In Pursuance There Of….Or NOT? ~ Letter to the AmmoLand Editor

Opinion
Letter to the AmmoLand Editor

We The People Second Amendment Constitution Bill of Rights
Why have a Constitution at all if a law, regulation, or opinion can nullify the plain simple understanding that the Founding Fathers were explicit about? IMG iStock

USA – -(Ammoland.com)- The federal government’s power grab over states’ rights continues unabated as evidenced by numerous “laws” and “edicts” as well as bureaucratic decrees that continually are flaunted in the face of We The People.

Recently, while listening to a presentation by KrisAnne Hall, who is an expert on the subject of the Constitution, she mentioned a lawsuit brought by “The United States” against one of the states claiming that the “Supremacy Clause” allowed any law that the federal government passed to overrule any that the state has passed.

Interesting enough the lawsuit used … and didn’t quote the complete clause!

According to the Feds, given the Supremacy Clause, the states have always lacked the authority to dishonor any “opinion” issued by a federal court, and compliance is not merely a matter of cooperation that the State may withhold; but must obey as if it is “law”. The same goes for any federal “law” that is passed by the legislature and signed by the President.

However, the truth can be found in our Constitution, specifically the Tenth Amendment and the Supremacy Clause themselves, which the feds are citing with … and not even mentioning the words IN PURSUANCE THEREOF.

First, the Supremacy Clause, which states: “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.” Citizens who are well versed in the contents of our founding documents know that a key phrase in the Supremacy Clause is the phrase, “which shall be made in Pursuance thereof.”

Constitutional law is one that is made in pursuance of the Constitution. A law that is not made in pursuance of the Constitution is not, in fact, a law; but is ‘null, void, and of no effect’. Such a law also violates the Tenth Amendment which states;

“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” In 1798, referring to the federal government, Thomas Jefferson wrote that “whensoever the general government assumes undelegated powers….a nullification of the act is the rightful remedy.”

Thus, unless a “law” or “opinion by any court, state, federal circuit or even of the Supreme Court itself must exist “made in pursuance thereof” (the Constitution), specifically the Tenth Amendment. Further, understanding this the 1934 National Firearms Act, the 1968 Gun Control Act, the Hughes amendment, and hundreds of other obvious violations of the Constitution should be nullified because the states always did have the authority to refuse to follow or obey unconstitutional “law” under the Tenth and (“in pursuance thereof”), regardless of what ANY Circuit Court of Appeals may find. Every Circuit court is still bound to follow the Constitution and any violation made by it would be null, void, and of no effect.

Letters to the AmmoLand Editor
Letters to the AmmoLand Editor: Got something on your mind? Let us know and you can see it here.

What is vitally important to understand here is that under the Tenth Amendment the powers delegated to the federal government by the states do not mean the states give up their rights; because they “are reserved.” Understand that when a court, any court, upholds an action that is unconstitutional it not only makes that ruling null and void, but that court should be held to answer for its’ violation of its sworn oath to uphold the Constitution. Any Circuit Court of Appeals that is not acting “in pursuance thereof” should therefore have the ruling vacated.

You have to admit, America is not broken, but America is being taken over.

In fact, one of the Appeals Court justices, Judge Michael Boudin, in his dissenting opinion in one case wrote “State interposition to defeat federal authority vanished with the Civil War.” It did!?

You could claim that Judge Boudin may be referring to Reconstruction and you could certainly point to Reconstruction as the pivotal point in our nation’s history for the beginning of this Federal takeover. However, the Reconstruction Act of 1867 was, and remains to this day, unlawful because it was not in pursuance of the Constitution and is, therefore, null, void, and of no effect.”

Garrett Epps, in his The American Prospect article “A State-Federal Standoff Over The Death Penalty“, wrote “But the argument has actually been framed in terms of the decidedly strange idea of “dual sovereignty” in which the state and federal governments, like God the Father and God the Holy Ghost, somehow inhabit the same space under the same Constitution remaining one and yet mystically separate at the same time”.

They can do both. The Tenth Amendment states “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” The states, through the compact between them (known as the Constitution), grant these powers to the federal government but ALSO retain them. If the “supreme law of the land” is the Constitution, of which both the Supremacy Clause and Tenth Amendment are part, then why ignore one in favor of the other? YOU CAN’T without violating the very premise of the Constitution in the first place!

For instance, using this as an example…the Federal government passed the National Firearms act in 1934. The Supreme Court upheld it as “constitutional”. Well, how can a “law” that states that an individual who wishes to possess a rifle with a barrel length shorter than 16 inches is somehow a law violator if that law is looked at under the 2nd amendments SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED prohibition as well as the 10th amendment AND the “in pursuance thereof” understanding of the meaning of the Constitution in the first place? And you can’t “tax” a right without directly violating the right itself and the “shall not be infringed” clause of the 2nd!

Why have a Constitution at all if a law, regulation, or opinion can nullify the plain simple understanding that the Founding Fathers were explicit about?

As commonly happens in states’ rights cases where the federal government claims the Supremacy Clause trumps states’ rights, time and time again it ignores the Tenth Amendment in its arguments. Many citizens, even those who swear an oath to uphold the Constitution, are of the mistaken belief that the Tenth Amendment is only about states’ rights. Of course, we know that there is more to the Tenth Amendment than that. Since the Tenth Amendment has not been revoked, the states’ rights retained therein have not been superseded, in contrast with any ruling issued by any Circuit Court of Appeals or the Supreme Court. In cases involving states’ rights the Constitution, specifically the Tenth Amendment, must always be right; every time, in every issue, without exception.

So ask yourself this…using reason, logic, and common sense…do ANY of the 20,000+ state and federal laws that are considered “gun control” laws violate IN PURSUANCE THEREOF? or NOT? And if they DO, then they are ALL null and void from the date of their inception.

~ Mark Reynolds AKA Courageous Lion


About Mark Reynolds

Mark Reynolds has written for LewRockwell.com as well as Strike the Root. He has also written for Media Bypass and other publications in the past that deal with the rights of We The People. He resides in the state of Arkansas among the Ozark Mountains. He has four sons and a wonderful wife for 45 years that has put up with his obsessive-compulsive firearms hobby for all of those years. He has been an avid shooter, gun collector, firearms hobbyist, re-loader, amateur gunsmith, and just an all-around enthusiast since he was 14. None of his firearms have ever harmed another human being.

Mark Reynolds AKA Courageous Lion
Mark Reynolds AKA Courageous Lion
4.4 7 votes
Article Rating
Disclosure: Some of the links below are affiliate links, meaning at no additional cost to you, Ammoland will earn a commission if you click through and make a purchase.
Subscribe
Notify of
124 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
JPM

As long as the general population can maintain their creature comforts (heat & AC, hot & cold running water, smart phones, groceries, “nice” clothes, internet access and video games, regular pay checks, etc.) the Constitutional abuses will continue unabated and the power of the Federal Government will continue to grow and our rights disappear. We are overpopulated with men without balls or a spine (if they even still claim to be or know what a man is), women who behave like men until they are treated like a man, then they tearfully regress into “little girls”, and people in general… Read more »

Wild Bill

So how will you get those people back to the Constitution and self reliance? What do you propose?

StLPro2A

“WE THE PEOPLE”
ARE PISSED!!!!!!!!!!!
That is all. Class dismissed.

StLPro2A

Let the enemy write the rules…..laws, regulations,… Play by the enemy’s rules. Lose by the enemy’s rules. Politicians are accomplishing what armies failed or fear to attempt….the radical transformation of America into a Socialist shit hole. And, yet, not a shot fired in defense of the Constitution, Bill of Rights, Freedom, Liberty, Rights. Our Founding Fathers would already have been finished shooting a second time.

Russn8r

I don’t see the people resorting to the ultimate insurance policy, 2A, when they neglect peaceful solutions, Back The Blue Whatever They Do, cover for LEOs who murder innocents, won’t even ostracize Oathbreakers who push & enforce gun control.

Last edited 1 month ago by Russn8r
JSNMGC

Our founding fathers would be shocked and appalled at the size and scope of government, the extent of wealth redistribution (in its many, many forms), and the number of armed government employees who follow orders to enforce the entire mess.

Tionico

KrissAnne Hall is great….. glad she’s on OUR side.

Tionico

quote: State interposition to defeat federal authority vanished with the Civil War. Indeed. Those states that had, of their own free will, joined the Union by ratifying the Constitution as it stood at the time of their admission, decided to withdraw that same power used in joining. Never mind their reasons. If I am visiting someone’s house and choose to leave, it matters naught to anyone else WHY I decided to leave. That is MY decisioin, and mine alone. But a certain former corporate railroad lawyer took it upon himself to issue oreders for the Union navy to impose a… Read more »

GomeznSA

Tio – you raise some valid points, ‘some’ of which could be debated amongst gentle folk but IMHO you missed one of the key points. The southern states provided some 80% (likely much more) of the federal budget via tariffs and taxes on their goods. northern industrialists wanted absolute control over that budget with virtually no input from the south. When the southern states objected it set a series of events into motion which culminated in the war of northern aggression. Never forget that history is written by the victors – hence far too many folks are now taught that… Read more »

Wild Bill

Even the Articles of Confederation were a perpetual union. Perpetual union was intended and agreed to when the the delegates to the convention to amend the Articles of Confederation were junked and the Constitution was written and later, agreed to by the states.

But I like everything else that you wrote.

CourageousLion

Can you show me in the United States Constitution the words “perpetual union”? It was a concept in the Articles of Confederation that had a number states in opposition. It is a grey area. Such as a perpetual union between a husband and wife. When vows are violated the perpetual union can be dissolved.

Russn8r

Yep.

Knute Knute

And here’s the Bona Fides on that subject! “among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government” -Thomas Jefferson, The Declaration of Independence, July 4, 1776! And OFC this document led to a war. No slavemaster wants his slaves to escape! Then, now, or in Ancient Rome or in Babylon the… Read more »

Last edited 1 month ago by Knute Knute
Wild Bill

Knute! I am so glad that you are here. I want to free float the barrel of an old .22. It is pretty darn accurate, but I am wondering if removing the wood so that it does not touch the barrel. And what is the official gunsmith procedure for that?

Wild Bill

The Articles of Confederation established that the Union was perpetual. I am unaware of any state (former colony) or individual person being against that. Certainly, the convention delegates that acted in ultra vires were not against perpetual union or they would have put that into the new Constitution. Here is the Chief Justice Chase explained the matter: ” … Chase wrote that the original Union of the colonies had been made in reaction to very real problems faced by the colonists. The first result of these circumstances was the creation of the Articles of Confederation, which established a perpetual union between… Read more »

Russn8r

AofC superseded by Constitution; no mention of perpetual union, changed many rules:

form a more perfect Union, Justice, Tranquility, common defence, general Welfare & Blessings of Liberty to ourselves & our Posterity”

Dishonored goals = Breach of contract.

Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom & independence, and every Power, Jurisdiction & right not by expressly delegated to the U.S.” -AofC

Dishonored. Breach of Contract. AofC constrains Constitution? Then so does the Dec of Indy:

“whenever any Gvt becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it”

But Oathbreakers embrace dishonor

Last edited 1 month ago by Russn8r
Wild Bill

Your argument is not with me. Your argument is with the Continental Congress, all of the founders, knowledgeable legal scholars, historians, and every Supreme Court, president, and Congress from that time to this.

Russn8r

Hardly. As usual, you appeal to alleged “consensus”, like a global warmie, when your arguments fail.

CourageousLion

The story of Donald Scott remains to this day a travesty of “justice”. As does Daniel Shaver shot down in cold blood trying to pull his pants up by Officer Brailsford who’s rifle ejection ports said “You’re fucked” on it and of which the video of the incident and the rifle were not allowed into evidence due to the fact it would “prejudice” the jury which he was facing for a murder charge. And of course the jury found him not guilty of the death of Shaver. The list is endless.

CourageousLion

I do believe that “all of the founders” can’t be included because it is obvious that Thomas Jefferson wouldn’t have agreed. Fact is that it was the Federalists who believed in a strong dictatorial tyrannical government that would have stood for what the hell is going on these days.

Wild Bill

Yeah, I’m pretty sure that TJ was onboard with perpetual union. Remember the Articles of Confederation were written by the Second Continental Congress before the Revolution was over. The ongoing fighting with British made anything other than union of the colonies unthinkable to the entire population, excepting Tories. But no one wanted a centralized government like the one that they were trying to shed. So the Continental congress came up with a confederation theory for our first government. Another clue is: “To all to whom these Presents shall come, we, the undersigned Delegates of the States affixed to our Names… Read more »

Last edited 1 month ago by Wild Bill
Russn8r

Would be great if Ammoland put this article in the Gun Rights tab so more folks would see it.

Arizona

The right to keep and bear arms is the right upon which all others depend, for so long as government does not attain a monopoly of arms (and thus a monopoly of violence), it cannot successfully deprive citizens of their natural rights. Unfortunately, federal and state governments have been assuming powers unto themselves far beyond those agreed upon in our federal and state Constitutions, the contracts with which We the People granted our consent to be governed. That consent depends on fulfillment of the contract terms. Decade by decade, however, politicians, bureaucrats and courts have infringed on our rights and… Read more »

JSNMGC

Decade by decade, however, politicians, bureaucrats, courts, and enforcers have infringed on our rights.

Russn8r

The Oathbreaker Posse doesn’t like that kind of observation.

JSNMGC

Apparently not.

CourageousLion

And when doing so, became outlaws and are no longer given consent by the governed.

jukk0u

Roar on, brother!

Arizona

“The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and name of law, is in reality no law, but is wholly void and ineffective for any purpose since it’s unconstitutionality dates from the time of it’s enactment… Since an unconstitutional law is void, the general principles follow that it imposes no duties, confers no right, creates no office, bestows no power or authority on anyone, affords no protection and justifies no acts performed under it… No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it.”

StLPro2A

The rub is…who says what is unconstitutional?? “…shall not be infringed.” except for full-auto function, number of rounds, barrel length, need, accessories, permission slip required, where applicable, as determined by who,….ad nausea. We’ve let the tyrants make the determination for so long, they have been accepted by the Useful Idiot Government Plantation Dwellers.

Wild Bill

All three branches have the ability to say what is unconstitutional. Congress by repeal. The S.Ct. by Marbury v Madisen. And one other branch could, quietly or loudly, refuse to implement an unconstitutional law.
But, as you say, we’ve let the tyrants make the determination! Things are as our government of elitists want them to be.

Desert Rat

But they will send their kill teams to your home in the middle of the night, break down your door & kill everyone who stands up to defend their home & all for an illegal $200 tax stamp. Remember Ruby Ridge, Waco, Malheur Refuge & the attempt at Bundy Ranch that was stopped by the armed citizens. Until The People clean this mess up once & for all, it will continue unabated. The Corporate UNITED STATES OF AMERICA does not operate under the Constitution & the Common Law but under Admiralty Law. See rubyraymedia.com “A Second Declaration of Independence”.

Wild Bill

Yes, scary isn’t it.

Idaho Bob

Was this article plagiarized in part? I found several instances where the exact wording appeared in an article written in 2012 by Doug Berge over at the Tenth Amendment center. “First, the Supremacy Clause, which states: “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.”… Read more »

Last edited 1 month ago by Idaho Bob
Russn8r

Accusation with no link?

CourageousLion

Actually, I read articles quite frequently and use some of the information to make my post. I can’t remember where I got all of the information and should probably make notes and links to it for further study by readers, but yes, I did take parts of at least four articles, added my view and made up the total article. I see “plagiarized” as taking something in its entirety and claiming it is yours. This has pieces from different sources that I did use to make this with. It is quite common for writers to do so. Trying to write… Read more »

Last edited 1 month ago by CourageousLion
Knute Knute

Just as I did in a post above. I quoted both The Declaration of Independence AND “The Eight Stages of Civilizations”. That doesn’t make me a plagiarist. Plagerizing is quoting someone else’s entire work and claiming the authorship for oneself. It’s kind of sad how few understand that. But on the bright side, I’ll bet Bob understands it a bit better now.

Russn8r

Yep. Bob’s smear of CL is pretty lame.

Knute Knute

In this vein, I wrote a tri-fold pamphlet some decade or more ago, but have yet to see it get any traction. I’ve passed out a hundreds of copies over the years, but like the Mitch Hedberg one liner; When people hand you a pamphlet it’s like saying; “here, you throw this away”! Since you have media connections, I’ll post it here in three parts for you to use as you choose. You can even plagiarize it if you want to! 🙂 (OFC, it won’t be plagiarizing, since I expressly gave my permission to do so) Text follows in three… Read more »

CourageousLion

I’d love for you to read A Caveat Against Injustice as well as Miracle On Main Street. http://bornagainclassics.com/Books/ACaveatAgainstInjustice-Shermann/

Miracle on Main Street: http://bornagainclassics.com/Books/The-Miracle-On-Main-Street.pdf

You are well informed and correct in may respects. Our system of “money” was basically a system of barter using silver and gold coins. Today, I am willing to work for $50 in fed notes doing plumbing repair per hour or $2.00 in quarter dollar silver coins for the same time. With modern technology a barter system would work on a local level if someone can keep track of who gets what for what.

Knute Knute

It would, but the bookkeeping is way too large and rapidly changing for any humans to keep track of. It would have to be online where algos can do the heavy lifting in the bookkeeping. Did you read the second and third parts about what could easily come AFTER just the simple website on direct barter? That was only in the beginning. The real power is in parts 2 and 3.

Last edited 1 month ago by Knute Knute
Knute Knute

I got to chapter two of miracle. A tiny nit to pick, Chapter 2 starts with only one cause of inflation, fiat ‘money’. I’d have to say, not quite. If the system was run honestly, then the money in circulation needs to increase with the economy. Double the GNP means twice the economy, which requires twice the currency. THAT increase is NOT inflation. But, since there are such huge profits to be made, the issuing authority never stops there. They print more than what the economy requires, and there is the inflation. From “Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars; “He found… Read more »

Last edited 1 month ago by Knute Knute
CourageousLion

I think Judge Roger Sherman had figured it out. Even by doing what you suggest, you’re still going to be using valueless paper that will still diminish in value but at a slower rate if they did what you suggest. The issue would be HOW would you know that what they claim the economy is GNP wise is the truth. They could claim one thing just to boost the “money” supply for their benefit. Anytime “money” loses value it is felt the most by those who save. And of course in the raising of the costs of goods and services.… Read more »

Knute Knute

I don’t picture this website being run by any government. It could be private. On the direct barter side, that would be the preferred way. All it does it put two people together. What legitimate part could a government have in that? OFC the administrators of the system could do whatever they want, just like ammoland, as well as everybody else, does with their sites. That is why it would have to be open source code, like Linux. This lets everyone on the system view the coding. There are lots of Linux users, they’re mostly all coding professionals, and a… Read more »

Wild Bill

I thought that the point of barter in the modern world was to not keep track so as to avoid federal income tax.

CourageousLion

That too. But without a system to line people up willing to trade their time or products for something else, it just isn’t going to happen. As for federal income tax…they sure don’t need that with the money system the way it is now. The only reason for it, is to make you THINK they need it.

swmft

gee you mean print what you want is not a sound system? Guess I will stick to gold silver and barter for main sources and avoid the government every way I can

Knute Knute

Part Two:                    A New Financial System  If, however, this system were to be officially allowed, then it could simply turn everything on it, both goods and services, into some generic form, let’s just call it “credit hours” for now, to represent one hour of basic human labor. An algorithm could then rank everything, both goods and services, and price them based upon the supply and the demand, in units of “Credit Hours”.  Everything in this case would have to be absolutely open, every page’s code able to be accessed by everybody on the system, to insure that the administrators don’t get… Read more »

CourageousLion

The problem I see with this is that some folks will have credit hours worth way more then the average laborer. Brain surgeons for instance will value their credit hours way higher then someone who does dry wall installation.

Knute Knute

But there aren’t very many surgeons around. The algos will value everything by ratios of supply and demand. So if there are few brain surgeons and lots of demand, then their hours will be worth many times the average. OTOH, when a ton of lawn cutters go on in a city with little grass, then their hours could be worth only a few credit minutes. Perhaps even seconds. It all will depend on the supply and the demand. When they equal, then your hour of service would be worth one credit hour. If there is twice as much supply as… Read more »

Knute Knute

With the site open source, you could have assurances that the ratios were correct, since everyone is watching. And if the brain surgeon doesn’t like the ratio the system was offering, he still has the option to not take the offer and just wait for the direct barter instead.

Knute Knute

 Part Three:                                      The Payoff  So, in this new, improved, monetary system, we could all either barter our goods and services(things of real value) directly with each other with no fees, or just accept the system’s “Credit Hours”, with everyone on the system watching for skimming and fraud.  Transactions would be handled by the algorithms for free with no currency NOR money required. There would always be sufficient “Credit Hours” to enable exchanges, for they would be created by the system when needed, and deleted when redeemed. This would also have a side benefit, as everyone would soon come to recognize the… Read more »

CourageousLion

Shortages in a substance based monetary system such as gold or silver would be addressed by lower prices on goods and labor. Currently you can convert a quarter dollar of silver for about $7.50 in fed notes and purchase almost two gallons of gas for the $7.50 In 1964 that same gallon of gas would have cost you that quarter dollar of silver. So the silver has actually increased in value due to its rarity in circulation and I suspect will do so to the point that a quarter dollar of silver would purchase a tank of gas and I… Read more »

Last edited 1 month ago by CourageousLion
Knute Knute

IMO that’s why fiat currency has never worked throughout history. It works opposite to natural law, and so it must fail, sooner or later. It COULD work, but only if it was run 100% honestly, and that doesn’t happen because once one understands the structure, one cannot help but see that massive profits are available for nothing. So fiat becomes a Ponzie scam. A chain letter. A system that pays off its previous liabilities with ever increasing amounts of fraud. This is why inflation is spoken of by the authorities as so necessary. Because they need more and more to… Read more »

CourageousLion

Check out A Caveat Against Injustice by Judge Roger Sherman that I have a link to. It goes right along with what you just posted.

Roland T. Gunner

So…how do we get there from here?

Arkansas Rob

Well written. Here in Saline County, we’re trying to elect another Reynolds to Congress, to get rid of the Fudd RINO traitor French Hill. Hope he’s French Toast.

KenW

IMO amending the Constitution to elect Senators rather than having the state Legislature appoint did as much or more damage to the 10th Amendment, because it literally turned the senate into a “good ole boys (and girls) club.”

CourageousLion

I agree. And it was done for the purpose of getting the Federal Reserve act passed the same year, if you read between the lines. Because if you look at the Constitution one of checks and balances had to do with who controlled the money. When it was written Judge Roger Sherman “made sure” that the window to paper fiat currency was slammed shut. Since Senators were appointed instead of elected they were jealous of their power to protect the state they were located in. And part of their power was to make sure that the first part of Article… Read more »

The Crimson Pirate

What’s are your thoughts on the appointment of Marshall to the Supreme Court and his effect on states rights?

CourageousLion

That his influence should have been ignored. Or nullified as Jefferson put it. He was a federalist that believed in strong central government. Obviously if you look at the Constitution itself you can see the Founding Fathers would have been at odds with his view of things.

Russn8r

Sadly, Trump infested SCROTUS with 3 more Blue-Light Federalist Society picks who aided Biden’s coup d’etat, and Amy & Brett voted to force injections on medical pros.

Russn8r

You’re happy they joined DemCom “Justices” for the Biden coup, denied TX et al “standing” & forced injections?

How The Federalist Society Betrayed Conservatives
Who picked this gang of idiots for the Supreme Court?
by Emerald Robinson
https://emeralddb3.substack.com/p/how-the-federalist-society-betrayed

Russn8r

If you have no problem with his picks, you have no problem with those decisions.

CourageousLion

Trump wasn’t in tune with a lot that was going on behind the scenes. He trusted too many traitors plus his ignorance of the Constitution was apparent on numerous occasions when he was for “red flag laws” and “bump stock bans” and I’m sure that isn’t all. If we don’t get some people into office that read and study the history of the Constitution and what the INTENT was for so much of it, we’re screwed.

Russn8r

Yep. Trump worshipers own Trump’s betrayals when they cover for him with ‘3D chess’ BS.

Maybe the best we can hope for is someone a lot less bad. So far, DeSantis fits, but the jury’s out. I just lobbied him again to ram ConCarry through special session rather than wait until late this yr/early next when Marion’s key saboteur is out due to term limits.

[email protected]
[email protected]
850-717-9337

CourageousLion

So are you a Florida resident? I really like how DeSantis took a stand against all the CONvid horse crap. Maybe he could invite Fauci down and have him indicted for crimes against humanity.

Russn8r

No, but I don’t need to live there. He knows I’m a donor, and he solicits me almost daily. I tell him I’ll donate again when he signs Con Carry. He knows anyone who lobbies him is a potential donor-supporter. Same qualitative incentive to heed us as he does to heed a pro lobbyist for a natl group.

And the constitutional oath is to all of us, not just FL.

I think he’d be down with indicting FauXi.

swmft

trump is a product of new york, how would he understand the constitution; from a state where they violate it routinely?

CourageousLion

Ignorance is bliss.

Wild Bill

“… the Seventeenth [Amendment] was propelled by popular outcry. Article I, Section 3, clause 1 stipulated that senators be chosen by state legislatures, but in the Gilded Age, money talked, and money could induce a state legislature to select a particular senator.
The push for direct election of senators started in the 1890s, …” Please see The U.S. Constitution Explained Clause by Clause by Ray Raphael, p 156

CourageousLion

That’s what we are told by people like Raphael, But reason, logic and common sense tell me that the time frame of the ratification of the 17th and the Federal Reserve are suspect. And I’m convinced that with the Senate vote on the subject that there was some collusion going on.

Wild Bill

It was change that was very popular among the general public at the time because legislators were making lots of money selling those appointments.

CourageousLion

Well, you may be right, and if that is the case, is the end result any different in reality? The voted in Senators are typically rich or have lots of rich backers expecting something in return. Different day, same crap.

Wild Bill

It is not me, really. It is the historical and legal scholars and the writings of people that were there recording it all.
Yep, the people with the gold make the rules.

Russn8r

He’s not right.

Wild Bill

Can’t stand the thought of it? Look within yourself.

Russn8r

Strange dude, covering for Oathbreakers with prissy snark attacks. What a sad troll’s life you live.

CourageousLion

Sad isn’t it. Brailsford should have been executed. But the fat lady hasn’t sung yet.

Russn8r

Yep.

EMAN

Isn’t this basically why a half million citizens of the Republic were murdered back a couple hundred years ago?

CourageousLion

Yes, it is could be said that States rights was the major reason for the war for Southern Independence. It was not slavery. Reading “The Real Lincoln” by Thomas J. DiLorenzo is very eye opening. Lincoln was the first major case of being a dictator while occupying the Presidency. There are two good reads on that. ” In their best-selling book, The SouthWasRight!, theKennedy brothers dispel many commonly held beliefs about the Civil War. Their well-researched arguments demonstrate the South’s many legitimate complaints during the antebellum period, including unfair taxation and unequal constitutional rights. The other was Was Jefferson Davis… Read more »

Bigfootbob

Please, for contrast sake, watch what’s going to happen in King County, Washington in the Pugetopolis region home to Seattle with their new APPOINTED SHERIFF. Believe it or not, the last elected sheriff was so bad, that the socialists that make up 90% of the King County Council successfully convinced the voters in King County to change their County Charter to allow the county council to appoint their sheriff rather than by election. Have you ever heard of something so insane? Look at the demographics of King County??? Repeat after me…”Liberal Guilt!” The 5 largest ethnic groups in King County,… Read more »

GomeznSA

Big – in case you aren’t aware – king county tried that ‘noble’ experiment some 30+ tears ago. They decided to convert the sheriff’s office into the King County Police with an appointed (unelected and unaccountable to the voters) chief. I don’t recall exactly how badly it worked out but suffice it to say that the voters woke up and decided that was a bad move and reinstated the sheriff’s office.
socialists NEVER give up. They will claim that ‘this time’ they will get it correct (not right) since they are so much smarter this go round.

Russn8r

Nicely done. I was looking at some stuff on the supremacy clause on Cornell’s website after reading your article earlier today. e.g.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/article-6/clause-2/supremacy-clause-current-doctrine

They skip over the fundamental issues you raised. Can’t see the forest through the trees.

CourageousLion

I’m sure that they skip over the fundamentals because frankly “they” don’t want the people to be able to use what the founding fathers gave them. I wrote this for Lew Rockwell years ago and much of what I am saying is still in effect today. It is my “why I don’t vote” post. However, in the upcoming elections in my state I registered because the guy I’m helping to become Sheriff is VERY Constitutional minded and the woman who is running for the US Senate is ALSO very Constitutionally minded. That is what we need to start looking for.… Read more »

Russn8r

Yep. I think it’s a little of “can’t see the forest” through all the legal priesthood mumbo jumbo, a little of don’t want to see it, and a lot of don’t want us to see it. I’ll check your rockwell article manaña. ¡Buenas noches!

Bigfootbob

Although I am a newbie here, I cannot say that I have ever read anything from you that I didn’t think was spot on and I really like your writing style. Having said that, I am super glad you are utilizing the most important tool the Founding Fathers gave you…your vote.

Thank you for all you do to help save our Republic. God bless you.

swmft

do not agree the vote is the most important tool , I will go with the gun there. elections can be corrupted

Arny

Especially with the help of foreign nations. Canada comes to mind.

Arny

Why is no one looking here ?

Arny

Could it be because of ….. ?

Tionico

text is so fuzzy it is not readable.. might as well not be there.

JSNMGC

Click on it.

Knute Knute

I notice you got two downvotes just for telling someone they can make a thumbnail readable by clicking on it.
Do you think these two just have a prejudice against reading in general… or is it more likely that they’re prejudiced against YOU personally? 🙂

JSNMGC

I suspect they are angry at people who oppose the myth, so they downvote everything written by those people.

One of them may be along shortly to attempt to explain that the reason for the downvotes is that I “insult” people. This is the same person who insults people in far worse ways than sarcasm and who has never chastised people who use extremely vulgar insults (because those people agree with him).

The downvotes are funny.

Knute Knute

And now its three… plus two for my post noting that yours had absolutely nothing in it to bother any sane person.
I think that shows their personal bias pretty darn clearly!

Russn8r

The Oathbreaker Posse projects their sad love of “likes” for self-esteem, thinks you’re the same so they can intimidate you by downvoting if you reply to those they hate. They aim to cancel us to prevent remembering the names of innocent victims of Oathbreakers & the “good” cops who cover for them. It’s juvenile, won’t work.

Wild Bill

You don’t know what is in any other person’s mind, much less several. You just make stuff up.

3%er

JSNMGC,I was having the same problem that Tionico had viewing the text. I took your advice and clicked on it and became crystal clear. Thanks.

JSNMGC

You’re welcome.

Have a nice day.

3%er

You too.

CourageousLion

That’s interesting.

Russn8r

The Oathbreaker Posse is downvoting you.

Finnky

I’d the first edges out the second, but just barely. Without the first we lack coordination required for truly effective use of the second. Using the first, plus financial power and voting we may yet be able to avoid having to depend on the second.

As the saying goes, the pen is mightier than the sword – but the swords word is final.

Roland T. Gunner

ARE corrupted?

CourageousLion

Did you know that you actually have two votes? The other vote you can utilize is the vote you cast on a JURY. For you see, here is the proper definition of a CRIMINAL JURY: 1828 Noah Websters Dictionary JU’RY, noun [Latin juro, to swear.] A number of freeholders, selected in the manner prescribed by law, empaneled and sworn to inquire into and try any matter of fact, and to declare the truth on the evidence given them in the case. Grand juries consist usually of twenty four freeholders at least, and are summoned to try matters alleged in indictments.… Read more »

Russn8r

Every vote to toss a “criminal” case that must be unanimous is always decisive.

“It is not only his right but his duty to find the verdict according to his conscience even in direct opposition to the court.” ~Adams

“if [it] relate to public liberty or biased judges, the jury decides both law & fact.” ~Jefferson

“it is presumed, juries are the best judge of facts, courts the best judge of law. But both are lawfully your power.” ~Jay

“the jury, for security of life & liberty, is intrusted with both law & fact.” ~Hamilton

Oathbreaker Posse downvotes below:

Last edited 1 month ago by Russn8r
CourageousLion

A felony conviction requires all jurors vote guilty. If one person hangs on and refuses, the end result is a hung jury in which case the trial can be put before another jury. Most likely it will not. The best way to win in every case is to have a NOT GUILTY verdict handed down by the jury. And it could have been decided to be that way because they agreed that the “law” was idiotic and not fit for a free society.

Russn8r

Yep. One not-guilty vote is decisive as to that trial. May not convince the rest of the jury, but a hung jury’s likely enough as there’s usually no retrial. More is better. If just one, they may think retrial’s a good bet.

If loyal citizens knew their jury rights, how to get past voir dire & hang juries or get acquittals, many good folk would go free. As it’d swamp the system & persecutors don’t like losing, they’d have to back way off unconstitutional, unconscionable, selective, politically or personally driven trials.

Still a great non-violent recourse.

CourageousLion

Can I comment on my own submission? I guess I can! LOL!

Knute Knute

I’ve read your stuff in Media Bypass years ago. Never suspected you were CL until now! 🙂

CourageousLion

I have been getting the urge to write some again since I got behind Mark Foresee for Sheriff of Boone County Arkansas and wrote his flyer that he is getting out to 4,000 residents of the County I’m in. If anyone wants a copy they can use to help a Constitutional Sheriff, let me know…here is a copy of what I put together for him.

Russn8r

If you have campaign payee name & address, I’ll send a check.

CourageousLion

I will get it for you!

Wild Bill

Now that is activism! And yes, put up that address, please.

CourageousLion

Done!

CourageousLion

100 N Willow Harrison Arkansas 72601
Election fund for Mark Foresee.

Russn8r

Thanks. Check in mail.

CourageousLion

He got it! Thanks for your support.

swmft

no, you cant . bet i can get the 9th circuit to say so too

Knute Knute

I’ll bet the ninth circuit thinks the moon is more important than the sun…. because the moon shines at night when they need the light! 🙂