Tag Archives: rights

The Congressional Two-step with Mick Mulvaney

I always enjoy asking a question and getting an answer that directs the subject in another direction because the person you question doesn’t want to answer the question at hand. This is what appears to have happened when I questioned House Representative Mick Mulvaney about the 5th Amendment. The Congressional two-step begins.

Under the 5th Amendment you are under NO obligation to tell the government anything that they may one day use against you in court so how can congress pass a law that says you have to tell them something? You would think asking a lawyer about this would be a simple question. But No.

Mulvaney starts with “I get this question a lot.” but proceeds to go back to the 2nd Amendment because I used the CWP as an example. My question was about the 5th. When I finally get him to speak to the 5th Amendment he states, “The social convention over the course of the last 200 years is we are willing to make some limitations on our own [rights].” WHAT? “Social convention” is a reason for the government to step on my rights? Where is that spelled out in the Constitution? He continues, “You can waive any of your Constitutional rights”. Actually you can’t but that was an argument for another time. But even if I could where does it say I have to in order to appease government? Because that is now “the social norm”? Really Mick?

Later I questioned him again. And again he dances. This time the question went to the 16th Amendment and the Supreme court ruling that the 16th Amendment gave Congress no new taxing authority. He does go into a story about a college professor who said he would give an automatic A on an exam to any student who can show the section of the code that says you have to pay an income tax.

So what does the code say…

“Title 26 CFR Ch. 1 (4-1-03 Edition) (iii) The purpose of publishing revenue rulings and revenue procedures in the Internal Revenue Bulletin is to promote correct and uniform application of the tax laws by Internal Revenue Service employees and to assist taxpayers in attaining maximum voluntary compliance by informing Service personnel and the public of National Office interpretations of the internal revenue laws, related statues, treaties, regulations, and statements of Service procedures affecting the rights and duties of taxpayers. Therefore – issues and answers involving substantive tax under the jurisdiction of the Internal Revenue Service will be published in the Internal Revenue Bulletin.”

I have been to several of these Town hall meetings and always leave feeling like I just danced with a master. Is it the lawyer or the politician I just danced with? Is there a difference? But Mick was right. Social convention does allow for a lot of things that an informed populace would stand against. Or at least one would hope they would.

He may not like my questions but at least he is willing to listen and put himself out there.

Advertisements

What Revolution?

The one that will never come? The one that never came? With all the rights the people of this country have seen disappear there never was a revolution. What would make the people think there ever will be one?

“The Government will never get my guns.”

“The people will fight back if there is a gun confiscation.”

No. The government is already taking your guns and no-one is fighting back.  Some are even helping. Every person who applied for a Concealed Weapons Permit (CWP) has been in league with the government. You have gone to the government and asked “Permission” to exercise a God-given right. And in doing so you have signed a contract giving up that right.  You’ve even given up your 5th Amendment right just by filling out the form. You know, the part that says you don’t have to be a witness against yourself.

Juries everyday find people guilty of crimes involving “illegal guns”, generally meaning they are not permitted to own or carry them. But this is a violation of the rights of the person possessing the gun. So why is it allowed?

It is allowed because the people have been conditioned to accept it. And the conditioning will continue and the people will not revolt. They will find more and more excuses to pass more and more laws and through “law enforcement” pick us off one by one until there are none left. They have no reason to go door to door to take your guns because eventually you will give them up.

”But they won’t get MY gun.”

Look at your child or grandchild. Would you hold on to your gun if the only way to feed or clothe that child was by giving up your gun? Would you get in a gun battle with a government entity who would have custody of that child should your efforts fail? You think the government doesn’t already know the answer to these questions?

Look at what you have given up already…

  • Freedom of speech… From “Free Speech” zones to fear of the “political climate” people are not only afraid to speak their minds but afraid to be associated with anyone who does.
  • Peaceful Assembly…When people are told they must have a “permit” (Permission) to assemble then the right is gone. And anyone who applies for the “permit” has helped to destroy that right.  And anyone who has enforced that “permit” has violated the rights of the person who either refused to apply or the person who was coerced into applying for the permit. (“Papers please.”)
  • Petitioning the Government for Redress of Grievance… Why does no-one do this? The government should be so bogged down in paperwork there should be time for little else. Oh, that’s right, at some point some government employee will say, “You really should get a lawyer.” Now comes all the lovely fees.
  • Unreasonable searches and seizures… “Probable Cause”. Need I say more? The people have been so led to believe that it is OK to “search and/or seize” just because an officer thinks it is OK, especially if “You have nothing to hide.”. Have we really come to the point we think others should have unlimited power over us whether we have anything to hide or not? (If your answer is “Yes” please defriend me on Facebook.)
  • To be confronted with witnesses against you…”Confidential informants” The no-see-ums of Law Enforcement. (This alone should get jurors to judge against LE.) Obtaining witnesses in your favor… Not if a judge thinks it brings no merit to the case for whatever reason a judge decides. Who gave them this power?
  • Assistance of counsel… I bet you thought that meant a “lawyer”, right?  That is what they want you to believe. But “counsel” is anyone who can counsel you on your rights.
  • Right to trial by jury… How many have waved this right and paid a fine because a trial would just be too inconvenient? As long as the “state” makes money and it costs them nothing they will continue to harass.
  • “nor excessive fines”… We are fined for everything and always in excess. The bait and switch is to call it a “fee” and impose it on everything.  And the reasoning is that by going about your daily life you might commit a crime.
  • “nor cruel and unusual punishments”… You go to jail just because an officer doesn’t like your attitude, or worse yet, he doesn’t like you. Maybe you are “known” to LE as someone who doesn’t like them depriving people of their rights, maybe they are told to watch for any opportunity to arrest or harass you. (You think these guys won’t enforce any gun law, constitutional or not?)
  • Rights retained by the people… The 9th Amendment states that if the people wish to retain their rights there is NOTHING contained in the Constitution that can be construed as to deprive them of that right.
  • Your 10th Amendment rights… “States Rights” is what this is pushed as but the last statement is “or, to the people.” How have we managed to let others use this as a way to remove federal power over us just to be replaced by State power? If your tyrant is local is he any less a tyrant?

Recently my Mother passed away and as I jumped through the governments hoops of giving up my rights to settle her affairs (Yeah, they got me).I couldn’t help but wonder how it got to this point.

Because people always give way to government. Why? Because they say they know what is best? What makes them the experts on what is best? “Because things are different now”? How are they different? “They have bigger weapons”? Why do “they” have bigger weapons? Who gave them the right to have bigger weapons? “Because you will go to jail”? Why will you go to jail? Why are juries so dumbed down? What gives the government the right to arrest you for exercising a right?

The capitulation will continue and they will never have to fear a revolution.


The 1st Amendment.

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people to peacefully assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

“Congress shall make no law respecting [showing partiallity] an establishment of religion , or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…” Yes we do have the right in America to exercise our religion but the churches have been conned into accepting the governments seal of approval.  The 501 (c) 3 tax exemption. Should we blame the government for this one. I don’t think so. They are opportunists and took advantage of the ignorant. I think we should blame the churches and pastors who took part and the congregations that enable them to continue. Why is it so hard to get people to give to the churches if they can’t deduct it off their taxes at the end of the year? Personally I wonder why they give to these modern churches at all, but that is me.
When the church accepts the 501 (c) 3 they are then under government regulation. I thought “Christian” churches were suppose to be under Christ. Oh well, can’t deduct the dollars if you follow Christ. And we know the all mighty debt, I mean dollar, is god.

“…or abridging the freedom of speech…” Do we still have freedom of speech in America? Yes we do, that is if you can find the posted  free speech zones. You know, the ones they move in the distance so noone you want to hear you, mainly politicians, ever will.  And not just the politicians, but their fawning entourage. Heaven forbid these people should see maybe their favorite overlord to be, or is, is corrupt or unsupportive of their rights. That this jewel is in fact a common stone.
There is this sad pretence in the once “Land of the free and home of the brave” that nothing has altered since its inception. Nothing could be farther from the truth. But we must maintain this pretense to keep the people from really revolting against this unjust regime of totalitarianism that is sweeping this country. So occaisionally we show the protesters and pretend that these are just a bunch of spoiled malcontents that didn’t get their way on some small issue. Then we can all just go back to life as usual. Yawn.

“…or of the press…” This is a good one. The press has abridged itself. Most of the media is owned by certain major corporations who refuse to print or report the truth and the people refuse to take the time required to seek out the ones who do tell the truth. And for the most part they only want their news in sound bites. Complacency is destroying America. But those who lie to us have the freedom to do so. And they are usually the ones who teach us to ridicule the ones who would tell us the truth. We are trained so well.

“…or the right of the people to peacefully assemble…” Ok, this one went the way of the dodo bird the first time someone applied for that permit to assemble.  You know, there always has to be that first person to comply. Well yeah, there is that first law Enforcement officer who goes along too. And I bet both thought they were great Americans who played by the rules. They probably never saw themselves as the ones breaking them.

“…and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances,”  As long as you can afford a lawyer you still have this right too.


ARE JUDGES ABOVE THE LAW ?

I love it when law enforcement puts its own foot in its mouth. OK, the sheriff told me he was a Constitutionalist but yet he enforces unconstitutional laws, or more correctly, allows his deputies to do so.  Maybe I am being to hard on the guy. Maybe he doesn’t understand the whole concept of due process. But wait a minute, isn’t it his duty to understand what he has sworn an oath to uphold ?

The other day at the Kershaw County Court House I was told by a deputy that he would defend every part of the Constitution but in the same conversation he told me that if I was so naive as to think I could walk into a court room and exercise a Constitutional right and the judge was to say, “contempt” this same officer would incarcerate me without due process. What ? Wait a minute. Am I missing something here ?

OK, I guess I should explain due process. It starts with an injured victim who then files a complaint. Once ‘probable cause’ (You know, the accused probably caused the injury) is determined a warrent is issued (A warrant attested to by the accuser). Oh yeah, then comes search and seizure, not before. Then there is that whole speedy trial by jury of your peers thing. Then, and only then, if the jury (People who today have their 13th Amendment rights trashed and are threatened if they wish to refrain from involuntary servitude) finds you guilty you can be incarcerated. Well, only if the offense warrants jail.

So, the question is, “What gives a judge the right to subvert the Constitutional right of due process and put you in jail ?”. Well uh, nothing. He is not above the law. So how did we, and especially this officer who “will defend the Constitution to the letter” get conned into thinking he is ? Good question.

“The claim and exercise of a Constitutional right cannot be converted into a crime.” Miller v. U.S. Hey, the sheriff told me if the Supreme Court said it he would abide by it. The jury is definately still out on this one.

So, if you find yourself being forced into involuntary servitude and asked to convict someone of an unConstitutional law you may want to practice jury nullification. If a law is unConstitutional you cannot find someone guilty of it as it cannot exist. “Any law that is repugnant to the Constitution is null and void of law” Marbury v. Madison, 5 us 137.


%d bloggers like this: