“We do not believe any group of men adequate enough or wise enough to operate without scrutiny or without criticism. We know that the only way to avoid error is to detect it, that the only way to detect it is to be free to inquire. We know that in secrecy error undetected will flourish and subvert.” –J. Robert Oppenheimer
My schedule has been hectic, so an on-topic breather is in order. I am going with a subject that relates to the subject period in history as well as today. Since it is in the news at times, let’s discuss the filibuster. What the heck is it and why should we care?
This definition per clown provided Wiki is as good as any…
A filibuster is a political procedure in which one or more members of a legislative body prolong debate on proposed legislation so as to delay or entirely prevent a decision. It is sometimes referred to as “talking a bill to death” or “talking out a bill”, and is characterized as a form of obstruction in a legislature or other decision-making body.
However, its noted origin as a procedure (not the name) appears to trace back to ancient Rome in 60 and 59 BC when Cato the Younger conducted it in opposition to Caesar’s desires in the ancient Roman Empire. The Roman Senate had a rule that all daily work had to be completed by nightfall. Cato was noted for his long winded speeches, so in two instances he got up and spoke until nightfall to foil Caesar’s plans. It worked the first time, but Caesar had a work around ready the second time as he took the measure he wanted passed to the Tribal Assembly and got it done.
There are numerous countries in which this procedure has been done in their legislative assemblies. As an example, the first time it appears to have been done in Great Britain was in Parliament in 1874. It first entered into U. S. Club Senate rules in 1806, but not used until 1837.
The filibuster was not used frequently until the 1970’s. In more recent times it has become more of a threatened use, especially since the 2010’s. It has also become watered down as a procedure to the point it is mostly only used to counter new legislation today, which is bad enough when the legislation that could pass would help We the People instead of the Uniparty and globalists.
However, the big thing is that it is not a product of the Constitution.It is in the Club Senate’s “rulebook”.
So, why does it continue to exist? Better yet, why do we need an obstruction to the usual “majority rules” method of determining the fate of legislation? We need to understand the history to know the answers to those questions, well, at least more official answers. TradeBait’s response that follows is probably a bit less tactful.
To cut to the chase It is just another contrived rule that We the People had no voice in determiningits existence and use. As posted in previous Dailies they do the same garbage in the judiciary. They build in rules of engagement, practices, procedural hoops, and standing that are not enumerated or codified into law by the legislature. They are inserted at the discretion of the involved parties and frequently used as weapons to achieve goals in conflict with the intent of the Constitution, laws, and will of We the People. They grant permissions to positions and bodies to do so that have never been legally authorized by our system of government. They then hide behind the rules they create.
The Senate politicians sell filibuster presence as a tool to prevent unthrottled and dangerous control by legislators of the “political process” that could abuse citizen voters. They use fear porn induced warnings in serious tones of voice to make their points. Sometimes, I am convinced the real boogeyman or Sasquatch will run out from behind them to threaten us all.
One thing is true, the threat of the use of this tool has kept even a unified House, Senate and POTUS from achieving their fake media described scary agendas despite having received control from the popular vote. How convenient that the GOP or Dems cannot seem to get that important piece of legislation across the finish line that benefits We the People more than the politicians and globalists. With it available the Uniparty continues its reign.
Instead, we get Obamacare and such, right McShame? Oh yeah, you are no longer here to undercut the will of We the People. But just as a reminder, if Harry Reid followed by Turtle did not permit its nuking in regard to confirmations; PDT would have never received approval for any judges, SCOTUS justices, or cabinet selections. Who knew in advance we would thank two Uniparty henchmen for their efforts to release us from that bondage one day? Of course, doing so was met with wailing and gnashing of teeth by media and the Uniparty faithful. Much fear porn was broadcast and now we know why. SCOTUS leaned back toward the right over time and some honest judges were added to the federal court rosters.
In Club Senate the filibuster is still a game maneuver the majority can also use to not move forward with popular legislation that they would ordinarily have the votes to pass, especially with the Uniparty in control. Instead they can hide behind the perceived threat of a filibuster. Rarely do filibusters actually happen, the vast majority of the time their use is just threatened or “understood” to be possible. All of it is theater to keep the public fooled and sidetracked, just like the non-election elections.
There is no point in addressing cloture to end debate. The majority still needs 60 votes to invoke it to end the show. In the political environment of today, rarely would there be any Dems willing to join with the GOP to do so. That makes it easy for GOP Senators to grandstand and gaslight the public on their “conservative” values and standing “with” POTUS Trump against the big, bad Dems.
Conditions Today
Let’s take a look at what MTG thinks of the Club Senate and the filibuster.
If you are an optimist you will respond to this situation with a desire to get rid of it so you can get done what needs to be done. If you are a pessimist you want to keep the filibuster as a tool to keep the leftists from ruining the country should they return to power. However, that may turn out to be a less than accurate analysis if indeed, POTUS Trump and patriots are cleaning the election system and taking back control of the federal government swamp.
Do you really believe the Democrat Party has over 70 million real life voters? If you do, you will be more likely to want to retain the filibuster. If you don’t, you will be more likely to want it terminated providing the election system is cleaned up and fair for all voters.
Next, do you believe in DOGE and their efforts or not? I did not say Elon, I said DOGE. Their efforts are helping to clean the system along with ICE and Homeland Security. Add in the Civil Rights division of the DOJ which is now playing hardball as you saw in Part 2. Evidence is being introduced into the courts on hacking election systems, fraudulent ballot harvesting, and fraudulent voter registration activities. Lies are being exposed that claimed no internet connectivity, when in fact the voting machines were connected. More legal actions are underway on clamping down on ID requirements as well as illegals having access to voter registrations.
I don’t believe the Dems have the votes even if it not totally cleaned yet. My gut says they have less than 50 million. They have no message, no inspiring leaders, no bench to sway the majority of the eligible voters. The longer that America First MAGA can dominate the more the judiciary will become Constitutionalist in nature. That realization is contingent on the current administration and leadership knowing that the Democrat Party does not now have or will have anywhere near the votes they manufactured in 2020 with the election steal.
PDT suggested doing away with the filibuster at least a dozen times in his first term. Contrast that viewpoint with that of a Uniparty Senator. From a 9/26/24 USA Today article on the subject comes this quote, “The day Republicans vote to nuke the filibuster is the day I walk out the door,” said Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., who noted that the party repeatedly resisted Trump’s calls to end the filibuster for legislation while he was president.
Sounds like a really good reason for it to be nuked to me, Thommy Turd.
That leads this author to suggest that it is time to kill the filibuster dead as a doornail. Just the threat of its use stops good legislation that We the People support. With its termination the remaining RINO’s will have to openly state their positions for or against a measure – no more hiding. We the People can then primary them out and replace with America First.
If we truly want to end the RINO species, we have to eliminate their habitat. Thommy Turd told everybody where he hides. Remove the ability to hide and openly expose them. Playing defense all the time plays into the Uniparty’s hands. If we go on offense on this, they will either fight to survive or run away scared. We the People then know where they stand and what to do.
However, none of that is the primary reason to terminate the use of the filibuster. The primary reason to get rid of it is the same as with the other contrived rules, procedures and practices in every area of government. There is no provision for it in the Constitution. Assuming honest elections, the threat and the use of it circumvents the will of We the People.
Remember what Alexander Hamilton, John Adams and a handful of other revered founding fathers wanted to do to circumvent the will of We the People when the Constitution was constructed? They were fearful of We the People and the popular vote as it had been a major problem to the new nation due to States’ Rights and its inability to pay military pensions. Thanks to Thomas Jefferson and a large majority of founders they did not get what they wanted. The popular vote was supported in the end result. However, that did not stop those at our nation’s founding that did not like that result. Instead, less than 20 years later, the pro-filibuster crowd in Club Senate began making rules that worked around the issue just a Caesar’s opponents did with the ancient Roman Senate.
The specific problems from our founders’ days no longer exist. In my opinion, it is time for We the People to go boldly into the Golden Age and terminate the filibuster.
Or we can continue looking around for the boogeyman and Sasquatch.
Please remember Wolf’s rules for our community. In general that means to be respectful to each other and to pull no shenanigans that your mom might find offensive or otherwise cause jail time. That said, free speech is honored here.
There are Important Notificationsfrom our host, Wolf Moon; the Rulesof our late, good Wheatie; and, certain caveatsfrom Yours Truly, of which readers should be aware. They are linked here. Note: Yours Truly has checked today’s post for any AI-generated content. To the best of her knowledge and belief, there is none. If readers wish to post any AI-generated content in the discussion thread for today’s post, they must cite their source. Thank you.
Do not forget to LABEL AI articles video and such.
…The Times framed Trump’s historic first 100 days darkly, as a warning or a sinister omen, but was finally forced to admit that either way, the nation has never witnessed any presidency like this. For instance, one sub-headline blared, “The United States has never seen an effort to expand presidential authority at the scale of Donald J. Trump’s second term.”
[And we had not seen a greater effort to EXPAND the unaccountable bureaucracy, then under FDR. POTUS Trump is trying to return us to the original Constitutional design of the executive.-GC]
“They are trying to do a moonshot on executive power,” explained Harvard Law School professor Jack Goldsmith. Jack doesn’t share Trump voters’ excitement. He feels threatened: “this situation is a much more dangerous threat to the rule of law than the last time.” I’ll just point out that, over the last four years, Jack never thought Biden’s lockdowns, mandatory drugs, or vaccine passports for accessing air travel were threats to the rule of law….
Given our out of control judiciary, I thought this would be a good time to look at what has happened to our judicial system over time. I am hoping Pgroup2 chimes in because I am NOT a lawyer and don’t play one on TV.
Let’s start with what our Constitution says about the Judiciary.
Article I
Section 2.
…No person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the age of twenty five years, and been seven years a citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an inhabitant of that state in which he shall be chosen.…
Section 3.
….No person shall be a Senator who shall not have attained to the age of thirty years, and been nine years a citizen of the United States and who shall not, when elected, be an inhabitant of that state for which he shall be chosen….
Section 8.
The Congress shall have power…
To constitute tribunals inferior to the Supreme Court…
I included Section 2 & 3 because it gives the minimum age and the minimum years as a citizen before the founders considered a person eligible to serve the US people. Shouldn’t judges who serve for a life time be required to have similar qualifications? Maybe 30 years of age and 10 years a US citizen? OR better yet, like our president a natural born US citizen?
Article II
Section 2.
The President shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy …. and he shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.
He shall have power, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to make treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall appoint ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, judges of the Supreme Court, and all other officers of the United States, whose appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by law: but the Congress may by law vest the appointment of such inferior officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the courts of law,or in the heads of departments.
That last part will come back to bite us in the rump!
Article III
Section 1.
The judicial power of the United States, shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The judges, both of the supreme and inferior courts, shall hold their offices during good behaviour, and shall, at stated times, receive for their services, a compensation, which shall not be diminished during their continuance in office.
Section 2.
The judicial power shall extend to all cases, in law and equity, arising under this Constitution, the laws of the United States, and treaties made, or which shall be made, under their authority;–to all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls;–to all cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction;–to controversies to which the United States shall be a party;–to controversies between two or more states;–between a state and citizens of another state;–between citizens of different states;–between citizens of the same state claiming lands under grants of different states, and between a state, or the citizens thereof, and foreign states, citizens or subjects.
In all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and those in which a state shall be party, the Supreme Court shall have original jurisdiction. In all the other cases before mentioned, the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction, both as to law and fact, with such exceptions, and under such regulations as the Congress shall make.
The trial of all crimes, except in cases of impeachment, shall be by jury; and such trial shall be held in the state where the said crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any state, the trial shall be at such place or places as the Congress may by law have directed.
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. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.
The Congress shall have power to declare the punishment of treason, but no attainder of treason shall work corruption of blood, or forfeiture except during the life of the person attainted.
This article looks at the judiciary from the point of view of the federal government.
….The provision for tenure during good behavior and a prohibition on reductions in salary assured the judges of the Supreme Court and other judges authorized to exercise the judicial power of the United States an independence that the Constitution denied the legislators and president. The constitutional outline of the judiciary, far briefer than the articles defining the legislative and executive branches, offered a general description of the federal courts’ jurisdiction. Article III was more specific in its protection of several rights and liberties, such as the guarantee of trial by jury in criminal cases and freedom from bills of attainder or vague charges of treason.
Other articles of the Constitution also shaped the structure and operation of the federal judiciary. According to Article II, the president would appoint judges with the approval of the Senate. In Article I, the enumerated powers of the Congress included the authority “to constitute Tribunals inferior to the Supreme Court.” Although Article III made no mention of a chief justice, the provision in Article I for the chief justice to preside in the impeachment trial of a president indicated the delegates’ assumption that the Supreme Court would include one leadership position. Article VI required all judges, like state and federal legislators and executives, to be bound by oath to support the Constitution.
The constitutional provisions for the judiciary reflected the conventions’ debate on the appointment of judges, the institutional independence of the third branch, and the value of lower federal courts. Many delegates assumed Congress would elect judges, while other wanted the president alone to select the members of the Supreme Court. Madison’s original proposal for the Constitution called for the president and members of the Supreme Court to serve on a Council of Revision that would have authority to veto legislation. The most contentious, and finally unresolved, debate concerning the judiciary centered on the proposals for lower federal courts that would operate alongside existing state courts. Supporters of a strong national government wanted a system of lower federal courts with final jurisdiction in many cases, while those who wished to preserve the authority of state governments proposed that the state courts exercise federal jurisdiction on a local level. The debates on the ratification of the Constitution further demonstrated how controversial were the proposals for lower courts and made clear the challenge Congress would face in establishing a national judiciary within a federal system.
The Supreme Court has no power to amend our Constitution. And it’s impossible for an amendment to take away powers our Constitution doesn’t grant.
Joanna Martin, J.D.
1. First Principles
Let’s analyze COSP’s silly argument. We begin by looking at First Principles:
♦The Judicial Branch was created by Art. III, §1, US Constitution. Accordingly, it is a “creature” of the Constitution. 1
♦The federal government came into existence when the States, acting through special ratifying conventions held in each of the States, ratified the Constitution.2
Since the Judicial Branch is merely a “creature” of the Constitution, it follows that it is subordinate to the Constitution, and is completely subject to its terms. It may not annul the superior authority of the States which created the Judicial Branch when they ratified the Constitution; 3 and as a mere “creature” of the Constitution, it may NOT change the Constitution under which it holds its existence! 4
2. Supreme Court Opinions are not “the Law of the Land”
Article VI, cl.2, US Constit., the “supremacy clause”, defines “supreme Law of the Land” as the Constitution, and acts of Congress and Treaties which are authorized by the Constitution. Supreme Court opinions aren’t included!
Furthermore, Art. I, §1, US Constit., vests all law-making powers granted by the Constitution in Congress. Our Constitution doesn’t grant any lawmaking powers to the Judicial Branch.
So why does everybody say, as we heard during the Kavanagh confirmation hearings, that Roe v. Wade is “the Law of the Land”? Because Americans have been conditioned to believe that the Supreme Court is superior to our Constitution; that their opinions about our Constitution are “law”, and we are bound by them unless and until they issue new opinions which release us from their previous opinions.
3. Organic & statutory law and the totally different “common law” precedent followed in courts
Americans have been conditioned to ignore the huge distinctions between organic and statutory law, on the one hand; and the common law which is embodied in the precedents followed by judges in litigation…..
There is a lot more and it is well worth reading. Other Publius Huldah articles on the due process clause.
…..
REGULATIONS
Well, Well, Well the Federal Register says this page is ‘NOT FOUND’ No wonder I could not find it when I went looking a few weeks ago. However I had it in my notes and it was archived.
The idea for a centralized publication system for executive branch documents began during the Great Depression, when Congress began enacting a host of legislation that gave executive branch agencies increased authority to regulate.
With this flood of new regulations, [Thanks FDR – GC] it soon became apparent that, because there was no standardized repository, it was difficult for the public and federal agencies to know which regulations were effective and enforceable.
This situation was dramatically highlighted when the Supreme Court decided a case involving an agency that tried to enforce a regulation that had actually been revoked by an executive order. No one—not the government, not the defendants, not the lower courts—was aware that the regulation had been eliminated.1 In response, Congress enacted the Federal Register Act (FRA) in July of 1935. The FRA created the Federal Register as the official daily publication for presidential documents and executive agency rule and notice documents and established a central location for filing documents for public inspection.
The documents that the Federal Register Act requires agencies to publish in the Federal Register include:
* executive orders and proclamations;
* documents of general applicability and legal effect;
* documents that impose a penalty;
* any other documents that Congress requires.
The act also requires that these documents are made available for public inspection at least one day before they are published in the Federal Register….. [GEE a WHOLE DAY!]
Proposed Rules
This third section contains documents that announce possible changes to the CFR and solicit public comment on the proposal, such as notices of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) and preliminary rulemaking documents, including advance notices of proposed rulemaking and petitions for rulemaking…..
If you break a regulation you are not tried within the normal court system. Instead you are tried by a ‘judge’ WITHIN THE FEDERAL BUREAU THAT MADE THAT REGULATION.
Administrative law judges (ALJ) (not administrative judges) are executive judges for official and unofficial hearings of administrative disputes in the Federal government. Because they only hear administrative law issues as designated in the Administrative Procedure Act of 1946 (APA), administrative law judges are considered part of the executive branch, not the judicial branch, and ALJs are appointed by the heads of the executive agencies. However, administrative law judges receive much of the same protections as those in the judicial branch in order to preserve their neutrality [And if you believe that Schiff, I have a bridge I want to sell! –GC] such as not being subject to bonuses or ranking systems of executive agencies.
Given the broad scope of administrative law, ALJs participate in many different topics and for many different agencies such as the Social Security Administration (SSA), the Environmental Protection Agency(EPA), and the U.S. Postal Service. The determinations of an ALJ may be appealed potentially even to a federal judicial court. However, essentially every agency has its own appellate processes of review that must be followed before someone can access the federal courts, and sometimes in large agencies, the agency’s internal review process can be quite extensive.
ALJs do not serve the same role as administrative judges. While similar in name to ALJs, administrative judges can only participate in unofficial disputes of executive agencies which constitute the majority of administrative disputes. Only ALJs can hear official disputes heard by the agencies. Further, administrative judges are directly hired by the agencies and are subject to their employment rules and benefits, unlike the independent[YEAH RIGHT! -GC] ALJ judges.
Many states also have ALJs that serve similar roles as their Federal counterparts. The rules and nature of ALJs vary by state on levels of neutrality, procedure, and jurisdiction.
EXAMPLE:
The Food Safety Modernization Act bill was so over-the-top in its overreach that the bill’s language states, “(t)he validity and appropriateness of the order of the Administrator assessing the civil penalty shall not be subject to judicial review.”
And if you’re think this is as outrageous as this bill can be, you’d be very wrong. Section 406 clearly states, “(i)n any action to enforce the requirements of the food safety law, the connection with interstate commerce required for jurisdictionSHALL BE PRESUMED TO EXIST.”
…Lori Robertson of FactCheck.org, who is not a lawyer (she has a B.A. in advertising), claims the bill doesn’t apply to “ that tomato plant in your backyard.” As a lawyer, I am skeptical of this claim (I co-represented the prevailing defendant in the last successful constitutional challenge to federal regulation under the interstate commerce clause, United States v. Morrison(2000), one of only two cases in 70 years in which a challenge was successful). Congress’s power under the Constitution’s Commerce Clause is almost unlimited in the eyes of the courts, a nd thus can reach the “tomato plant in your backyard.” — Trojan Horse Law: The Food Safety Modernization Act of 2009
Text from the bill HR 875 that became the Food Safety Modernization Act.
Civil Penalty-
(A) IN GENERAL- Any person that commits an act that violates the food safety law (including a regulation promulgated or order issued under the food safety law) may be assessed a civil penalty by the Administrator of not more than $1,000,000 for each such
B) SEPARATE OFFENSE- Each act described in subparagraph (A) andeach day during which that act continues shall be considered a separate offense. [Now you know why I no longer sell my goats and sheep and rather kill & bury them than sell them for food! -GC]
Criminal Sanctions-
(1) OFFENSE RESULTING IN SERIOUS ILLNESS- Notwithstanding section 303(a) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 333(a)), if a violation of any provision of section 301 of such Act (21 U.S.C. 301) with respect to an adulterated or misbranded food results in serious illness, the person committing the violation shall be imprisoned for not more than 5 years, fined in accordance with title 18, United States Code, or both.
(2) OFFENSE RESULTING IN DEATH- Notwithstanding section 303(a) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 333(a)), if a violation of any provision of section 301 of such Act (21 U.S.C. 331) with respect to an adulterated or misbranded food results in death, the person committing the violation shall be imprisoned for not more than 10 years, fined in accordance with title 18, United States Code, or both.
(e) Penalties Paid Into Account- The Administrator–
(1) shall deposit penalties collected under this section in an account in the Treasury; and
(2) may use the funds in the account, without further appropriation or fiscal year limitation–
(A) to carry out enforcement activities under the food safety law; or
(B) to provide assistance to States to inspect retail commercial food establishments or other food or firms under the jurisdiction of State food safety programs.
I do not know if these Criminal Sanctions are tried before the Administrator or not. With NAIS aka animal ID traceability, the large corporations LOVE this law since they can slough off any legal ramifications onto the farmer.
….However, this type of jury is called a “petit” or “trial jury”; a grand jury is very different. A grand jury is a group of citizens convened by the federal government to determine if probable cause exists to believe that a person committed a federal crime.…
Federal prosecutors present evidence and live testimony in a grand jury proceeding by issuing grand jury subpoenas. A grand jury subpoena is not issued by the grand jury but by the federal prosecutor assigned to the case.
Under the United States Constitution, all federal felony charges must proceed with a grand jury indictment. However, there is no grand jury requirement for misdemeanor offenses.
Nothing like a bit of gaslighting to confuse the public….
In dealing with the grand jury, the prosecutor must always conduct himself or herself as an officer of the court whose function is to ensure that justice is done and that guilt shall not escape nor innocence suffer.
The prosecutor must recognize that the grand jury is an independent body, whose functions include not only the investigation of crime and the initiation of criminal prosecutionbut also the protection of the citizenry from unfounded criminal charges.
The prosecutor’s responsibility is toADVISEthe grand jury on the law and to present evidence for its consideration.In discharging these responsibilities, the prosecutor must be scrupulously fair to all witnesses and must do nothing to inflame or otherwise improperly influence the grand jurors.…
[updated January 2020]
9-11.242 – NON-DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE GOVERNMENT ATTORNEYS
Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 6(d) provides that the only prosecution personnel who may be present while the grand jury is in session are “attorneys for the government.” Rule 1(b) defines attorney for the government for Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure purposes as the Attorney General, an authorized assistant of the Attorney General, a United States Attorney, an authorized assistant of a United States Attorney, and certain other persons in cases arising under the laws of Guam.
An agency attorney or other non-Department of Justice attorney must be appointed as a Special Assistant or a Special Assistant to the Attorney General, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 515, or a Special Assistant to a United States Attorney, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 543, in order to appear before a grand jury in the district of appointment….
Note the word ADVISE and the CHANGE of DATE… From the older reading the Grand Jury is INDEPENDENT of the courts and can look into matters. This of course is NOT a concept our Overlords want us to know. It is JUST like the RIGHT TO A JURY TRIAL and JURY NULLIFICATION. A right granted by the US Constitution but eroded and hidden from us.
Prepared By Kelly Mordechai, Author“The Hidden 4th Branch”
Kelly Mordechai is experienced at filing formal grand jury petitions and has appearing before a grand jury based upon a filing of his own formal grand jury petition. The process for accessing a country, state, or federal grand jury is protected by your ‘Right to Petition’ and can differ greatly from grand jury to grand jury, so knowing your rights, and the specific procedures that may be unique to the grand jury you are attempting to petition, is paramount to a successful filing. Mr. Mordechai is happy to consult with anyone interested in filing a formal grand jury petition….
Q2:What is a grand jury?
Answer: A grand jury isan independent legal authority, empowered by the U.S. Constitution, case law, and history. A grand jury is composed of everyday people entrusted to investigate any and all allegations of felonious criminal activity and inparticular “willful misconduct by public officials.”
Grand juries possess the legal authority to indict anyone believed to be guilty where evidence and testimony substantiates the allegations of criminal activity.
Once indicted, alleged criminals are required to stand trial or seek a plea bargain.
Grand juries are comprised of U.S. citizens, aged 18 or older, and selected directly from the communities they are appointed to serve.
Referred to as the unofficial 4th branch of the government, grand juries possess enormous power to pursue justice on behalf of ‘We the People’, particularly in times when corruption is evident and unchecked. With clear evidence during the COVID crisis that crimes against humanity, extensive fraud, and rampant acts of willful misconduct have been committed, grand juries present the best potential solution for Americans seeking justice. A grand jury convened to independently investigate government officials and public health officials for corruption, fraud, and willful misconduct can ensure that any and all alleged criminals stand trial for wrongdoing. [2]
Q3:Can any U.S. citizen petition a grand jury?
Answer: Yes. Every U.S. citizen retains the 1st Amendment ‘Right of Petition’. While some states have made significant effort to install obstacles that prevent ordinary U.S. citizens from actively engaging their right to petition grand juries, these rights are maintained in all 50 states, nevertheless. Kansas, Nevada, North Dakota, New Mexico, Nebraska and Oklahoma have laws that specifically empower citizen led grand juries without the need to file formal petitions through the US Attorney or State Attorney General acting as a middleman in the process…
[Page 16 thru 39 are references.]
WHYdidtheyremovedTrial by Jury AND JURY TRAINING???
“ I consider trial by jury as the only anchor ever yet imagined by man, by which government can be held to the principles of its constitution.”
Thomas Jefferson, 1788.
“Representative government and trial by jury are the heart and lungs of liberty. Without them we have no other fortification against being ridden like horses, fleeced like sheep, worked like cattle and fed and clothed like swine and hounds.”
John Adams, 1774.
“Trial by jury in civil cases is as essential to secure the liberty of the people as any one of the pre-existent rights of nature.”
….Despite this extensive history, modern judges mostly forbid any mention of jury nullification in the courtroom. This has happened in part because of an obscure Supreme Court decision. In 1895, the Court ruled in Sparf v. US that juries do have the power to nullify the law. But the ruling also stated that judges are not required to inform the jury of this. As a result, judges and prosecutors have exploited Sparf to forbid any mention of jury nullification from the courtroom….
William Penn may have thought he had settled the matter. Arrested in 1670 for preaching Quakerism, Penn was brought to trial. Despite Penn’s admitting the charge, four of the 12 jurors voted to acquit. The judge sent the four to jail “without meat, drink, fire and tobacco” for failing to find Penn guilty. On appeal, however, the jurors’ action was upheld and the right of juries to judge both the law and the facts — to nullify the law if it chose — became part of British constitutional law.
It ultimately became part of American constitutional law as well, but you’d never know it…
“Anyone accused of a crime in this country is entitled to a jury trial.”
The Constitution may say so but, in fact, this is simply not the case — and becoming less so as politicians fiddle with legal definitions and sentencing standards in order specifically to reduce the number of persons entitled to a trial….
The nullification principle involves the power to say no to the excesses of government, and thus serves as a final defense against tyranny.As Thomas Jefferson put it to Tom Paine in a 1789 letter, “I consider trial by jury as the only anchor ever yet imagined by man, by which a government can be held to the principles of its constitution.”….
Author, Tom Stahl is a former FIJA Board member and practicing attorney from Waterville, Washington
ALL CRIMINAL CASES
The constitutions of Maryland, Indiana, Oregon, and Georgia currently have provisions guaranteeing the right of jurors to “judge” or “determine” the law in “all criminal cases.” Article 23 of Maryland’s Constitution states:
…In the trial of all criminal cases, the Jury shall be the Judges of Law, as well as of fact, except that the Court may pass upon the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain a conviction. The right of trial by Jury of all issues of fact in civil proceedings in the several Courts of Law in this State, where the amount in controversy exceeds the sum of five thousand dollars, shall be inviolably preserved.
…There is no doubt that jury nullification was one of the rights and powers that the people were exercising in 1791 when the Bill of Rights of the United States Constitution was adopted. As legal historian Lawrence Friedman has written:
In American legal theory, jury-power was enormous, and subject to few controls. There was a maxim of law that the jury was judge both of law and of fact in criminal cases. This idea was particularly strong in the first revolutionary generation when memories of royal justice were fresh.
Jury nullification is therefore one of the “rights retained by the people” in the Ninth Amendment.
And it is one of the “powers reserved to the people” in the Tenth Amendment.
Jury nullification is decentralization of political power. It is the people’s most important veto in our constitutional system. The jury vote is the only time the people ever vote on the application of a real law in real life. All other votes are for hypotheticals.
Chief Justice Roberts shows that he’s part of the swamp. If you believe his bs about judges, I have a bridge to sell you. The Obama judge is a leftwing extremist, and the son of a lefwing extremist who was a well-known communist classmate of mine at Berkeley in the 1960s.
Unfortunately I do not have the authors of the following two quotes.However they encapsulate our present situation so well, I am including themany way.
Justice is based on how strong your connections are to the people with power and how much money you have. Without those two, justice is rarely attainable. I have spent too many years around the system to even begin to think the average person stands a chance at getting justice.
….
The whole concept of an “independent” judiciary is silly when you have activists judges making up justifications to rule on partisan ideological lines out of whole cloth. When this happens judges are effectively legislating from the bench.
IF THERE IS NO TRIAL BY JURY, THEN THE PEOPLE CAN NOT NULLIFY BAD LAWS.
Therefore removal of the right to a jury trial became a goal of the Cabal.
Right to Jury in Criminal Cases
Amendment VI
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.
Right to Jury in Civil Cases
Amendment VII
In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved….
The 6th and 11th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and Article 3 Section 2 give US citizens the right to a trial. However as Joan Biskupic, a Washington Post reporter stated:
“Anyone accused of a crime in this country is entitled to a jury trial.” The Constitution may say so but, in fact, this is simply not the case — and becoming less so as politicians fiddle with legal definitions and sentencing standards in order specifically to reduce the number of persons entitled to a trial.
Biskupic also wrote: “The American custom is that jurors decide the facts of the case (whether the person did what he is accused of) and leave it to judges to interpret the law. There is no room, in other words, for jurors to say whether they think the law is a good one, though there have been a few celebrated exceptions — notably the 18th-century acquittal of John Peter Zenger of seditious libel and the 19th-century acquittals for prosecution under the fugitive slave law.”
This is a rewriting of history, one of the privileges of a reporter who works for a paper free to do so thanks to the rights of jurors upheld in the Zenger case. — The Progressive Review 2/99
I find it interesting that some of my older references are from PROGRESSIVES. It shows just how far they have ‘progressed’ towards a communist totalitarian dictatorship in a few decades.
Here is how the politicians have gotten around the US Constitution to make sure citizens are denied their right to a trial:
The Seventh Amendment, passed by the First Congress without debate, cured the omission by declaring that the right to a jury trial shall be preserved in common-law cases… The Supreme Court has, however, arrived at a more limited interpretation. It applies the amendment’s guarantee to the kinds of cases that “existed under the English common law when the amendment was adopted,” …
The right to trial by jury is not constitutionally guaranteed in certain classes of civil cases that are concededly “suits at common law,” particularly when “public” or governmental rights are at issue and if one cannot find eighteenth-century precedent for jury participation in those cases. Atlas Roofing Co. v. Occupational Safety & Health Review Commission (1977). Thus, Congress can lodge personal and property claims against the United States in non-Article III courts with no jury component. In addition, where practice as it existed in 1791 “provides no clear answer,” the rule is that “[o]nly those incidents which are regarded as fundamental, as inherent in and of the essence of the system of trial by jury, are placed beyond the reach of the legislature.” Markman v. Westview Instruments (1996). In those situations, too, the Seventh Amendment does not restrain congressional choice.
In contrast to the near-universal support for the civil jury trial in the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, modern jurists consider civil jury trial neither “implicit in the concept of ordered liberty,” Palko v. State of Connecticut (1937), nor “fundamental to the American scheme of justice,” Duncan v. Louisiana (1968).
The result is a relentless march towards concentrating power into the hands of the ruling elites….
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This comment is no longer available at either the Conservative Tree House or in the Wayback archives. I think it is important enough to preserve it here.
Judicial Tyranny has long been an enemy to our Republic.
President Thomas Jefferson knew what was coming way back in 1800, but even these great men would’ve laughed at allowing “lower courts” rule over the executive branch, and pushed back hard against the Supreme Court at times.
Thomas Jefferson on Judicial Tyranny
“Nothing in the Constitution has given them [the federal judges] a right to decide for the Executive, more than to the Executive to decide for them. . . . The opinion which gives to the judges the right to decide what laws are constitutional and what not, not only for themselves, in their own sphere of action, but for the Legislature and Executive also in their spheres, would make the Judiciary a despotic branch.” (Letter to Abigail Adams, September 11, 1804)
“The original error [was in] establishing a judiciary independent of the nation, and which, from the citadel of the law, can turn its guns on those they were meant to defend, and control and fashion their proceedings to its own will.” (Letter to John Wayles Eppes, 1807)
“Our Constitution . . . intending to establish three departments, co-ordinate and independent that they might check and balance one another, it has given—according to this opinion to one of them alone the right to prescribe rules for the government of others; and to that one, too, which is unelected by and independent of the nation. . . . The Constitution, on this hypothesis, is a mere thing of wax in the hands of the judiciary, which they may twist and shape into any form they please.” (Letter to Judge Spencer Roane, Sept. 6, 1819)
“You seem . . . to consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions; a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. Our judges are as honest as other men, and not more so . . . and their power [is] the more dangerous, as they are in office for life and not responsible, as the other functionaries are, to the elective control. The Constitution has erected no such single tribunal, knowing that to whatever hands confided, with corruptions of time and party, its members would become despots.” (Letter to William Jarvis, Sept. 28, 1820)
“The judiciary of the United States is the subtle corps of sappers and miners constantly working under ground to undermine the foundations of our confederated fabric. They are construing our constitution from a co-ordination of a general and special government to a general and supreme one alone. This will lay all things at their feet, and they are too well versed in English law to forget the maxim, ‘boni judicis est ampliare jurisdictionem’ [good judges have ample jurisdiction]. . . . A judiciary independent of a king or executive alone, is a good thing; but independence of the will of the nation is a solecism, at least in a republican government.” (Letter to Thomas Ritchie, Dec. 25, 1820)
“The germ of dissolution of our federal government is in the constitution of the federal Judiciary; an irresponsible body (for impeachment is scarcely a scare-crow) working like gravity by night and by day, gaining a little today and a little tomorrow, and advancing its noiseless step like a thief, over the field of jurisdiction, until all shall be usurped.” (Letter to Charles Hammond, August 18, 1821)
“The great object of my fear is the Federal Judiciary. That body, like gravity, ever acting with noiseless foot and unalarming advance, gaining ground step by step and holding what it gains, is engulfing insidiously the special governments into the jaws of that which feeds them.” (Letter to Judge Spencer Roane, 1821)
“At the establishment of our constitutions, the judiciary bodies were supposed to be the most helpless and harmless members of the government. Experience, however, soon showed in what way they were to become the most dangerous; that the insufficiency of the means provided for their removal gave them a freehold and irresponsibility in office; that their decisions, seeming to concern individual suitors only, pass silent and unheeded by the public at large; that these decisions, nevertheless, become law by precedent, sapping, by little and little, the foundations of the constitution, and working its change by construction, before any one has perceived that that invisible and helpless worm has been busily employed in consuming its substance. In truth, man is not made to be trusted for life if secured against all liability to account.” (Letter to A. Coray, October 31, 1823)
FTA: The justices overturned a lower court ruling that had endorsed the SEC’s hiring practice for the judges. The agency’s commissioners, who are presidentially appointed, should have named them, not SEC staff, the justices said.
This ruling has real impact giving power back to the president across the board in numerous agencies. Looks like POTUS will have more seats to fill.
Here’s where case law method started:
-snip-
•In the 1870s, Dean Christopher Columbus Langdell transformed American legal education by introducing what has become the standard first-year curriculum for American law schools – including classes in contracts, property, torts, criminal law, and civil procedure.
•Langdell also developed the case method of teaching law, which became the dominant pedagogical model at U.S. law schools. His notion that law could be studied as a “science” gave university legal education a reason for being that was distinct from vocational preparation. Critics at first defended the old lecture method because it was faster and cheaper and made fewer demands on faculty and students. But advocates said the case method had a sounder theoretical basis in scientific research and the inductive method.
https://hls.harvard.edu/about/history
REPLY:
So true! Our current structure represents the bastardization of our system! The Constitution, itself, is written in the Common law. That is a quote by Antonin Scalia, by the way. The Progressives systematically sidelined common law and replaced it with Equity law, which is why we have the corrupt legal and judicial system that we have today. For a lucid and comprehensive timeline of just how they did it, see this amazing legal journal article that I found quite by accident, but which I treasure, to this day. This link goes directly to a U Penn website where you can download the article as a pdf: https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3957&context=penn_law_review
Title of the article: HOW EQUITY CONQUERED COMMON LAW: THE FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE IN HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE [94 pages – GC] This is definitely a turgid law journal article and it requires a lot of concentration for us laymen. I had to read it several times to make full sense of it. HOWEVER: You can easily see, even while skimming the article, how the Progressives used the very same arguments to attack the common law that they use, now, to attack the Constitution: “The common law is antiquated and it’s no longer relevant to our society.” ” The common law is too complex. It needs to be streamlined.” I marvel that they have gotten away with destroying institution after institution using the same hackneyed lies! Lastly, the footnotes in this article are a treasure trove of truths that basically catch the evil doers of each era red-handed, destroying the key features of our system. Among those, the common law is the most valuable, and its main institution, the common law grand jury was the most valuable tool to help keep the republic, as Franklin exhorted us to do. The common law grand jury gave the jurors absolute hegemony over the judge and the prosecutor. No request that they made–not for evidence or further investigation, or to examine evidence personally, or to hear witnesses questioned again–could be refused. The decision of the common law grand jury was final.
Partly because I read this article, I came to the conclusion that the Founders intended for the common law grand jury to be the tool that made the People the fourth branch of government. They gave the people omnipotence, via the common law grand jury, so that they could nip corruption in the bud, as it first began to form, in local arenas. This is the key to the keeping of our republic. As we Drain the Swamp, we need to keep in mind that we must also restore the apparatus by which we can prevent the corruption spreading, again. I hope you guys give sufficient credence to what I am saying, here. I see this whole concept as being of central importance.
After almost twenty-five years of battle, Congress passed the Enabling Act of 1934,1 authorizing the Supreme Court to promulgate the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (“Federal Rules” or “Rules”).2 The 1938 Federal Rules were heralded as a phenomenal success.’ Approximately half of the states adopted almost identical rules, and procedural rules in the remainder of the states bear their influence.” For decades, most first year law students have learned about civil litigation through a Federal Rules filter.5
Now the Federal Rules and adjudication of civil disputes are under attack.’ Among the key targets are discovery abuse,7 expense and delay,” excessive judicial power and discretion,’ excessive court rulemaking,10 unpredictability, 1 litigiousness,12 an overly adversarial atmosphere,13 unequal resources of the parties, 4 lack of focus,1 5 and formal adjudication itself.”6 Case management, efforts to encourage settlements, and a breathtaking array of alternative dispute resolution mechanisms represent the current major categories of response.17 There remains speculation, however, as to what factors have contributed to the nature of current civil litigation. Suggested culprits include the explosion in substantive law, photocopying, the types and difficulty of issues brought to courts, the increase in amounts of money involved, and “the sheer number of parties.”1 ‘ Without denigrating these and other factors, this Article concentrates instead on the inherent nature of the Federal Rules and on the basic choice of procedural form made by their promulgators.
It advances two theses.
First, an historical examination of the evolution of the Federal Rules reveals that rules of equity prevailed over common law procedure.
Second, this conquest represents a major contributing factor to many of the most pressing problems in contemporary civil procedure.
That the Federal Rules and modem procedure draw heavily on equity is not news. Both the commissioners who drafted the New York Field Code in the mid-nineteenth century and the most influential proponents of procedural reform in the twentieth century, cited, drew upon, and applauded equity procedure.’ 9 Some contemporary scholars have also acknowledged the modern debt to equity procedure. For example, eleven years ago, Professor Abram Chayes noted how modem civil procedure, in public law cases, looked to equity for remedies.20 Professor Owen Fiss has eloquently expressed a recent defense to the obligation of judges, particularly federal ones, to use historic equity powers in order to breathe life into sacred constitutional rights and to permit such rights to evolve and expand as society attempts to become more humane.21
As important as scholarship like Professors Chayes’ and Fiss’s has been, however, it does not do justice to the revolutionary character of the decision inherent in the Federal Rules to make equity procedure available for all cases. Nor does it explore what the choice of equity procedure meant historically, how it evolved, and what concerns and problems flow from a procedural system driven by equity. The defense of equity power in constitutional cases designed to restructure public institutions tends to undervalue the problem of how to translate rights, constitutional or otherwise, into daily realities for the bulk of citizens. 12 Aspects of common law procedure and thought, not equity, may be required to help deliver or vindicate rights, now that equity has opened a new rights frontier.
Focusing on the historical currents that resulted in the Federal Rules will illustrate what an enormous distance was traveled, how one-sided the procedural choices became, and the problems implicit in those choices. Perhaps exploring where one came from can help clarify where one may wish to go. Part I of this Article first looks at the major components of common law and equity procedure, and then examines the domination of an equity mentality in the Federal Rules. Part II explores the American procedural experience before the twentieth century, and demonstrates how David Dudley Field and his 1848 New York Code were tied to a common law procedural outlook. Part III concentrates on Roscoe Pound (who initiated the twentieth century procedural reform effort), Thomas Shelton (who led the American Bar Association (“ABA”) Enabling Act Movement), and Charles Clark (the major draftsman of the Federal Rules). Through understanding these men and the interests they represented, one can see that we did not stumble into an equity system; people with identifiable agendas wanted it. Part IV examines how the Federal Rules advocate rejected methods that might have helped balance and control their equity procedure, why the methods of confining the system failed, and why current approaches to redress the imbalance of an equity-dominated system will also fail. It concludes with a summary of fundamental constraints rejected by the advocates of uniform federal rules of procedure. My goal is to rescue some quite profound voices from the wilderness.
I. COMMON LAW, EQUITY, AND THE FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE
Much of the formal litigation in England historically took place in a two-court system: “common law” or “law” courts, and “Chancery” or “equity” courts.2 ” Although they were complementary, law and equity courts each had a distinct procedural system, jurisprudence, and outlook. The development of contemporary American civil procedure cannot be understood without acknowledging these differences. The more formalized common law procedure has been so ridiculed that we tend to ignore its development to meet important needs, some of which still endure, and that many of its underlying purposes still make sense. Conversely, especially during this century, equity has been touted in ways that obscure the underlying drawbacks to its use as the procedural model.
I hope this gives everyone a taste of how the Cabal has twisted our judiciary to ‘better suit their needs’ instead of ours.
9 I John, who also am your brother, and companion in tribulation, and in the kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ, was in the isle that is called Patmos, for the word of God, and for the testimony of Jesus Christ. 10 I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet, 11 Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and, What thou seest, write in a book, and send it unto the seven churches which are in Asia; unto Ephesus, and unto Smyrna, and unto Pergamos, and unto Thyatira, and unto Sardis, and unto Philadelphia, and unto Laodicea.
12 And I turned to see the voice that spake with me. And being turned, I saw seven golden candlesticks; 13 And in the midst of the seven candlesticks one like unto the Son of man, clothed with a garment down to the foot, and girt about the paps with a golden girdle. 14 His head and his hairs were white like wool, as white as snow; and his eyes were as a flame of fire; 15 And his feet like unto fine brass, as if they burned in a furnace; and his voice as the sound of many waters. 16 And he had in his right hand seven stars: and out of his mouth went a sharp twoedged sword: and his countenance was as the sun shineth in his strength.
17 And when I saw him, I fell at his feet as dead. And he laid his right hand upon me, saying unto me, FEAR NOT;I am the first and the last: 18I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death. 19 Write the things which thou hast seen, and the things which are, and the things which shall be hereafter; 20 The mystery of the seven stars which thou sawest in my right hand, and the seven golden candlesticks. The seven stars are the angels of the seven churches: and the seven candlesticks which thou sawest are the seven churches.
Reasonable Fear.
It is the human condition to face fears in our lives that are truly reasonable fears. But, when we have done all we can to prepare and protect, we still find our power is not sufficient to remove all sources of threat.
Psalms 127
1 Unless the LORD builds the house, They labor in vain who build it; Unless the LORD guards the city, The watchman keeps awake in vain.
2 It is vain for you to rise up early, To retire late, To eat the bread of painful labors; For He gives to His beloved even in his sleep.
May the truth of God’s provision and protection calm the fears of those who belong to him.
1 When you abide under the shadow of Shaddai, you are hidden in the strength of God Most High.*
2 He’s the hope that holds me and the stronghold to shelter me, the only God for me, and my great confidence.
3 He will rescue you from every hidden trap of the enemy, and he will protect you from false accusation and any deadly curse.
4 His massive arms are wrapped around you, protecting you. You can run under his covering of majesty and hide. His arms of faithfulness are a shield keeping you from harm.
5 You will never worry about an attack of demonic forces at night nor have to fear a spirit of darkness coming against you.
6 Don’t fear a thing! Whether by night or by day, demonic danger will not trouble you, nor will the powers of evil be launched against you.
7 Even in a time of disaster, with thousands and thousands being killed, you will remain unscathed and unharmed.
8 You will be a spectator as the wicked perish in judgment, for they will be paid back for what they have done!
9-10 When we live our lives within the shadow of God Most High, our secret hiding place, we will always be shielded from harm. How then could evil prevail against us or disease infect us?
11 God sends angels with special orders to protect you wherever you go, defending you from all harm.
12 If you walk into a trap, they’ll be there for you and keep you from stumbling.
13 You’ll even walk unharmed among the fiercest powers of darkness, trampling every one of them beneath your feet!
14 For here is what the Lord has spoken to me: “Because you loved me, delighted in me, and have been loyal to my name, I will greatly protect you.
15 I will answer your cry for help every time you pray, and you will feel my presence in your time of trouble. I will deliver you and bring you honor.
16 I will satisfy you with a full life and with all that I do for you. For you will enjoy the fullness of my salvation!”
*boxed notes, above, are from The Passion Translation footnotes.
The Guardian Angel by Von Kaulbach
Our Turn.
We can make a difference. And we must make a difference.
May God bless and guide you as you pray and take action for our nation.
God Bless America, Land that I love. Stand beside her, and guide her Thru the night with a light from above. From the mountains, to the prairies, To the oceans, white with foam God bless America, My home sweet home.
It is now a very appropriate time to discuss political parties since they have been doing their best to disrupt the will of We the People for many years.
In our newly formed nation during the subject period of this series, the Federalists were the first organized political party that apparently formed in 1789, although some sources hold out for as late as 1795. When one considers that Alexander Hamilton, John Jay and James Madison produced and published the Federalist papers from 1787-1788 in NY newspapers, this writer chooses to use the earlier date.
That would be the year the Constitution was ratified. That did not take long, did it?
The Federalist movement and party dominated the affairs of America during the 1790’s, then never won an election after 1801 before disappearing not long after the War of 1812. Their lasting legacy will always be the Constitution, for better or worse.
To provide some background and more of a basis for this part, please review this summary of political parties in America.
Before we go further I have a confession to make. I firmly believe as POTUS James Monroe stated, “Surely our government may go on and prosper without the existence of parties. I have always considered their existence as the curse of the country”
You will find that statement in the fourth paragraph of the linked letter below from said James Monroe to James Madison on May 12, 1822.
Preach it, James. You understood this subject well in my opinion. It would not be long (1828) before a political party rose up against the freemasons, the Anti-Masonic Party. Seems you were a freemason. Oh well. That party was absorbed into the Whigs a decade later.
However, please do not miss what Monroe said in the sentence previous to the above referenced quote. “Public opinion will react on this body, & keep it right.“
Seems that is still the key over 200 years later; transparently keeping the citizens truthfully informed while they remain engaged with their government officials and related activities. Which is why the current day Uniparty worked successfully to take over the opinion shaping in media. They were successful in keeping the masses in the dark about what the usurpers were really doing while also cultivating a general disinterest or distaste of politics and voting within the general public.
The major problem they now have, thanks to POTUS Donald J. Trump, is a very large group of Americans no longer believe a stinking word they say and are now fulfilling James Monroe’s prediction of keeping the politicians more honest (“right”). The fake media’s effect is being relegated to the sheeple with Bob Uecker’s view. In honor of the recent start to MLB’s season…
Dang, I miss that guy.
British Legacy
We cannot really blame our founders for establishing political parties. The vast majority of them and other patriots who formed our new nation came from the United Kingdom. As a result, let’s take a look at the political party history and landscape there before the nation of America was a thing. Check out #3 in the link below.
Tory and Whig parties formed beginning in the 1680 time frame. Which makes it easier to understand how and why political parties formed in America. Colonists had been conditioned to their existence as subjects of Great Britain. They had seen the Tories remain loyal to the Crown and viewed as traditionalists all of those years. The Whigs were the reformers and liberals. As a result it was a natural reaction when opposing viewpoints developed in America during and after the war to create the Federalists and Antifederalists. The supporters took sides and the first to become organized appears to be the Federalists. They were soon followed by the Democratic-Republicans (Antifederalists), also known as the Jeffersonian Republicans in the 1792-95 time frame. The actual dates are disputed among many historical accounts, but are in the general time frame of late 1780’s to mid 1790’s for both parties.
Conditions On The Ground Then
As we know, political parties generally form to advance common interests. Alliances on issues of importance make it easier to advance those common interests. However, those alliances also tend to create issues to gain power and money while moving public opinion to their points of view.
That is clearly what the Federalists did. Seven of the thirteen states in the new nation of the United States of America were fine with the Articles of Confederation. The Federalists foresaw big trouble on the horizon as stated in the previous part, or, felt they could not gin up enough fear porn to hopefully move public opinion their way. At that point they did not believe they could influence the seven states sufficiently to gain the nine votes needed to produce a new, nationally governing document. The seven states were entrenched in their thinking and operation. The Federalists were obviously opposed to states’ rights exceeding federal authority and believed in a strong central government. So, they used a provision in the Articles to have state conventions to elect special delegates to amend the Articles at the Philadelphia Convention. It worked. The bottom line is they wore down their political opponents and succeeded in flipping three states to their views of terminating the Articles and replacing with the Constitution that resulted.
Who were those founding fathers who could be so formidable in support of their beliefs and persuasive in their arguments? Well, that would be political heavyweights George Washington, John Adams, James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, Robert Morris, and John Jay primarily; along with many others who were friends and allies. They were a formidable, respected block of patriots.
Washington said, “I do not conceive we can last long as a nation without having lodged somewhere a power whick(h) will pervade the whole union in as energetic a manner as the authority of the state governments extends over the several states.” He wrote letters to the governors of all thirteen states expressing his views. His beliefs in a stronger central government weighed heavily on the leaders and the people.
To be sure there were heavyweight patriots lined up against the loss of the Articles and the provisions it contained. Richard Henry Lee, Thomas Jefferson, James Monroe, Elbridge Gerry, and William Paca among others opposed its discontinuance. Some changed their views during the negotiations or after the Constitution was ratified. Jefferson took the opposite view about the internal rebellions the Federalists feared. He felt they were good for the nation to experience occasionally to improve itself. He felt those involved in such events such as in Shays’s Rebellion should not be harshly punished as an example. As a student of the Enlightenment he believed the good of people would win out in the end. This was directly opposed by many Federalists who did not share his views. They pointed to the perceived selfish responses of state leaders in not paying federal war debts as well as rebels and insurrectionists in the general populace as evidence.
As in most things of importance in government, history indicates that both camps were probably right and wrong in their various assessments.
Conditions On the Ground Now
Fast forward to January 6, 2021. What say you, America? It is the day We the People realized fully that elections have been fake for some time. It is the day many realized the federal government had become fully corrupted and had become agents of criminal leaders.
I guess the Federalists did not foresee a day when America’s federal government and elected officials leading it would authorize its Intelligence and law enforcement agencies to plan and instigate domestic terror operations against fellow citizens to influence the views, activities and votes of the general populace. But yet, here we are still dealing with the same shiz the colonists faced when the Brits did so on behalf of the Crown and Parliament.
With the Constitution’s ratification there have proven to be precious few effective triggers for citizens and even states to pull to counter the corruption as the bad faith is exhibited. That has led to outright rebellion at times in our history, as Thomas Jefferson suggested it probably would and should. As it turned out there is a large segment of We the People who have been good and faithful citizens abiding by the laws while many elected leaders, the supporting federal bureaucracy, and judiciary have not been.
It has been an infuriating experience for many patriotic American citizens through the years who point to the Constitution and tell the tyrants of the day that their actions cannot stand per the rule of law. These have been the same We the People who are viewed as We the Peasants by their greaters. Peasants who have endured corrupted elected officials, bureaucrats, law enforcement agencies, and judiciary who turn blind eyes or even openly support the criminal activities without recourse for the lessers.
Is it any wonder that POTUS Trump frequently promotes the song, “Do You Hear the People Sing?” from Les Miserables in his events? He knows how we deplorables have been treated.
There have been clear violations of the intent of existing law in the Constitution over two centuries now. In response to it there is Monroe’s, “Public opinion will react on this body, & keep it right.“ Was the 2020 election, among other disputed elections throughout our history, supposed to be rectified through that statement? How about the related treatment of American citizens on J6 who objected to the obvious election steal and the authorities’ circumvention of keeping it right? Did we keep the federal government right?
When the interpreters, administrators and enforcers are corrupted; can there even be justice outside of divine intervention or rebellion by the peasants?
Need more evidence of federal government failure to protect in America? Per numerous government sources somewhere between ten and twenty million illegal invaders poured over our borders in four years from 2021 through 2024. Elected officials in bothpolitical parties along with federal law enforcement agencies and the judiciary did nothing to enforce the law and Constitution despite the catastrophic on-going effects it had on the nation and We the People. Instead many made the paths of these illegals smooth and easy to navigate with taxpayer money to also help them along while ignoring the needs of citizens. Many of these enemies of the state are still in seated roles of power and authority and are circumventing the laws daily despite the attempts of POTUS Trump and patriots to administer them legally.
If our government actually did operate as a republic and in accordance with the law we would not be $36+ trillion in debt, rife with corruption, and illegally ruled as subjects by evil doers and incompetents. There would be no need for DOGE.
Unlike our independence movement brothers and sisters who were not involved in political parties until after the Revolutionary War; who depended on Committees of Correspondence to make everybody aware pre-war along with newspapers and horseback delivery of letters post war; we have the capacity to know where each candidate and elected official stands or votes on every issue in real time every moment of every day. All that is truly needed is the will to do so with required transparency, improved use of existing technology, and the deemphasis of the propagandist media that provides misleading to false information.
Think about who we are today. One big convoluted mess in politics for over 200 years that led to wars, genocide, carpetbaggers, robber baron rule, corrupted institutions, and so on. Perhaps we need to consider what POTUS Monroe believed, “I have always considered their existence as the curse of the country.”
Back in the founders’ day as well as now in ours; it seems only sunlight, integrity, backbone and accountability are needed to make good things happen. Something they and we have available in state capitals in legislative houses and governors mansions located in the midst of We the People and not in the jackboot protected District of Criminals.
We will not solve this ages old problem here. It may never be. However, our thoughts and beliefs can be seen and heard to help provide sunlight. The more informed We the People are, the more impact we can have on the political process. With this in mind I say; kick azz, DOGE and POTUS Trump! We the Peasants support your efforts fully. Just let us know how we can help.
Signer time. We will only do one as his involvement is extensive, yet, rarely prominently discussed by historians and pundits except for his part in establishing one pain in the azz political procedural exercise.
Elbridge Gerry
Born in 1744 in Marlblehead, MA, Elbridge Gerry was the son of a wealthy, ship operator and merchant, Thomas Gerry and mother, Elizabeth, who was also from a wealthy merchant family. He was educated by private tutors before entering Harvard College at thirteen years of age, where he went on to earn BA and MA degrees by the age of twenty. He then joined the family merchant businesses, which was active with shipping routes into the West Indies, Spain and all along the North American coast. His father was also active in local politics as well as the militia.
Gerry aligned with other notable Massachusetts patriot leaders Samuel Adams, John Adams, and Mercy Otis Warren among others. He won election to the state assembly in 1772 and worked closely with Samuel Adams for colonist causes against Parliament. He established the Marblehead’s Committee of Correspondence, but ran into trouble with the people there when he supported small pox inoculations being done at a local hospital. This was met by violence against the supporters and hospital as the people were not sure about the transmission of the disease at that time.
He rebounded politically a couple of years later when the Boston Port Act closed it and pushed the activities to Marblehead, where Gerry was instrumental in keeping supplies flowing back to the Boston area while caring for his dying father. He was elected to the First Continental Congress, but declined due to the grief from losing his father. When the governor began making moves against the colonists, he helped store weapons and supplies in Concord, which became a target of the British military at the start of formal hostilities in the Revolutionary War. While the Siege of Boston was ongoing, he helped supply the developing Continental Army as he continued to do throughout the war. He used his business contacts in France and Spain to continue to supply weapons and supplies the entire period. Despite all of his merchant activities he chose not to overtly profit from the war and spoke out against price gouging. He desired price controls to help increase the quantity of supplies they could obtain. The Descendants site indicates he was the 11th wealthiest signer of the Declaration.
With his election to the Second Continental Congress he had the honor of approving and signing the Declaration. His support was so strong, John Adams wrote, “”If every Man here was a Gerry, the Liberties of America would be safe against the Gates of Earth and Hell.”
He was accused of being one of the Conway Cabal against the leadership of George Washington, but quickly brought that to an end with a rebuttal that strongly countered the accusers. In the early years post war he was against a strong central government other than having concerns over Shays’s Rebellion. He remained an opponent of political parties until around 1800. At that point he felt it necessary to align and join the Democratic-Republicans in opposition to the continuing Federalist push for a dominant central government.
In 1780 he resigned from the Congress and refused all other public service appointments and offices until 1783 when the Confederation Congress met to make improvements and reforms to that document, many of which he strongly supported. He served two years before resigning from it. It was one year later that he finally married. He wed Ann Thompson, some twenty years younger, who was the daughter of a wealthy NYC merchant. His good friend, James Monroe, was his best man in the wedding. The couple went on to have ten (some say nine) children together over the next fifteen years, which needless to say strained the health of his wife. With wealth earned pre and during the war, he sold off his merchant business and made land purchases. This included a 100 acre estate of a former royal lieutenant governor that he named Elmwood that was located in Cambridge, MA. It became his home for the remainder of his life.
He returned to public life with the Constitutional Convention, making sure to represent the interests of the states in the negotiations. However, the Shays event had an impact on his beliefs about individual citizens having the right to vote to affect government. He strongly advocated for indirect elections. He was unsuccessful in the House, however, he helped make that happen in the Senate. He was very unhappy the Constitution as proposed did not enumerate specific personal liberties and did not want the central government strengthened in its position. As an Episcopalian he fought specifically for stronger language relating to religious freedom, which did not go far enough in his opinion. As a result of it and other differences he voted against the Constitution along with George Mason and Edmund Randolph – the only three against its ratification. At this point John Adams seemed to change his opinion of Gerry and called him obstinate and focused only on small things, although they remained cordial and continued working together.
When it came time for Massachusetts to take up the issue he was not chosen as a delegate due to his stance, although he was invited to attend. Even with that state’s strong Federalist involvement it still only passed by a 187 – 168 vote. This vote and the beliefs of many he knew soured him against numerous formerly friendly officials.
Per the Descendant’s site, “Overcoming his objections to the Constitution, Gerry served in the House of Representatives from 1789 to 1793. To the dismay of his anti-federalist friends, he supported the Federalist agenda, including Hamilton’s proposals to fund the War debt and establish a national bank.“
This reversal and acceptance led to Gerry being brought back into the good graces of John Adams. The following information from the Descendants site gives an interesting look at America’s position in the world at that time.
“On June 20, 1797, President John Adams sent Gerry along with Charles Pinckney and John Marshall to France, to negotiate a peace treaty with Talleyrand, Napoleon’s new foreign minister. The mission was a disaster, with the French trying to bribe the American commissioners, and came to be known as the XYZ affair with the letters representing the three chief French bribers. Finally, the Treaty of Mortefontaine was completed in 1800 and is considered a great achievement by the Adams administration in keeping the United States neutral in the expanding war between Britain and France.
In 1800, maligned by federalists who believed him partial to France, and concerned about the likelihood of Alexander Hamilton becoming General of the army, Gerry joined the moderate wing of the Republican party. He ran for Governor of Massachusetts, a strong Federalist stronghold, in the early 1800s but was unsuccessful.”
He ran again for governor as a Democratic-Republican in 1810 and was elected and reelected in 1811; only to lose in 1812 for the following that leads to the reason most folks would ever remember his name. From the Descendants site,
“He had become unpopular after supporting a redistricting bill that gained him lasting fame. By rearranging voting districts around Amesbury and Haverhill to favor the Republicans, the resulting district resembled a salamander, thus earning the famous sobriquet of a “gerrymander.”
So he was the trouble maker responsible for what is still happening today! For those who want to know more about it…
I noted in one source that even as an older man he must have had an eye for female beauty.
“He paid special attention to Betsy Patterson Bonaparte, the American-born sister-in-law of Napoleon, whose revealing attire caused a stir wherever she went.” For those like me who were clueless about Ms. Bonaparte there are the links below. Lady readers may be especially interested in the second one.
Despite Gerry’s election loss for governor, he was added to the ticket of James Madison as VP. With their election and the War of 1812, his work became very contentious. However, he enjoyed the aristocratic lifestyle and DC parties despite the rancor in the Senate over which he presided. He died on his way to the Senate in 1814. His wife Ann lived until 1849, the longest surviving widow of a Declaration signer.
The following Descendants site description gives us a more personal look at the man.
“Elbridge Gerry was a small, dapper gentleman possessed of pleasant manners, but never very popular because of his aristocratic traits. He had no sense of humor, frequently changed his mind on important issues, and was suspicious of the motives of others. But he was a conscientious businessman who paid attention to detail. His patriotism and integrity could never be questioned.
While Gerry’s actions can be considered those of a maverick, they can also be viewed as those of a man of principle with independence of thought and action independent of party influence. He signed the Declaration and the Articles of Confederation but vigorously opposed the Constitution. He then served in Congress where he supported Alexander Hamilton’s federalist agenda ensuring the future financial security of the young republic. He became a Republican in 1800, lost several contests for Governor of Massachusetts. But he was elected Madison’s Vice President and stayed loyal to him when most of the Republicans split off over Madison’s handling of the war.
Dr. Benjamin Rush wrote that he was “a genuine friend of republican forms of government.” One of Gerry’s own statements was “I hold it to be the duty of every citizen, though he may have but one day to live, to devote the day to the good of his country.”
His home at Elmwood is located a half mile from Harvard’s campus and has remained a place where Harvard people have lived. The school purchased it in 1962 and its President has resided there ever since. Gerry was buried in the Congressional Cemetery in DC.
Elbridge Gerry was a great American Patriot who worked tirelessly for the betterment of our nation. His expectation was for all of us to do likewise.
Please remember Wolf’s rules for our community. In general that means to be respectful to each other and to pull no shenanigans that your mom might find offensive or otherwise cause jail time. That said, free speech is honored here.
Welcome. Please visit this post for our long-standing site rules. ### Kindly identify all AI products, per warning in the header ###
2024 Presidential Election Map by County. (an uncertain credit) Let us Never Forget: our VOTES gave the Trump Administration a Mandate to FIX IT ALL.
Do not submit again to a yoke of slavery.
For freedom Christ has set us free. Stand firm, therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery. — Galatians 5:1
We got our miracle. America is back.
Let us dedicate ourselves to the cleansing, healing, and rebuilding of our beautiful nation.
God will guide us. Prayers & thanks to God for President Donald J. Trump.
Exodus Jubilation.
This is the first week of the Eastertide season.
Eastertide (also known as Eastertime or the Easter season) or Paschaltide (also known as Paschaltime or the Paschal season) is a festal season in the liturgical year of Christianity that focuses on celebrating the Resurrection of Jesus Christ.
The church refers to this period of time after the resurrection as the Paschal Season. What are they referring to?
It’s all about the Passover.
…the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus comes clothed to us in the imagery, symbolism, and language of the Jewish Passover. In fact, the name these early Christians give to their Easter festival is the Greek word pascha. Pascha is a Greek translation of the Hebrew Pesach, which is the Hebrew name for Passover. The Latin church picks up this usage and calls Easter in Latin as pascha as well. And from that Latin origin, modern European romance languages get their name for Easter: French: Paques, Spanish: Pascua, Italian: Pasqua. — Gordon Lindsey, The Bible is in My Blood
Drawing parallels between the exodus and the resurrection, Christians see the Exodus as a type, a foreshadowing of the massive jailbreak when Christ frees the righteous dead from the shadow-lands of the underworld, leading them in triumph from darkness into His light. And Christ’s defeat of sin and death is indeed, Good News.
This parallel is highlighted not only within the Gospel accounts themselves, but throughout the New Testament.
For Christ, our paschal lamb, has been sacrificed. Let us, therefore, celebrate the festival, not with the old leaven, the leaven of malice and evil, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth. — 1 Corinthians 5:6-8
Rejoice!
Easter’s message rings out in the traditional greeting; one says, “Christ is risen!” and to which the response is, “He is risen indeed, Alleluia!” There is joy in the air. An exuberance, a jubilation, as believers celebrate the defeat of their enemy, and the triumph of their Savior.
Christ is risen from the dead, trampling down death by death, and upon those in the tombs bestowing life! — Paschal troparion, Christos anesti
In the book of Exodus, after witnessing the Egyptians absolute defeat by the hand of God, the people of Israel, led by Moses, break into song–not only singing–but dancing in celebration. Finally, they are beginning to believe that they have been freed from their oppressors.
We see a people filled with exuberant jubilation rejoicing over the utter defeat of their enemy, and the stunning triumph of their saving God.
And we are right there with them in this Eastertide season. God has mightily delivered us. Let us rejoice!
The Song of Moses
Then Moses and the Israelites sang this song to the LORD: (Exodus 15:1-21)
I will sing to the LORD, for he is gloriously triumphant; horse and chariot he has cast into the sea.
My strength and my refuge is the LORD, and he has become my savior. This is my God, I praise him; the God of my father, I extol him.
The LORD is a warrior, LORD is his name!
Pharaoh’s chariots and army he hurled into the sea; the elite of his officers were drowned in the Red Sea.
The flood waters covered them, they sank into the depths like a stone.
Your right hand, O LORD, magnificent in power, your right hand, O LORD, shattered the enemy.
In your great majesty you overthrew your adversaries; you loosed your wrath to consume them like stubble.
At the blast of your nostrils the waters piled up, the flowing waters stood like a mound, the flood waters foamed in the midst of the sea.
The enemy boasted, “I will pursue and overtake them; I will divide the spoils and have my fill of them; I will draw my sword; my hand will despoil them!”
When you blew with your breath, the sea covered them; like lead they sank in the mighty waters.
Who is like you among the gods, O LORD? Who is like you, magnificent among the holy ones? Awe-inspiring in deeds of renown, worker of wonders, when you stretched out your right hand, the earth swallowed them!
In your love you led the people you redeemed; in your strength you guided them to your holy dwelling.
The peoples heard and quaked; anguish gripped the dwellers in Philistia.
Then were the chieftains of Edom dismayed, the nobles of Moab seized by trembling;
All the inhabitants of Canaan melted away; terror and dread fell upon them.
By the might of your arm they became silent like stone, while your people, LORD, passed over, while the people whom you created passed over.
You brought them in, you planted them on the mountain that is your own—
The place you made the base of your throne, LORD, the sanctuary, LORD, your hands established.
May the LORD reign forever and ever!
When Pharaoh’s horses and chariots and horsemen entered the sea, the LORD made the waters of the sea flow back upon them, though the Israelites walked on dry land through the midst of the sea.
Then the prophet Miriam, Aaron’s sister, took a tambourine in her hand, while all the women went out after her with tambourines, dancing; and she responded to them:
Sing to the LORD, for he is gloriously triumphant; horse and chariot he has cast into the sea.
God Bless America, Land that I love. Stand beside her, and guide her Thru the night with a light from above. From the mountains, to the prairies, To the oceans, white with foam God bless America, My home sweet home.
Welcome. Please visit this post for our long-standing site rules. ### Kindly identify all AI products, per warning in the header ###
2024 Presidential Election Map by County. (an uncertain credit) Let us Never Forget: our VOTES gave the Trump Administration a Mandate to FIX IT ALL.
Do not submit again to a yoke of slavery.
For freedom Christ has set us free. Stand firm, therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery. — Galatians 5:1
We got our miracle. America is back.
Let us dedicate ourselves to the cleansing, healing, and rebuilding of our beautiful nation.
God will guide us. Prayers & thanks to God for President Donald J. Trump.
Sovereignty
Sovereignty. Souveraineté. What does this word, sovereignty, mean? It seems to mean different things to different people.
This Kind of Sovereign?
Judging by a paper called, “A QUICK GUIDE TO SOVEREIGN CITIZENS,” by the UNC School of Government, there are some people that think they can become free by resisting the governmental structures currently in place in our nation. In brief, the paper tells us:
“Sovereign citizen” is a catchall phrase referring to a variety of anti-government individuals and groups who share some common beliefs and behaviors. The organizations to which many sovereign citizens belong have a variety of names… In one way or another, though, all sovereign citizens, whether tied to an organization or not, adhere to a view that the existing American governmental structure, including the courts and law enforcement, is illegitimate and that they, the sovereign citizens, retain an individual common law identity exempting them from the authority of those fraudulent government institutions.
Hmmmm. Maybe this isn’t the kind of sovereign we were looking for.
A Different Take on Sovereignty.
We’ve already had some discussion recently on this essay, but you might not have read far enough down to reach this fantastic claim:
… Still, their eyes were always looking forward, toward a moment when the government wouldn’t just digitize its services but its sovereignty. Enter DOGE. The Department of Government Efficiency didn’t materialize in a vacuum. It was seeded during the Obama years, whispered into existence by those who knew that the real power would come not from Congress, but from a system nimble enough to move faster than legislation, and quiet enough to reshape infrastructure without fanfare. It began as the United States Digital Service—a small team of technocrats who fixed websites, sure, but more importantly, mapped the internal circuitry of American bureaucracy. They weren’t patching holes. They were creating access points. And then, just as quietly as they arrived, they left the back door open.
Sounds interesting. But I’m not sure exactly how to respond. The author provides three hypothetical outcomes of the end of Act III. The second outcome, narrative fracture, doesn’t look good. The first outcome, sovereign reset, is just about what most people seem to want. But that third outcome—if it is even possible—the revelation state, I think people with a heart to be free might want an outcome like this:
It’s not just about controlling the machine—it’s about purifying it. The Sovereign Reset without accountability is stable, but cold. The Narrative Fracture without vision is chaotic and likely irreparable. But the Revelation State? That’s the rarest kind of government: One that awakens, without collapsing. One that confesses, without capitulating. One that still serves, even after seizing control.
However, does this path return us to the intentions of the Founding Fathers of our nation? I wonder.
The Declaration of Independence affirmed the republican principle of popular government. The people were the source of all sovereignty, or authority, in the representative government. They gave their consent to their elected representatives to govern them. The document stated, “That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving [receiving] their just powers from the consent of the governed.”
The Preamble to the Constitution outlined that the new constitutional government was also to be based on this principle of popular sovereignty. It stated, “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union.” This meant that the people of the United States, through their representatives, established this new government. The previous government under the Articles of Confederation (1781–1789) did not have sufficient power to govern the nation because the states were sovereign.
The core purpose of the Declaration of Independence was to establish a just political order that recognized human equality in natural rights for all persons. “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable [impossible to take away] Rights.” This meant that the equality of all people would be the basis of any American system of government. This promise, though not fully realized, has guided American political debates ever since.
This was recognized in the Preamble, which stated simply that one of its main goals was to “establish Justice.” Justice meant that all were equal under the law and equal in their rights. Individuals would be able to pursue their own happiness and have equal opportunity to work hard and keep the fruits of their labor. James Madison noted the importance of justice in Federalist No. 51 when he wrote, “Justice is the end [purpose] of government. It is the end of civil society.”
God as Sovereign.
On this Maundy Thursday of the Christian Holy Week, it seems fitting to reflect on how Jesus the Christ, and our Lord, presented his sovereignty in the last hours before laying down his life for those he came to redeem.
From the Gospel of John 18:33-19:22 (AMPC):
So Pilate went back again into the judgment hall and called Jesus and asked Him, Are You the King of the Jews? Jesus replied, Are you saying this of yourself [on your own initiative], or have others told you about Me?
Pilate answered, Am I a Jew? Your [own] people and nation and their chief priests have delivered You to me. What have You done? Jesus answered, My kingdom (kingship, royal power) belongs not to this world. If My kingdom were of this world, My followers would have been fighting to keep Me from being handed over to the Jews. But as it is, My kingdom is not from here (this world); [it has no such origin or source].
Pilate said to Him, Then You are a King? Jesus answered, You say it! [You speak correctly!] For I am a King. [Certainly I am a King!] This is why I was born, and for this I have come into the world, to bear witness to the Truth. Everyone who is of the Truth [who is a friend of the Truth, who belongs to the Truth] hears and listens to My voice.
Pilate said to Him, What is Truth? On saying this he went out to the Jews again and told them, I find no fault in Him. But it is your custom that I release one [prisoner] for you at the Passover. So shall I release for you the King of the Jews?
Then they all shouted back again, Not Him [not this Man], but Barabbas! Now Barabbas was a robber. So then Pilate took Jesus and scourged (flogged, whipped) Him. And the soldiers, having twisted together a crown of thorns, put it on His head, and threw a purple cloak around Him. And they kept coming to Him and saying, Hail, King of the Jews! [Good health to you! Peace to you! Long life to you, King of the Jews!] And they struck Him with the palms of their hands.
Then Pilate went out again and said to them, See, I bring Him out to you, so that you may know that I find no fault (crime, cause for accusation) in Him. So Jesus came out wearing the thorny crown and purple cloak, and Pilate said to them, See, [here is] the Man!
When the chief priests and attendants (guards) saw Him, they cried out, Crucify Him! Crucify Him! Pilate said to them, Take Him yourselves and crucify Him, for I find no fault (crime) in Him. The Jews answered him, We have a law, and according to that law He should die, because He has claimed and made Himself out to be the Son of God.
So, when Pilate heard this said, he was more alarmed and awestricken and afraid than before. He went into the judgment hall again and said to Jesus, Where are You from? [To what world do You belong?] But Jesus did not answer him.
So Pilate said to Him, Will You not speak [even] to me? Do You not know that I have power (authority) to release You and I have power to crucify You? Jesus answered, You would not have any power or authority whatsoever against (over) Me if it were not given you from above. For this reason the sin and guilt of the one who delivered Me over to you is greater.
Upon this, Pilate wanted (sought, was anxious) to release Him, but the Jews kept shrieking, If you release this Man, you are no friend of Caesar! Anybody who makes himself [out to be] a king sets himself up against Caesar [is a rebel against the emperor]!
Hearing this, Pilate brought Jesus out and sat down on the judgment seat at a place called the Pavement [the Mosaic Pavement, the Stone Platform]—in Hebrew, Gabbatha. Now it was the day of Preparation for the Passover, and it was about the sixth hour (about twelve o’clock noon). He said to the Jews, See, [here is] your King! But they shouted, Away with Him! Away with Him! Crucify Him! Pilate said to them, Crucify your King? The chief priests answered, We have no king but Caesar!
Then he delivered Him over to them to be crucified. And they took Jesus and led [Him] away; so He went out, bearing His own cross, to the spot called The Place of the Skull—in Hebrew it is called Golgotha. There they crucified Him, and with Him two others—one on either side and Jesus between them.
And Pilate also wrote a title (an inscription on a placard) and put it on the cross. And the writing was: Jesus the Nazarene, the King of the Jews. And many of the Jews read this title, for the place where Jesus was crucified was near the city, and it was written in Hebrew, in Latin, [and] in Greek. Then the chief priests of the Jews said to Pilate, Do not write, The King of the Jews, but, He said, I am King of the Jews.
Pilate replied, What I have written, I have written.
Prayer.
God Bless America, Land that I love. Stand beside her, and guide her Thru the night with a light from above. From the mountains, to the prairies, To the oceans, white with foam God bless America, My home sweet home.
I had not planned for this part to be released on this date as it was scheduled for two weeks from today. However, the Lord had other plans. Many of you will probably understand what I mean as you read the following.
What does the word “Providence” really mean in the Declaration when in the last sentence it says, “And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.”?
Did you notice the word is capitalized? Why do you think that is? The answer is revealed in the definition of the word. Merriam Webster has the following,
1aoften capitalized: divine guidance or care – bcapitalized: God conceived as the power sustaining and guiding human destiny
2: the quality or state of being provident
From this we learn that Providence is all about God and His relationship with humanity. We see the capitalization of the word has meaning. It ties God in as a powerful, divine being giving guidance and His care to humanity. The first two paragraphs of the Declaration state this understanding by the signers as they establish the basis for their move toward independence. We need to focus on the capitalization of the words a bit closer.
The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America, When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that 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, 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. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and 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. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.–Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.
A number of words are capitalized in the Declaration of Independence. In addition to capitalizing titles and names, the framers did so with other key words to emphasize the points they were making. When individually listed, they lead the reader to conclusions about the purpose of the document. From the opening two paragraphs, they are listed below:
Course, Laws of Nature, Nature’s God, Creator, Rights, Life, Liberty, Happiness, Right of the People, Government(s) – various places, Form of Government, Safety, Happiness, Prudence, Object, Despotism, Guards, Systems of Government, Tyranny, Facts
If you had not read the Declaration and only saw these capitalized words from it that are listed above, could you come to a conclusion about the document’s purpose and intent? How about something like this in TradeBaiteese?
In the course of living life within the laws of nature under nature’s God who established it, our Creator has granted rights to life, liberty and happiness that governments in whatever form and system must honor and provide for the safety of the people. If not, the people should object and guard against any despotism that leads to tyranny and get rid of it. Those are just the facts!
I am sure readers can come up with their own versions as well. However, the intent of the words in the document remain clear. As it states in its wrap up,
“And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.”
More Providence Discussion
Which leads to this excellent discussion of “Providence” by our own Bakocarl in the 4/13/25 daily thread. That God had Bakocarl provide this discussion in the same time period as my own preparation for this thread on this topic of God’s hand guiding the completion of the Declaration of Independence, well, it will likely be met with acceptance of Providence by believers and called coincidence by non-believers. For the record, he and I had no previous discussion relating to the subject. Bakocarl said,
Then we have what is called the providence of God. The doctrine of providence holds that God quietly and invisibly works through the natural world to manage events. God, in His providence, works out His purposes through natural processes in the physical and social universe. Every effect can be traced back to a natural cause, and there is no hint of the miraculous. The best that man can do to explain the reason why things happen in the course of natural events is to point to “coincidence.”
Believers proclaim that God arranges the coincidences. The unbeliever derides such ideas because he believes natural causes can fully explain each event without reference to God. Yet followers of Christ are wholly assured of this profound truth: “We know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose” (Romans 8:28).
The book of Esther shows divine providence at work. The banishment of Vashti, the selection of Esther, the plot of the assassins, the pride of Haman, the courage of Mordecai, the insomnia of the king, the bloodlust of Zeresh, and the reading of the scroll—everything in the book happens, like cogs in a well-oiled machine, to bring about the deliverance of God’s people. Although God is never mentioned in Esther, His providence, working through “coincidence,” is plain to see.
God is always at work in the lives of His people, and in His goodness will bring them to a good end (see Philippians 1:6). The events that define our lives are not simply products of natural causes or random chance. They are ordained by God and are intended for our good. We often fail to sense God’s hidden guidance or protection as events in our lives unfold. But, when we look back at past events, we are able to see His hand more clearly, even in times of tragedy.
I doubt there is a MAGA supporting believer alive that doubts “Providence” was involved in Butler, PA that eventful day; which could have ended in tragedy. As we believers know it did not because God had other plans for Donald Trump and America since we under his divine “Providence”. What is to be our response to same? “…, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.”
Does that even remotely resemble what has happened in America in your lifetime outside of Ronald Reagan’s and Donald Trump’s presidential terms? Even in those periods the Dems and RINO’s worked against the unity the Declaration requires that is under divine Providence.
Coincidently (not), the subject of Providence is exactly what Donald Trump believes.
I hope all of you will take this discussion of Providence to heart and worship the Lord who rose from the dead to give us life eternal.
Time for more signers, let’s finish the Maryland crew.
William Paca
William Paca was born in 1740 in Abington, MD as one of seven children. His parents were John and Elizabeth Smith Paca. His father was a wealthy plantation owner who was the third generation of Paca’s who had lived in Maryland. The first generation family patriarch, Robert, had indentured himself to a colonist named John Hall when he arrived in America in 1660. He worked on the Hall property. When John Hall passed away, he later married his widow and in so doing became an owner. This became the basis for the family’s future possessions and occupation as planters. This became a family tradition for the Paca men as they married well and added to the family’s possessions and properties. They were involved in the Anglican Church and later joined the Quakers. However, William’s parents left the latter to return to the Anglican Church when they were married in 1732. John went on to become a justice of the peace, Captain in the militia, and delegate to the General Assembly.
As best that can be determined William was schooled at home until age 12, when he was sent to the Academy and Charity School with his brother in Philadelphia. He went on to later graduate from Philadelphia College (Penn) in 1759 at age 19. He went to Annapolis to begin his law career, clerked for Stephen Bradley, and helped found a pro democracy debate society called the Forensic Club. It was in the club that he forged a strong, lasting friendship with fellow signer, Samuel Chase. From there he progressed to attendance at the prestigious Middle Temple in London before following with a Masters back at Philadelphia College. He was admitted to the bar in 1764.
The previous year (1763), William did the male thing in the Paca family; he married into money He married Ann Mary (Molly) Chew. She was from long established, wealthy family who had family descended from the settlers of Jamestown in 1622. Her father had died soon after her birth and her mother had married another wealthy and politically connected man named Daniel Dulany who helped raise Molly. After William and Molly married they moved into a large mansion they had built in Annapolis.
Soon after this in 1765, William and Samuel Chase founded the county’s Sons of Liberty group and both pushed opposition to the Stamp Act. William was soon elected into the state’s General Assembly the next year just as in the previous generations of Paca men as he became popular and successful in his law practice. In personal settings he was reserved and thoughtful. In his political public life he was bold and unafraid to challenge authority. His political stature grew as he took on British oppression. Then personal tragedy hit, his beloved wife Molly died during childbirth of their third child in 1774. William became distraught with grief.
In response he turned his attention completely to the independence movement. It was not long until he joined the First Continental Congress and became close to John Adams. John Adams gave him the nickname of the “deliberater” due to his thoughtfulness and manners. He was also a signer of the Olive Branch Petition. It was during this period that Benjamin Rush described him the best when he described Paca as, “beloved and respected by all who knew him, and considered at all times as a sincere patriot and honest man.”
When Maryland removed voting restrictions on its delegates relating to independence, he immediately voted for approval of the Declaration of Independence and signed later. He continued to serve in Congress into 1777 before returning to Maryland and being elected into the senate of the Assembly. He was soon appointed as a General Court judge where he faced dealing with legal challenges from insurrectionists and traitors along the Eastern Shore. By 1780 he appointed to the Court of Appeals.
Back in 1777 he married well again, this time to Ann Harrison who was 16 years younger. She was the daughter of a wealthy Philadelphia merchant and past mayor, Henry Harrison. However, Paca faced tragedy yet again when she died in 1780, also possibly during the childbirth of their first child. In between marriages Paca had two children our of wedlock. Only two of his six children survived to adulthood, John Philemon Paca from his first wife, Molly, and an illegitimate child, Henrietta Mara, born to Sarah Joyce. He provided for his children born out of wedlock during their lives in every way possible.
Paca was a major backer of states’ rights and resisted efforts to change from the Articles of Confederation. He was an antifederalist during the period. However, when it came time he voted to approve the Constitution. During the period of its negotiation he pushed 28 amendments to make it more palatable to states’ rights advocates and those concerned with individual freedoms relating to religious liberty, freedom of the press, and freedom from judicial tyranny (we need him today for that one). Many of the proposed amendments passed into law in the Bill of Rights. You and I are beneficiaries today.
in 1789 Paca was appointed judge by George Washington to the Court of Maryland, a position that he held until his death in 1799. He was nearly 59 years old. This dedicated, important American Patriot was instrumental in giving us so many of the freedoms we take for granted today. We salute his service to our nation.
Thomas Stone
We now focus on an unquestioned patriot signer that will also include a short mention of a vaccination and dying from the grief of losing a loved one near the end.
Yes, this was the life of one Thomas Stone, who was born in 1743 in Charles County, MD. He grew up in wealthy plantation owning family and was educated at home until age 15. He started to a nearby small school of a Greek and Latin teacher for three years, riding by horseback ten miles each day to attend. He then moved to Annapolis to study law under a prominent attorney. Although from a wealthy family, Stone had to borrow the money to do it indicating his father was not in support. He was admitted to the bar four years later at age 21. At the age of 25, he married eighteen-year-old Margaret Brown who was the daughter of Dr. Gustavus Brown and his second wife, Margaret Black Boyd. He then built a beautiful home named Habre deVenture on his 400 acre estate, where they had three children together. They were Episcopalian in their faith.
His father passed away in 1773 and left his huge estate to the oldest son of a previous marriage and nothing to Thomas. That left Thomas and Margaret with taking in his six, much younger siblings. In response they added on to their home and did so without hesitation with great love.
Stone was a quiet man who disliked the concept of war with the British. However, as many others grew to accept it, he found it to be inevitable. His alignment with independence became official when he was appointed to the state’s Committee of Correspondence. As his recognition grew, he was appointed to represent the state in the Second Continental Congress after the battles of Concord and Lexington. He signed the Olive Branch Petition as a last attempt for reconciliation.
The following was included in one of his letters. “I wish to conduct affairs so that a just and honorable reconciliation should take place, or that we should be unanimous in a resolution to fight it out for independence. The proper way to affect this is not to move too quick. But then we must take care to do everything which is necessary for our security and defense, not suffer ourselves to be lulled or wheedled by any deceptions, declarations, or giving’s out. You know my heart wishes for peace upon terms of security and justice to America. But war, anything, is preferable to a surrender of our rights.“
In June 1776 he was chosen to be one of the thirteen who drafted the Articles of Confederation. A month later when the state freed its delegates to vote, he voted for the Declaration of Independence, signing the document a month later. He returned to Maryland, his law practice, and in public service as he was elected to the state Senate. He served for several years before once again being elected to serve in the Continental Congress in 1783 as the war ended. He returned to his law practice and public service in 1785. He left the latter after serving for a year with the Constitutional Convention.
In 1787 his world was turned upside down. I will finish the body of this discussion on his life with a direct quotation from the Descendants site:
“In 1787 Stone’s wife Margaret became alarmingly ill. She had received a smallpox inoculation a decade earlier, and from the effects of the mercury contained in the vaccine, she experienced a long state of weakness and decline. During her illness, Stone wrote as follows: “The illness of a wife I esteem most dearly preys most severely on my Spirits, she is I thank God something better this afternoon, and this Intermission of her Disorder affords me time to write to you. The Doctor thinks she is in a fair way of being well in a few days. I wish I thought so….”
Stone watched over her with unwearied devotion and a deep and abiding melancholy overtook his spirit. At length, however, in the middle of 1787, she sank to the grave at the early age of thirty-six.
From this time on, the health of Stone evidently declined. The grief-stricken Stone abandoned his work, and declined to attend the Constitutional Convention to which he had been elected. In the autumn his physicians advised him to take a sea voyage and in obedience to that advice, he traveled to Alexandria to embark for England. Before the vessel was ready to sail, however, he suddenly expired on October 5, 1787 in the forty fifth year of his age. Stone is buried in the family graveyard about 200 yards from his home at Habre deVenture, in Port Tobacco, Maryland.”
Thomas Stone was a great American Patriot and an even greater person. We have been graced by God to have men and women like Thomas and Margaret Stone in our national heritage.
Please remember Wolf’s rules for our community. In general that means to be respectful to each other and to pull no shenanigans that your mom might find offensive or otherwise cause jail time. That said, free speech is honored here.
Welcome. Please visit this post for our long-standing site rules. ### Kindly identify all AI products, per warning in the header ###
2024 Presidential Election Map by County. (an uncertain credit) Let us Never Forget: our VOTES gave the Trump Administration a Mandate to FIX IT ALL.
Do not submit again to a yoke of slavery.
For freedom Christ has set us free. Stand firm, therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery. — Galatians 5:1
We got our miracle. America is back.
Let us dedicate ourselves to the cleansing, healing, and rebuilding of our beautiful nation.
God will guide us. Prayers & thanks to God for President Donald J. Trump.
Vigilance.
Here we are. We are living through some of the most amazing days in the history of our country. And yet we can sense an uneasiness. An awareness that we need to remain vigilant. A feeling that the enemies of what is good and right are still hard at work trying to interfere, disrupt, overthrow, yes and even murder those building a better future for our nation.
Being Warned in a Dream.
It has been rare, but there have been times in my life when I needed to be warned about something, and it seemed that a dream was given. A dream that would shake me deeply. And then I would ponder, pray, seek insight, and face whatever the warning seemed to be about. Then I would try to respond appropriately in the circumstances.
Two days ago I awakened out of a dream with a grave sense of imminent danger. It was so disturbing, but I couldn’t really make out the full meaning. I will try and tell the details here as I remember them:
I am looking out over a freeway which is just below me in a canyon. At the edge of the canyon there are couple of people sitting at a table, maybe sharing a meal and talking. Beyond them, off in the distance, I can see a large silver airplane flying low over the city. It is apparently having mechanical trouble. I sensed great cry of prayer going up to God for the plane. The plane steadies, there is a sigh of relief. But then there is a distraction. I am still watching the plane. Suddenly it upends and then goes down hard, crashing. I run from where I witnessed the crash over to the airport. The wreckage is on the runway, but there is no fire, no emergency response crews, no activity at all at the crash site. I look around and see that there are people working in other parts of the airfield. They are focused on their work. Work that seems to be related to organizing or preparing to create chaos, not just protests, but also other kinds of disruptions and destruction. In the dream I picked up the sense that these are the kind of people that intend to harm our country—and it’s people—in any way they can.
Needless to say, reading Gail’s post yesterday did not do anything to calm my heightened sense of needing to be on alert. Alert in prayer. Alert in the world around me.
Nehemiah the Builder.
One of my early Bible teachers taught us to face difficult situations by praying and asking, “Where am I in the Bible now?” Perhaps the example of Nehemiah—rebuilding a nearly destroyed people and nation while facing danger and threats from those who hated and opposed his success—might just be a good fit for today. May pondering this story strengthen us to work at the tasks set before us with wisdom, humility, strength and courage.
For those that might appreciate a quick video overview:
An Inquiring Heart.
The story begins with Nehemiah in captivity, serving the king of another nation. But his heart is back home with his people. He questions his brothers that had just returned from Judah about of the state of his homeland. They reply, “Those who survived the exile and are back in the province are in great trouble and disgrace. The wall of Jerusalem is broken down, and its gates have been burned with fire.” (Ne 1:3, KJV)
A Broken & Contrite Heart.
The response of Nehemiah reveals his tenderness and compassion for his people. “When I heard these things, I sat down and wept. For some days I mourned and fasted and prayed before the God of heaven.” (1:4) Nehemiah doesn’t stand in judgment over others, he sits among them in his prayer:
“Lord, the God of heaven, the great and awesome God, who keeps his covenant of love with those who love him and keep his commandments, let your ear be attentive and your eyes open to hear the prayer your servant is praying before you day and night for your servants, the people of Israel. I confess the sins we Israelites, including myself and my father’s family, have committed against you. We have acted very wickedly toward you. We have not obeyed the commands, decrees and laws you gave your servant Moses.
“Remember the instruction you gave your servant Moses, saying, ‘If you are unfaithful, I will scatter you among the nations, but if you return to me and obey my commands, then even if your exiled people are at the farthest horizon, I will gather them from there and bring them to the place I have chosen as a dwelling for my Name.’
“They are your servants and your people, whom you redeemed by your great strength and your mighty hand. Lord, let your ear be attentive to the prayer of this your servant and to the prayer of your servants who delight in revering your name. Give your servant success today by granting him favor in the presence of this man.” (He was cupbearer to the king.)
Artaxerxes Sends Nehemiah to Jerusalem
Nehemiah succeeds in his plan to get King Artaxerxes’ support in returning to Judah to help rebuild. He gets the authority from the king to do this work. The king authorizes materials and military protection as well. However, some of the local officials are “very much disturbed that someone had come to promote the welfare of the Israelites.”
Nehemiah quietly checks out the situation after he arrives and then goes to the leadership of Jerusalem with his plan and the good news concerning the king’s support. They agree to begin rebuilding.
The Opposition’s Response #1
Their first response is to not only mock and ridicule the Israelites, but to also accuse them of rebellion against the king. Nehemiah answers them by (1) identifying God as their hope for success, (2) noting their submission to God as his servants, (3) declaring their undeterred decision to keep rebuilding, (4) pointing out the opposition’s lack of claim or historical right to their city.
The Opposition’s Response #2
As the work begins, the opposition becomes more incensed. The opposition leader airs his ridicule in front of his associates and the army of Samaria. “What are those feeble Jews doing? Will they restore their wall? Will they offer sacrifices? Will they finish in a day? Can they bring the stones back to life from those heaps of rubble—burned as they are?” Then his sidekick piles on, “What they are building—even a fox climbing up on it would break down their wall of stones!”
At this point Nehemiah has nothing left to say to their enemies. He goes straight to Godwith his appeal. “Hear us, our God, for we are despised. Turn their insults back on their own heads. Give them over as plunder in a land of captivity. Do not cover up their guilt or blot out their sins from your sight, for they have thrown insults in the face of the builders.”
The Opposition’s Response #3
The work continues to make good progress, and when the opposition hears about it, their anger grew to the point that “They all plotted together to come and fight against Jerusalem and stir up trouble against it.”
Nehemiah’s response again was to pray “to our God” and this time he “posted a guard day and night to meet this threat.”
Internal Discouragement
The workers start to report that their discouragement, and their fear of attacks by their enemies. Nehemiah’s listened to their reports. He takes direct action to fortify the protection for the families working on the wall. Again, he personally looks over the situation and speaks to the people directly.
I stood up and said to the nobles, the officials and the rest of the people, “Don’t be afraid of them. Remember the Lord, who is great and awesome, and fight for your families, your sons and your daughters, your wives and your homes.” When our enemies heard that we were aware of their plot and that God had frustrated it, we all returned to the wall, each to our own work.
Remaining Vigilant
Nehemiah then reports on the new level of vigilance provided to protect those working:
From that day on, half of my men did the work, while the other half were equipped with spears, shields, bows and armor. The officers posted themselves behind all the people of Judah who were building the wall. Those who carried materials did their work with one hand and held a weapon in the other, and each of the builders wore his sword at his side as he worked. But the man who sounded the trumpet stayed with me.
Then I said to the nobles, the officials and the rest of the people, “The work is extensive and spread out, and we are widely separated from each other along the wall. Wherever you hear the sound of the trumpet, join us there. Our God will fight for us!”
So we continued the work with half the men holding spears, from the first light of dawn till the stars came out. At that time I also said to the people, “Have every man and his helper stay inside Jerusalem at night, so they can serve us as guards by night and as workers by day.” Neither I nor my brothers nor my men nor the guards with me took off our clothes; each had his weapon, even when he went for water.
Correcting Internal Exploitation
At this time there is a famine and the people are being (illegally) charged interest and are having their crops and lands siezed by the wealthy. When Nehemiah learns of this he beomes very angry for this injustice. He calls a public meeting and speaks directly to these wealthy leaders:
So I continued, “What you are doing is not right. Shouldn’t you walk in the fear of our God to avoid the reproach of our Gentile enemies? I and my brothers and my men are also lending the people money and grain. But let us stop charging interest! Give back to them immediately their fields, vineyards, olive groves and houses, and also the interest you are charging them—one percent of the money, grain, new wine and olive oil.” “We will give it back,” they said. “And we will not demand anything more from them. We will do as you say.” Then I summoned the priests and made the nobles and officials take an oath to do what they had promised. I also shook out the folds of my robe and said, “In this way may God shake out of their house and possessions anyone who does not keep this promise. So may such a person be shaken out and emptied!” At this the whole assembly said, “Amen,” and praised the Lord. And the people did as they had promised.
The Opposition’s Response #4
When the opposition hears that the wall has been completely rebuilt (but without doors in the gates yet). They try a new tactic. Four times they send letters to Nehemiah, attempting to persuade him to come out of the city and meet them in an outlying village. But their plan was to ambush him and cause the work to stop. Nehemiah refused.
The Opposition’s Response #5
A fifth time the opposition sends an unsealed letter (so others would know what was written) with lying accusations saying the Israelites were planning to revolt against the king. Nehemiah says about this latest attack:
I sent him this reply: “Nothing like what you are saying is happening; you are just making it up out of your head.” They were all trying to frighten us, thinking, “Their hands will get too weak for the work, and it will not be completed.” But I prayed, “Now strengthen my hands.”
Intrigue Within the Community
Nehemiah then elaborates on an incredible amount of intrigue where people inside of his own community try and trap or entangle him, are collaborating with their enemies due to alliances via intermarriage, are leaking information back to them and are lobbying to influence Nehemiah to see their enemies in a good light. Sounds familiar.
A Great Awakening
Chapters 8 through 12 of the book of Nehemiah recount a profound return to God by the people. Starting with fasting and confessing their sins, listening to Ezra read from the scriptures, repentance, and crying out to the Lord their God. The people then agree to obey the Lord by correcting wrongs, agreeing to obey the Lord’s instructions for offerings, worship, and consecrating the new wall in a large festival-like event. Things are going well for as long as their leader, Nehemiah was there to keep watch over the community.
However, in the final chapter of the book we learn that as soon as Nehemiah left to go back into service with the king, some of the people went back on their promises to God. When Nehemiah returns he again brings correction, helping the people to remain faithful to their God.
Keep Us Faithful, O Lord
Now unto him that is able to keep you from falling, and to present you faultless before the presence of his glory with exceeding joy, To the only wise God our Saviour, be glory and majesty, dominion and power, both now and ever. Amen. — Jude 24-25 (KJV)
Our Turn.
We can’t leave this to others. We can make a difference. And we must make a difference.
May God bless and guide you as you pray and take action for our nation.
Twitterati, etc.
May I recommend to you toresays.com. A worthy follow.
God Bless America, Land that I love. Stand beside her, and guide her Thru the night with a light from above. From the mountains, to the prairies, To the oceans, white with foam God bless America, My home sweet home.
Welcome. Please visit this post for our long-standing site rules. ### Kindly identify all AI products, per warning in the header ###
2024 Presidential Election Map by County. (an uncertain credit) Let us Never Forget: our VOTES gave the Trump Administration a Mandate to FIX IT ALL.
Do not submit again to a yoke of slavery.
For freedom Christ has set us free. Stand firm, therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery. — Galatians 5:1
We got our miracle. America is back.
Let us dedicate ourselves to the cleansing, healing, and rebuilding of our beautiful nation.
God will guide us. Prayers & thanks to God for President Donald J. Trump.
Hearts of Courage.
Some grow in courage over time, others find their courage appears in the moment of need.
When is comes to hearts of courage, there are some who truly stand out for me. They have stood by their principles, even when judges let them know that their stand was going to get them thrown in jail. There are likely many more that deserve to be highlighted. But tonight, let us remember Gregg Phillips, Catherine Engelbrecht, and Tina Peters, who have done time for the stand they took.
Free Tina Peters.
And may all good hearts continue to earnestly pray for God’s protection, healing and vindication for Tina who is still locked up while her case is on appeal.
On Monday, March 3rd, the Deep State Dam began to crack open upon news the DOJ just filed a Statement of Interest in the case of Tina Peters. Read more commentary about that HERE. Accompanying this news was a spectacular throw down by Mike Davis from the Article III Project who revealed the corruption which led to the persecution, prosecution and imprisoning of Tina Peters for 9 years.
Now is the time for everyone to learn the real story about the dystopian abuse of Tina Peters. At the center of that is understanding why they would go to such extremes to frame, persecute, prosecute and imprison a near 70 year age Gold Star Mom who lost her Navy SEAL Son during service to his country. Without as much as a J-Walking ticket, or any ticket for that matter, the judge heartlessly sentenced Tina to what very well could be a death sentence for standing up and doing her sworn duty to preserve her election records. As described by Mike Davis, she was sentenced for “thought crimes”.
Well, it’s safe to say that the Deep State sure didn’t like Clerk Peters preserving those election records under her jurisdiction (all 29,000 of them) that they thought were successfully deleted at the direction of the Colorado Secretary of State. That deletion along with the other vulnerabilities are discussed on her website, https://tinapeters.us/ along with her forensic reports that delve into extreme detail on all the discoveries made by the forensic computer scientists.
Our DOJ, last month, has made a Statement of Interest (read more: The Gateway Pundit):
This review will include an evaluation of the State of Colorado’s prosecution of Ms. Peters and, in particular, whether the case was “oriented more toward inflicting political pain than toward pursuing actual justice or legitimate governmental objectives.”
Ms. Peters is currently incarcerated while pursuing a direct appeal of her underlying nonviolent convictions and combined nine-year sentence.
The application explains that Ms. Peters suffers from serious health issues and that, while incarcerated, her physical and mental health have deteriorated. Reasonable concerns have been raised about various aspects of Ms. Peters’ case.
These concerns relate to, among other things, the exceptionally lengthy sentence imposed relative to the conduct at issue, the First Amendment implications of the trial court’s October 2024 assertions related to Ms. Peters, and whether Colorado’s denial of bail pending appeal was arbitrary or unreasonable under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments such that §2254 relief is appropriate.
Accordingly, the United States respectfully submits that the concerns raised in the Application warrant – at the very least – prompt and careful consideration by this Court (and, at the appropriate time, the Colorado appellate courts).
Parallel to these proceedings and Ms. Peters’ direct appeal, the Department of Justice is reviewing cases across the nation for abuses of the criminal justice process…
Our Turn.
We can’t leave this to others. We can get informed on what has been found, what is being done about it, and what more needs to be done.
We can make a difference. And we must make a difference.
May God bless and guide you as you pray and take action for our nation.
Twitterati, etc.
Speaking of hearts…
May I recommend to you Nicolas Hulscher, MPH, @NicHulscher. Click the posted image to watch the one minute video showing the heart damage. Nicolas is an epidemiologist and administrator at Dr. Peter McCullough’s Foundation (@mcculloughfund).
Nicolas Hulscher, MPH @NicHulscher Mar 19 NEW AUTOPSY STUDY – Cardiac Micro-Scars in Sudden Death Following COVID-19 Vaccination
Cardiac micro-scars (MMS) found in 3 patients who died of unexplained cardiac arrest—all had 5-6 COVID-19 booster injections.
Key findings: Micro-scars in arrhythmogenic regions (pulmonary vein-left atrium junction) suggest a structural substrate for arrhythmias following COVID-19 vaccination.
Pre-death arrhythmias (atrial fibrillation & nonsustained ventricular tachycardia) occurred in patients with multiple booster doses.
Possible mechanisms: Spike protein production in cardiomyocytes, triggering immune activation, inflammation, microvascular injury, and fibrosis—leading to myocardial scarring and electrical instability.
Corroborates our prior research on COVID-19 vaccine-induced cardiac arrest, linking myocardial scarring, arrhythmias, and sudden death.
Prayer.
God Bless America, Land that I love. Stand beside her, and guide her Thru the night with a light from above. From the mountains, to the prairies, To the oceans, white with foam God bless America, My home sweet home.
Welcome. Please visit this post for our long-standing site rules. ### Kindly identify all AI products, per warning in the header ###
2024 Presidential Election Map by County. (an uncertain credit) Let us Never Forget: our VOTES gave the Trump Administration a Mandate to FIX IT ALL.
Do not submit again to a yoke of slavery.
For freedom Christ has set us free. Stand firm, therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery. — Galatians 5:1
We got our miracle. America is back.
Let us dedicate ourselves to the cleansing, healing, and rebuilding of our beautiful nation.
God will guide us. Prayers & thanks to God for President Donald J. Trump.
National Security!
It’s “their” very favorite playbook. They want to some how, some way, create another narrative that makes everything related to president, Donald J. Trump, into a “National Security Crisis!”
Well, do you know what a real national security crisis looks like? It looks like the election systems in all 50 states having a total loss of control.
“We identified, inside of the state’s official records about the 2022 and the 2020 elections, millions and millions of examples of what appear to be felony misconduct, according to the United States Department of Justice’s guidelines for prosecution of election offenses.” — Marly Hornick, in this interview
While we may need an Executive Order to act as a stop-gap for the 2026 Elections–which are nearly on top of us at this point–the real work of securing our elections must be done at the state level. And it appears state officials will only be motivated when they see that Federal prosecutions could be in their near future.
I very much appreciate that the E.O. deals with an issue found in some voting systems. A human readable ballot and a true paper trail are essential for a secure elections system.
“Above all, elections much be honest and worthy of the public trust. That requires voting methods that produce a voter-verifiable paper record allowing voters to efficiently check their votes to protect against fraud or mistake. Election-integrity standards much be modified accordingly.”
“… voting systems should not use a ballot in which a vote is contained within a barcode or quick-response code in the vote counting process … [with an exception for accommodating disabilities] … and should provide a voter-verifiable paper record to prevent fraud or mistake.”
The “follow the money” types amongst us are likely to be happy to see the E.O. provide direction for an audit of all Help America Vote Act (HAVA) fund expenditures.
“Following an audit of Help America Vote Act fund expenditures conducted pursuant to 52 U.S.C. 21142, the Election Assistance Commission shall report any discrepancies or issues with an audited State’s certifications of compliance with Federal law to the Department of Justice for appropriate enforcement action.”
And for those of us who were concerned with the word “voluntary” in the Election Assistance Commission’s guidelines, it looks like there might be some teeth in the E.O. here:
“The Secretary of Homeland Security and the Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, consistent with applicable law, shall in considering the provision of funding for State or local election offices or administrators through the Homeland Security Grant Programs, 6 U.S.C. 603 et seq., heavily prioritize compliance with the Voluntary Voting System Guidelines 2.0 developed by the Election Assistance Commission and completion of testing through the Voting System Test Labs accreditation process.”
That’s really all nice and everything, but is this going to be another here-today-gone-tomorrow news event? Well, rescinding all previous certifications of voting equipment based on prior standards sounds good.
“Within 180 days of the date of this order, the Election Assistance Commission shall take appropriate action to review and, if appropriate, re-certify voting systems under the new standards established under subsection (b)(i) of this section, and to rescind all previous certifications of voting equipment based on prior standards.”
There are also important sections on not counting votes cast after election day (duh!), validating that voters are citizens, preventing foreign interference and prosecuting election crimes.
The section on improving the security of voting systems reminds us that election infrastructure is designated as “Critical Infrastructure.” Note that non-citizens are not to be involved in the administration of any Federal Election. I wonder how many voting system contractors that you see at the local elections office are non-citizens. Do they even check?
The E.O. goes on to task Homeland Security with assessing the security of electronic elections systems and report on what they find. I suspect this doesn’t go far enough. If there are non-electronic procedures that are not subject to review for Federal Elections that allow for fraud, that should be addressed to. Maybe it’s in existing law and I missed it.
“Sec. 6. Improving Security of Voting Systems. To improve the security of all voting equipment and systems used to cast ballots, tabulate votes, and report results:
“(a) The Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security shall take all appropriate actions to the extent permitted by 42 U.S.C. 5195c and all other applicable law, so long as the Department of Homeland Security maintains the designation of election infrastructure as critical infrastructure, as defined by 42 U.S.C. 5195c(e), to prevent all non-citizens from being involved in the administration of any Federal election, including by accessing election equipment, ballots, or any other relevant materials used in the conduct of any Federal election.
“(b) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall, in coordination with the Election Assistance Commission and to the maximum extent possible, review and report on the security of all electronic systems used in the voter registration and voting process. The Secretary of Homeland Security, as the head of the designated Sector Risk Management Agency under 6 U.S.C. 652a, in coordination with the Election Assistance Commission, shall assess the security of all such systems to the extent they are connected to, or integrated into, the Internet and report on the risk of such systems being compromised through malicious software and unauthorized intrusions into the system.”
As the introductory text reminds us:
Free, fair, and honest elections unmarred by fraud, errors, or suspicion are fundamental to maintaining our constitutional Republic. The right of American citizens to have their votes properly counted and tabulated, without illegal dilution, is vital to determining the rightful winner of an election. Under the Constitution, State governments must safeguard American elections in compliance with Federal laws that protect Americans’ voting rights and guard against dilution by illegal voting, discrimination, fraud, and other forms of malfeasance and error.
We have been told that our elections systems are insecure. But what does that really mean? Three weeks ago, Marly Hornik of United Sovereign Americans gave a powerful 15 minute speech on the Stern American podcast, explaining how truly bad America’s situation has become.
My name is Marly Hornick, founder of the national election validity Organization United Sovereign Americans, along with cyber and election security subject matter expert Harry Haury. We came here to warn our fellow Americans that we have a constitutional and legal disaster on our hands.
The current election process nationwide is an uncontrolled, unmonitored catastrophe that is false returns. The last bastion of freedom on earth is at risk of being destroyed as early as 2026.
Under President Trump’s decisive leadership, we see the proof that our own government has been selling out our kids’ future by stealing trillions of dollars per year from the American people and making us pay for their often twisted agenda.
Nowhere have officials betrayed us as badly as in our elections nationwide. USA is the first organization to measure election misconduct as defined under criminal law, to deeply study Supreme Court precedent and document the scale of defined election fraud nationwide.
After years of law enforcement meetings, official reports, legislative hearings, criminal referrals, and staggering trial-ready evidence, massive election fraud is still being illegally certified as accurate. Asking whether election officials are bad people is irrelevant. Their job is to prevent fraud, and they are legally required to prove it to us. That’s what we pay them for.
Twenty-one chief election officials have been fully briefed, nine have been sued in federal court, and every last one has proven disloyal to the sovereign they serve, the American people, and to the contract we made with our government, the United States Constitution.
USA has tracked tens of millions of individual felonies. We were the first to discover and document the algorithms and central vote manipulation. We filed our detailed data with the states, the FBI, Homeland Security, and the DOJ under the previous administration, and filed nine federal lawsuits demanding that election commissions follow the law.
And what did we prove? Every last federalized state election official believes that they are the sovereign, that they are the one who chooses our representatives. Every last one, they are perfectly content to continue violating our Constitution down to the root. It’s time to make it personal.
This is our land, from sea to shining sea, self-dealing bureaucrats and criminals did not create it, and they cannot have it.
The top elections official of every one of our 50 states has been certifying elections that are run using equipment and processes that are deeply compromised. The courts, to this point, have refused to touch it. Pray.
Our Turn.
We can make a difference. And we must make a difference.
May God bless and guide you as you pray and take action for our nation.
Twitterati, etc.
May I recommend to you @PressSec. Karoline Leavitt is an Assistant to the President and the White House Press Secretary. She is always in top form, even on the day after DS tries to create another “National Security Crisis!” narrative on the thinnest of pretexts.
Prayer.
God Bless America, Land that I love. Stand beside her, and guide her Thru the night with a light from above. From the mountains, to the prairies, To the oceans, white with foam God bless America, My home sweet home.
But just as a reminder, if Harry Reid followed by Turtle did not permit its nuking in regard to confirmations; PDT would have never received approval for any judges, SCOTUS justices, or cabinet selections. Who knew in advance we would thank two Uniparty henchmen for their efforts to release us from that bondage one day? Of course, doing so was met with wailing and gnashing of teeth by media and the Uniparty faithful. Much fear porn was broadcast and now we know why. SCOTUS leaned back toward the right over time and some honest judges were added to the federal court rosters. 
POTUS Trump is trying to return us to the original Constitutional design of the executive.-GC]
or in the heads of departments.
The constitutional outline of the judiciary, far briefer than the articles defining the legislative and executive branches, offered a general description of the federal courts’ jurisdiction. Article III was more specific in its protection of several rights and liberties, such as 
]
Schiff, I have a bridge I want to sell! –GC] such as not being subject to bonuses or ranking systems of executive agencies.
NEW AUTOPSY STUDY – Cardiac Micro-Scars in Sudden Death Following COVID-19 Vaccination 
Cardiac micro-scars (MMS) found in 3 patients who died of unexplained cardiac arrest—all had 5-6 COVID-19 booster injections.
Micro-scars in arrhythmogenic regions (pulmonary vein-left atrium junction) suggest a structural substrate for arrhythmias following COVID-19 vaccination.
Corroborates our prior research on COVID-19 vaccine-induced cardiac arrest, linking myocardial scarring, arrhythmias, and sudden death.
