*** RESERVE A SEAT NOW ***
Other Locations Too ! See the Tour Map below.
*** RESERVE A SEAT NOW ***
The Constitution Under Attack **** GET YOUR FREE MAGAZINE ****
Alert! A rather insidious assault on the Constitution has been in progress for many years now in the form of a continual erosion of the rights of the people, the ignoring of checks and balances, the creation of extra-constitutional branches of government and the defiant redefinition of the document itself.
Yet now, as perhaps never before seen, there is a two-fold attack on the United States Constitution which is being perpetrated by both “Conservative” and “Liberal” interests simultaneously under the auspices of Domestic and Foreign Policy. While both political factions tend to oppose one another in these two areas, the solution each faction promotes would ultimately “fundamentally change” America.
A Treasonous Foreign Policy
The Obama Administration is in the process of hammering out two new “Free Trade” agreements in backroom negotiations. The two treaties are the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) and the Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP). The TPP would establish a partnership in which the United States would join with Pacific rim nations in a regional super-governmental structure in which US domestic law would be brought into conformity with that of the other block members. The TTIP would accomplish much the same with nations in the Atlantic region, namely, the European Union nations. Enforcement of the harmonizing of law amongst these blocks of nations would require new international agencies. One can easily see, that the creation of these new agencies by our Congress would move the responsibility of law making out of the hands of our elected representatives to agency members not directly affected by the will of the voting public. In other words, the people of our nation will have lost its ability to affect legislation in these areas. Furthermore, dispute resolution would necessarily need to be handled in tribunals which represent the interests of the partnerships as a whole. Therefore, American businesses will be subject to the will of non-American or super-national panels without recourse to the national legislature.
It is difficult to discuss exact details of these treaties at this time because the negotiations are closed to Congress and the American people. The secrecy in which these negotiations are being conducted is foreboding. I suppose we have to pass the “Partnerships” to find out what is in them. What we do know is that they are being treated as if they are treaties and we are reminded that Treaty Law supersedes the Constitution. Despite the fact that there is ample evidence to show that treaties are invalid when they attempt to alter the Constitution, much damage has already been done in this manner through NAFTA and the WTO while our domestic courts have ignored these abuses. See the free magazine link below which details what we know at this time.
A Dangerous Domestic Agenda
Meanwhile, in an attempt to arrest the abuses of a run-away federal leviathan in Washington, our “Conservative” leaders are dreaming up new ways to destroy our Constitution. The latest fad is that of the Liberty Amendments being promoted by Mark Levin. This movement is quite insidious and rather ingenious. While the various problems discussed by Mr. Levin are real, genuine concerns, the poison is in the solution. A Constitutional Convention call could accomplish all of the planks of the “Liberal Left” at once, even if it were called by “Conservatives” for the exact opposite intentions. Please understand, I am not opposed to the intentions, the reasoning, or the correction of real abuses. I oppose the method of solution and here is why.
In the United States of America, the sovereign will of the people is the basis for all government. We are reminded in the Declaration of Independence that “…Men are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights… 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, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”
The methods established within the Constitution to invoke this abolition or altering of the government is the Article V process. One such method is via a Constitutional Convention commonly called a Con-Con. There is a reason this method is not normally used.
Once this process is invoked and delegates are appointed, they would operate with the sovereign power of the people. This raw power must operate outside the confines of the governmental form which they seek to alter or abolish and there is no authority on earth which can restrain it. We are told that the amendments they would seek to establish would require ratification by the existing state governments. Is that a guarantee? No. Theoretically, the existing ratification process could be altered or abolished during this process. We have the historical precedent of the 1787 Constitutional Convention to prove that fact.
When the original 1787 Convention was called, the body was under instruction to alter the Articles of Confederation and the ratification process was specified to require unanimous consent of the 13 state legislatures. Rather than alter the existing document as instructed, they wrote an entirely new document. Read the document they gave us:
“The Ratification of the Conventions of nine States, shall be sufficient for the Establishment of this Constitution between the States so ratifying the Same.”
What happened to the unanimous consent requirement?
So, I caution my fellow countrymen. Do not be so gullible as to accept these assurances. There are no assurances. Ask yourself a simple question. In a country in which its leaders refuse to obey the contract of government, what makes our “Conservative” leadership believe that new amendments will be obeyed? The solution to America’s woes ultimately come down to the American people having the will to enforce the Constitution as it is written and as it is intended. That need will still exist regardless of how many amendments we pass.
Preserve The Constitution
The primary goal of all Americans must be to preserve the Constitution. For as long as this document stands as a bulwark against dictatorship, we have recourse to it. We have the ability to enforce it. If we allow either the “Left” to Supersede it via dangerous regional partnerships or the “Right” to alter it through convention, all bets are off. So, all men of good will need the Constitution. Our course of action is simple: Defend it and enforce it!
- How The Free Trade Agenda is Knocking down America (Full New American Magazine vol 29 no 17)
- America’s Voice Now Youtube Program November 2013 Part 1
- America’s Voice Now Youtube Program October 2013 Part 2
- America’s Voice Now Youtube Program October 2013
- America’s Voice Now Youtube Program August 2013
- Preserve Your Rights – Stop the “Free Trade” Agenda
- The “Free Trade” Agenda Threatens Our Rights
- Levin, Limbaugh, Hannity Calling for Con-Con
- Mark Levin’s Dangerous Constitutional Convention Proposal
- More About Levin’s Dangerous Con-Con Proposal
- Wrap-up Regarding Levin’s Dangerous Con-Con Proposal
- Not-So-Free Trade (Printable Brochure) Great Mailing Stuffer
- Real Price of Free Trade (Printable Brochure) Great Mailing Stuffer
- Free Trade Promises and Reality (Printable Brochure) Great Mailing Stuffer
Secure On-line Ordering:
Double Jeopardy in Jeopardy
Regardless of how you interpret the not-guilty verdict in the Zimmerman trial, all Americans should be concerned about the Federal Government launching a civil hate-crimes case against George Zimmerman. The Constitution provides protection against “Double Jeopardy”. It is in the best interest of all Americans to make sure our rights in this regard are protected. Even if it means allowing an injustice to prevail, it is critical that the federal government not be allowed to drag a defendant though repetitive trials. If Zimmerman can be indicted twice for the same crime, where does it end? Theoretically, he could be charged every time someone were to come forward with “new evidence” and he would have to live out his days in fear of a government indictment for an issue already resolved by a jury of his peers. Now, forget we are talking about George Zimmerman. Put yourself into his shoes, because once the precedent is set, we will all be subject to similar prosecutorial irregularities. Let’s review the major milestones of the case and then summarize the threat to our Constitution.
Summary of the Altercation
George Zimmerman, a 28 year old Hispanic neighborhood watch coordinator within a gated community in Sanford Florida, had an altercation with Trayvon Martin, a 17 year old black high school student who was residing within that community. The altercation occurred on February 26, 2012 and ultimately resulted in a lethal use of force. Mr. Zimmerman discharged his weapon amidst the struggle which had ensued and Trayvon Martin was mortally wounded.
On March 12, 2012, Police Chief Bill Lee turned the investigation over to the State Attorney’s office for review. He stated that Zimmerman had alleged self-defense and that unless probable cause could be shown to dispute that statement, the state had no cause for arrest. On March 13, 2012, Chris Serino, the lead investigator, filed a capias request, recommending that the State charge Zimmerman with negligent manslaughter, although he was doubtful that sufficient evidence existed to prosecute. Apparently both law enforcement officer’s opinion was confirmed by the State Attorney’s Office as they did not file any charges at that time.
By-Passing the Grand Jury
On March 20, 2012, State Attorney, Norm Wolfinger declared his intention to convene a grand-jury on April 10th to investigate and decide if an indictment should be handed down. Simultaneously, the Justice Department opened a Civil Rights investigation. Meanwhile, Governor Rick Scott, asked the Florida Department of Law Enforcement to investigate. On, March 22, 2012, Governor Rick Scott assigned State Attorney Angela Corey to the case. She promptly decided that her office would decide whether or not to press charges stating, “I always lean towards moving forward without needing the grand jury in a case like this, I foresee us being able to make a decision, and move on it on our own.” On April 11th, George Zimmerman was charged with 2nd degree murder. On July 13, 2013, the jury found the defendant not guilty.
According to CNN’s, State of the Union, broadcast last week, The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People are pushing for federal action. Ben Jealous, President of the NAACP, is pushing for US Attorney General Eric Holder to pursue a hate crimes charge against Mr. Zimmerman.
A Triple Threat To All Americans
What are the police powers of the Federal Government? Let us look into the Constitution:
Article I Section 8 paragraph 6
The Congress shall have the power… To provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States.
The Congress shall have the power… To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offences against the law of nations.
Article 3 section 3
Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort.
In summary, all laws that seek to create federal crime out of certain behavior not associated with counterfeiting, piracy or Treason are unconstitutional. The “law of nations” refers to laws governing the acceptable treatment of one nation regarding another so that clause would not apply to the actions of the civilian population. Even the impeachment power of the Federal Government holds no criminal authority. Impeachment is simply a governmental procedure for removing a member from government. Any criminal proceedings associated with an impeachment are handled by the appropriate authorities, and are sometimes but not necessarily a federal criminal case. Therefore, it is an abuse of power for the federal government to classify a whole host of new federal crimes including hate crimes. These suggested laws should be considered at the State level.
Threat #1: There is no justification for the Federal Government to assume original jurisdiction with regard to an act of violence committed by one citizen against another within the boundaries of a state.
Threat #2: In the Trayvon Martin case, an indictment of a grand jury was never handed down.
Threat #3: Even so, a trial was held and a jury of peers rendered a verdict. From a legal perspective, the case is settled and any subsequent indictment based upon the same offense would violate the protection against double jeopardy. The 5th Amendment applies …
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury … nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb.
Nullification is not only a legitimate remedy against federal over-reach, it is the rightful remedy and the only peaceful solution that was specifically endorsed by both James Madison and Thomas Jefferson. So, the author of our Constitution and the author of the Declaration of Independence agree. Each State must act as the final arbiter when the three branches of the federal government refuse to acknowledge the limits placed upon it by the several states. One need not seek permission within the Constitution to uphold the Compact. Like any other contract, the parties involved have a duty to ensure that it is adhered to. The supremacy of federal law does not apply to legislative acts which are, in themselves, unlawful. Such acts should not be dignified with the title of law.
Specific Nullification Measure in Pennsylvania
Support Pennsylvania House Bill 357, the Right to Bear Arms Protection Act, which seeks to establish that “any Federal law which attempts to register, restrict or ban a firearm or to limit the size of a magazine of a firearm in this Commonwealth shall be unenforceable in this Commonwealth; and imposing penalties.”
The Right to Bear Arms Protection Act (RBAPA) would nullify any new federal restrictions, whether passed by Congress or by presidential executive order, on firearms and/or magazine clips. Included in the RBAPA are criminal penalties on federal agents attempting to enforce any such federal restrictions and/or attempting to confiscate firearms or magazines. Washington’s anti-gun laws would not just be null and void in Pennsylvania, but attempts to enforce them within the state’s borders would be illegal.
In recent years dozens of states have introduced nullification-type legislation to stop Real ID, affirm the Tenth Amendment, reject a federal mandate to buy healthcare insurance, and to reject federal firearm laws for guns manufactured, sold, and used intrastate (known as Firearms Freedom Acts or FFA). In 2012 a total of eight states passed FFAs.
Contact The PA General Assembly: http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/legis/home/member_information/contact.cfm?body=H
Contact the PA Senate Requesting companion legislation be introduced into the Senate: http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/legis/home/member_information/contact.cfm?body=S
Note JULY-SEPT: The Legislature reconvenes September 23, 2013. Correspondence should concentrate on local office addresses and it is a good time for local office visits.
The Case For Nullification
States Should Enforce The Constitution Not Revise It !
State vs. Federal: Nullification
Nullification by Thomas E. Woods (Book Review)
State Nullification Bills Flourish in 2012
States’ Rights: The Foundation of Federalism
About John C. Calhoun
My Earlier Blog Posts: