Restore the Republic

Eric Garner

December 5, 2014 | Civil Liberties, Constitution, Founders, Judicial, Jury

On December 3rd a Grand Jury handed down a verdict of “no bill” in the case of the murder of Eric Garner. The Grand Jury handed down the correct decision. What’s that you say?

I said the Grand Jury handed down the correct decision. I did not say that the Grand Jury handed down a proper or lawful decision. Their decision was correct in the role we’ve abdicated to a government seeking to diminish not only our rights, but also our authority.

The Fifth Amendment to the Constitution states, “No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury…”

The Grand Jury is charged with the investigation, and determination of whether or not an act of malfeasance had occurred. It is, among other things, a stop-gap to government tyranny so it is certainly not subject to the authority of a prosecutor. It is meant to be in direct conflict to the unconstitutional office of the prosecutor. I don’t care what attorney or pretend constitutional scholar states to the contrary. They are simply part of a system who seeks to perpetuate its own authority, and wealth.

Each and every servant of the republic must swear an oath to uphold the Constitution. The Constitution is as binding on the states as it is on the central government. That oath is a sacred pledge to the People that the “rule of law” will be followed as it was enacted by the good People of this nation.

Law does not change. Either the word is followed as it was originally meant, or as Thomas Jefferson warned, “Our peculiar security is in the possession of a written Constitution. Let us not make it a blank paper by construction.”
Nowhere in the Constitution can you find an office of prosecutor established. The term prosecutor applies to the person bringing the complaint, and since this is a nation of sovereigns, not subject to the law, the office of prosecutor cannot exist. As a sovereign we can prosecute a war against another sovereign, and we certainly can claim the right of self-defense from the intrusions of another sovereign.

As a nation of sovereigns we can also prosecute through our most peaceful method in a jury trial. That petit jury is charged with not only determining the legitimacy of the claim, civil or criminal, but also the law, under which a case may arise.

Both the Grand and the Petit juries are independent of government intervention. They are not subject to the instructions of a judge, and the Petit Jury becomes the ultimate authority in the case, “…and no fact tried by a jury, shall otherwise be re-examined in any court of the United States”.

If we subscribe, at all, to the principles of the “Declaration” that established this nation as one, in which “all men are created equal”, we cannot logically conclude that one person, no matter what office he/she may have been assigned, can call upon the awesome power of the state to achieve what may very well be an abuse of power.

Years before my family came to this nation, and I dare say that one of the reasons they came was because we the People were willing to guarantee our rights, and freedom. As the court highlighted, “When we consider the nature and the theory of our institutions of government, the principles upon which they are supposed to rest, and review the history of their development, we are constrained to conclude that they do not mean to leave room for the play and action of purely personal and arbitrary power. Sovereignty itself is, of course, not subject to law, for it is the author and source of law; but in our system, while sovereign powers are delegated to the agencies of government, sovereignty itself remains with the people, by whom and for whom all government exists and acts.” – Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 U.S. 356

“We start with first principles. The Constitution creates a Federal Government of enumerated powers. See U.S. Constitution, Art. 1, 8. As James Madison wrote, “[t]he powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite.”” – United States v. Lopez, 514 U.S. 549

In both cases the court was simply stating the obvious intent of what our Founders saw for this nation of sovereigns. “There is no position which depends on clearer principles, than that every act of a delegated authority, contrary to the tenor of the commission under which it is exercised, is void. No legislative act, therefore, contrary to the Constitution, can be valid. To deny this, would be to affirm, that the deputy is greater than his principal; that the servant is above his master; that the representatives of the people are superior to the people themselves; that men acting by virtue of powers, may do not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid.” – Federalist 78, Alexander Hamilton

What happened? We the People sat back and fell for every trap, ploy, act, sham, and false flag devised and perpetrated by those who seek the power to rule over us with an ‘iron fist’.

What I’ve stated above is the rule of law as it was pronounced by the Founders of this nation. The thoughts, aspirations, and hopes of the People who fought for and established a new nation created as a Constitutional Federal Republic, not a democracy, and here lies the basic problem.

We the People have taken as Gospel so many fallacies that we don’t know the difference between what is up, and what is down. I’ve elaborated on a number of things in the past. Restating the obvious would mean nothing to the majority who’ve been led down this path of democracy, and tyranny. There are few who understand what is taking place, and even fewer who will admit that they don’t know how to resolve the issue.

The biggest problem is the majority that believes to the point of self-destruction that the government has all these powers that it presents to the public. We have absolutely no concept of freedom, and what it takes to maintain a “free state”.

The New York grand jury handed down a decision based on what they’ve been told, rather than what the law entails. In that context they were right. It is our insistence on subjugating ourselves to our servant that leads to most of our problems.

There is the old comical take of the agent coming along and stating “I’m here from the government, and I’m here to help”. It doesn’t work. It never did, nor was it intended to work for the benefit of the People. We laugh and joke about the role of government, but when push comes to shove we adhere to a completely inaccurate concept of our nation following blindly our representatives.

The police are not here to protect you. That lie is perpetrated so that we can be disarmed.

The police have the authority to arrest. That lie is perpetrated so that our sovereignty can be eliminated.

The police have “qualified immunity”. That lie is perpetrated to enhance the brazen activity of the strong arm of government.

There is nothing that can be done peacefully if you allow the incremental encroachment of the state upon our rights, and duties. The state, those who’ve ensconced themselves in positions of power, will protect itself from you at the cost of throwing an occasional sacrificial lamb to the crowd, but make no mistake that the few who are cast out are on the lowest rung of the latter of tyranny.

Those at the top have protected themselves from our prosecution, and they’ve done so by indoctrinating us into a system that enhances their existence while diminishing ours.

The problem of police against the public lies in our most recent and common held beliefs that we are the subjects of a newly founded ‘crown’, and not the rule of law established by our Founders.

Eric Garner was not killed by a choke hold, or high blood pressure, but rather by our shameful, and disgraceful ignorance when it comes to understanding and upholding this once great experiment.

When the blame is finally laid, it should be on the shoulders of the people who vote for the Bloomberg’s, and Cuomo’s of the world. The blood flows first from the ballot box.

Nicholas Testaccio

I Have Met The Enemy

October 28, 2014 | Civil Liberties, Constitution, Founders, Militia

In the year 1813 Admiral Perry defeated the British fleet in the Battle of Lake Erie. Upon the surrender of the British, Perry sent a communiqué to General Harrison stating, “We have met the enemy and they are ours…”

Over the years there has been a twist made to Perry’s message that has slanted to, “We have met the enemy and they are us”. A more appropriate statement of what we as a nation have become.

In what is a long and arduous battle to defend our rights, enlighten the public, and leave my children a better and hopefully free world, I’ve encountered unbelievable resistance from almost everyone I’ve come across.

There are the few who recognize the facts, and learn from the lessons of history. There are those I’ve been able to sway with facts, but if you put this on a scorecard with my name next to it, I’d be optioned off to the minors. Fast!

Yes my friends, you are reading the words of a man who considers that his best efforts go almost for naught. It’s not that the opponent is great, but rather that the team is unwilling. I equate my circumstance to the pitcher who throws a no-hitter, and looses.

As I’ve published a number of articles, in which I refer to the law, and Dr. Edwin Vieira’s vast arsenal on the Second Amendment and the need for the revitalization of the Militia, I’ve found that even those who proclaim their support for liberty have nothing more to say than that this is going nowhere. In fact, those pretend supporters whose only claim to fame is keeping the fight going rather than winning have ridiculed me.

So I’ve decided that maybe I should pepper my articles with terms that seem to hold the most interest for the public at large. Notice that I’ve referenced team and no-hitter. In this manner maybe I could draw some attention to what I have to say, and maybe, just maybe I’ll hit the magic 300 after failing the previous 7 times. And I note 7 as the number of my boyhood hero Mickey Mantel. Perhaps one of the reasons he drank was because no one was listening to him either.

Ladies and Gentlemen, it is the bottom of the ninth, there are seconds left on the clock, whatever the measure you use to site the ending of your favorite sport, in which your team is behind. The opponents of liberty are knocking on the door to victory because we’ve given up the game plan, and we’ve fallen for the same feint that opens the boxer to the right cross.

I recently watched a youtube video, in which Dan Bongino was pitted against a Vincent Demarco. Mr. Bongino was courteous to Mr. Demarco, but had it been myself I would have called Demarco what he is, a blatant liar. What he presented as facts was nothing more than outright lies and propaganda.

One statement that Demarco harped on was that Justice Scalia’s claim that the states have the right to regulate the ownership of firearms, and that it is consistent with the Second. Scalia’s statement, as are most that come from the gutter mouths of those who infest the bench is pure nonsense. The court did in fact say that the state has such an authority, and I did in fact note when I originally read the Heller decision that the purely arbitrary regulation of the Second was contradictory with other rulings. Such a ruling is inconsistent in the definition of law, and would certainly come back to bite us right on the backside.

I point to a previous article I wrote titled “Five to Four”. I’m going to challenge anyone to intelligently define the law when the court itself does not agree. There appears to be a completely misguided, and obviously dangerous doctrine created that the law can be interpreted. Can a person with a logical mind understand that this is simply a means, by which the state will eventually interpret away rights, and convert them to privileges that can be regulated into non-existence?

Once again I must point to an article I wrote some time back titled “Its Just a Game”. In it I point to how ambiguity and interpretation creates a victor and the vanquished in a basketball game by manipulation.

This brings into question the meaning of the word ambiguous:
· Able to be understood in more than one-way: having more than one possible meaning.
· Not expressed or understood clearly.

We should also address the meaning of interpret:
· To explain the meaning of (something).
· To understand (something) in a specified way.

If someone claims to be the ultimate arbiters of the law, then tells me that it can be interpreted, then argues about its proper interpretation, I should be preparing for the worst. Ultimately, the rule of law dies, and for the life of me I can’t understand why anyone would subscribe to such outlandish notions that bring into scope ambiguity.

The Constitution is the law. What congress enacts is not law if it is contradictory to the tenor under which it was created. In other words, if an act cannot find its origin in a specifically enumerated power, then it is null and void regardless of who says what to whom.

The bigger problem stares back at us in the mirror every day. We’ve either given up, fallen prey to mounds of propaganda, or are entrenched in the system. We give validity to people who post the term esquire behind their name, or sit on a bench while wearing a black robe.

No matter what the interpretation, I am inclined to see the error in allowing a judiciary to make claims on the law, especially when it can, and most likely will affect my rights, and my ability to protect myself from the very same entity calling the shots.

There is no lack of historical data reminding us that government, no matter what form, or label that may apply is untrustworthy. This is not because governments, a fictitious entity of law is inherently evil, but because it must be run by your friend and enemy alike.

Because human nature enters into the equation, abuse is always in the cards. This is why the Constitution was written in a manner that specifically enumerates clearly stated powers under which the government may operate. There is no room for interpretation by a branch of government that may have agenda driven goals.

The Founders were clear in their minds on how this nation should operate. They prohibited the state from infringing on speech, the grand jury, and the petit jury. They forbade government from placing its heavy boot on the neck of the people by clearly stating that the infringement upon private property, and the security of the home were immune without due process of law as determined by our peers, not some created government office.

In addition to words that are incapable of enforcement, the Founders recognized and codified the institution that protects all our rights. The Militia of the Several States protects all our rights. Unless we are willing to embrace our duty, this fight will go on with the ultimate dismantling of freedom.

Nick Testaccio

“A Declaration”

August 13, 2014 | Constitution, Founders, Founding Documents, History, Republic

In June of 1776, Richard Henry Lee of Virginia presented to the representatives of the Thirteen Colonies a Resolution that stated:

“That these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, free and independent States, that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain is, and ought to be, totally dissolved; that measures should be immediately taken for procuring the assistance of foreign powers, and a Confederation be formed to bind the colonies more closely together.”

On July 2nd, 1776 the representatives of Twelve Colonies voted in favor of the resolution that turned subjects of the crown into independent people, and states with rights equivalent to those of all other sovereign nations. As such, the need to establish a rule of law, and the reasons for which this separation had been adopted needed to be documented into law.

“In CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.
A DECLARATION
By THE REPRESENTATIVES OF THE
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
In GENERAL CONGRESS ASSEMBLED.”

“Submitted to a candid world”, not only a new rule of law, but also a declaration of war on “A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant,…”

When the Representatives of the States united in a cause of independence signed the “Declaration” they were turning the noble words of the document into a codified statement of law.

We hold these truths to be self-evident:
1. That all men are created equal.
2. That they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights.
3. That among these rights are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
4. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men.
5. That these governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed.
6. That the People retain the right to alter or abolish any form of government when that government infringes upon the rights and privileges of the People.
7. That the People retain the sovereignty 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.

As free and independent states, the People had to consider the consequences of such a break from a monarch. Undoubtedly, the king would move to retain what he believed to be his of divine right. Tyrants do not relinquish their power by the words of their subjects, no matter how eloquent the reasons are detailed. War would be inevitable.

As is right and proper, the representatives of the newly formed government “declared to a candid world” reasons for such a separation, and the causes that led the good People of these now united States to resist any further abuse, and tyranny.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, has quartered large bodies of troops, imposed taxes without our consent, and in every stage of these oppressions has ignored our Petitions for Redress of Grievance:
1. He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws.
2. He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people.
3. He has obstructed the administration of Justice.
4. He has constructed a multitude of offices to harass our people, and eat out their substance.
5. He has kept amongst us in times of peaces, standing armies.
6. He has affected to render the military independent and superior to the Civil power.
7. For abolishing the free system of English laws.
8. For taking away our most valuable laws, and altering fundamentally the forms of our government.
9. For suspending our own legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with the power to legislate for us in all causes whatsoever.
10. He has incited domestic insurrections.

The attributes of our government, and the causes for the impending war were much more detailed in the Declaration, but I’ve attempted here to highlight what our fundamental form was about, and what particular grievances are so obvious today. Why?

Because, first and foremost, the Declaration is a timeless document that has not become passé, politically incorrect, or negligent of the needs of the whole of the People. It stated for the record the desires of all men and women, for which we should strive. It also laid the groundwork for a nation that would not be bullied or stand aside when tyranny and injustice raised its ugly head.

As a whole, we’ve done quite well since the outset. We flourished as a nation, building monuments to the ability of man when he is free of the burdens of constant government intervention.

Yes we’ve made many mistakes, but certainly no more than other nations, and far, far less than the vast majority.

We must remember that it was white men and women, who worked to free slaves, and it was also white men and women who marched with oppressed blacks down the streets of Atlanta to bring about the Civil Rights change.
It was those same middle class men, and their representatives who helped achieve the right to vote for women. Certainly with no vehicle to attain their goal other than their husbands, sons, and all male legislatures, the dream could never have been accomplished.

This country built the largest population of middles class people, and they did it by butting heads with some robber barons, some legislators, and then coming together with rich men such as Henry Ford who recognized the values of a content, and happy working class to be able to afford the very products they built.

In the labyrinth of good and evil that permeates mankind this nation stood far and above the others, and it was for the most part attained by the hands and blood of the men that our schools now teach us to hate. Despite the propaganda that is today’s liberal agenda it is not the downtrodden that accomplish their goal through peaceful means, but rather those who think through the inconsistencies, and injustice, and take the stand to change.

The problem at hand is that those who profess to be the great progenitors of equality are rarely if ever in that role. You seldom hear the true fighters coming forward and claiming “I did that”. It is history, and the work of truth seekers who bring us the real story. It is the individually curious mind that seeks the truth while wading through the miasma of lies that are cast by the most devious and evil amongst us.

The truth of the matter is this. We fought a war for independence from a tyrant who cared little for the rights of man. We fought a Civil War, in which we sacrificed the lives of some 700,000 men, not to free the slaves, but rather to attain the goal of a maniac who disliked the notion of the republic and to fill the coffers of his corporate backers. Years later we created slaves of the majority of the population, again at the hands of robber barons in the form of the banking industry.

The sad part is that it is there for the good People to learn through the study of the journals and records of the day. It is, perhaps our gullibility, laziness, and other factors that deny us the determination to seek the truth. After all, would our teachers, judges, and bureaucrats lie to us? The undeniable truth is that they do it, and they do it to enhance their own status.

The monsters of the agenda to completely enslave the American people are those we’ve been thought to trust. They have names that any logical person would know have nothing at all to do with their agenda. Some actually believe they are doing good, forsaking all that history has thought them, and going blindly by the words of their masters.

The most evil of these groups and individuals have names such as the Ford Foundation, the Carnegie Group, The Teachers Union, National Organization for Women, The Southern Poverty Law Center, Barack and Michele Obama, Bill and Hillary Clinton, Bill and Melinda Gates, Dianne Feinstein, Chuck Schumer, The Supreme Court, Mothers Demand Action, and a host of others too numerous to mention that are funded by the Rockefeller Foundation and people such as George Soros who have nothing but evil intent for their fellow man.

The rank and file may very well have good intentions, but they are typically swayed by the whims, terms, and in many cases, by the intentional actions of their own government to subvert the rights of the People.

When the Declaration was written, it was a novel and noble attempt at defining a grand idea in which we the People of the Colonies united in just cause to remove ourselves from the bonds of tyranny and establish a new, and enlightened society. It had flaws, but men who sought justice, not the miraculous overnight change in the mindset, and character of the day, wrote it well beyond its time.

Today we live is a world in turmoil, made so by those who profess to be progressives and enlightened. It is a far cry from the pen of Thomas Jefferson, to the enacting body of men who debated the ins and outs of a new Republic. We have not carried out the forward thinking actions of men who knew they would hang together if they failed, but rather have fallen prey to the devious, and the demonic.

Nicholas Testaccio

 

This Fourth of July 2014

July 1, 2014 | General

Just one month ago we remembered the Seventieth anniversary of the invasion that took place on the shores and cliffs of Normandy, France.

“At dawn, on the morning of the 6th of June, 1944, 225 Rangers jumped off the British landing craft and ran to the bottom of these cliffs. *** Two hundred and twenty-five came here. After 2 days of fighting, only 90 could still bear arms.” – From Ronald Regan’s commemorative speech at Pointe du Hoc, France.

On that day the men of the allied forces stormed the beaches of Normandy where they made their mark in history. Regardless of what the causes, the circumstance, the conspiracies, and whatever it takes to place us into a war, young men shed their blood, some never made it back to the loved ones they left behind. Others were left with the most indelible of wounds that would haunt their mind and body for the rest of their lives.

They were brave men who went before me, and served their country with honor. They believed in the cause despite what history may uncover, or the horror that has come after them. Nevertheless they did what they felt was the right thing to do.

I am not ashamed of my service to my country because today we have created an empire that sucks the very life force from this world. I am not ashamed of the men who took up arms after 9/11 as they also believed it was the right thing to do.

In the heat of the moment when terror flashes across the spectrum of our lives, young men will rise to the occasion and the call of their nation. Those who volunteered to fight for their country saw burnt bodies, destruction, and horror placed right before their eyes. In their minds there was no other choice.

Most of us did not think that this was a planned event. All we saw was what was laid out on the radio, or the TV. And all we heard were the calls to action of the leaders of this nation.

No one wants to believe that those we select to represent our freedom and liberty would plan and execute such a heinous act. Whatever my belief is, or knowledge I may possess at this time, I can honestly say that I do not know precisely what happened on that day, nor do I know the full story of previous historical events, and all other events that have led us into conflict after conflict to this present moment.

I am weary of the sight of those being brought home in caskets, or on gurneys clinging to life. They are real people who will suffer the scourge of war for the rest of their lives, and whether it was for naught only the Universe will make that determination. It is not my place to do so for I am but a small man placed here at this particular moment to perform some task, for which I’ve been given no clear instruction.

While I may see the corruption, and terror that this nations policies incur, it is not always obvious to the wide-eyed kid down the block who wants to serve, and be counted among those of us who went before him. I will certainly never disparage the lot because the few conduct themselves in a manner that does not comport to honor. Those good soldiers went for a valid reason in their minds. They did not examine all the angles, the play-by-play, and analyze the words of those they trusted. They acted as they saw fit, and in a world where we are expected to trust and act accordingly, they did so in all good faith.

They did not sit at home behind a typewriter excoriating the deeds of others, and certainly not those who would offer to shed their blood.

They are not among those whose philosophy is do as I say, not as I do. “THESE are the times that try men’s souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands by it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph.” – Thomas Paine

There are many among us today that consider themselves to be patriots. They screech to the Heavens that something is wrong. They present the evidence, but for the most part the masses will not listen. Words will only bring us so far in a conflict where the enemy has no intent to surrender, and certainly no motivation to do so. The enemy of freedom holds a monopoly of force, and does so with the knowledge that the “summer soldier and the sunshine patriot” make a fine living at doing nothing more than talking.

While the so-called patriot whines and shouts about this issue and that, the forces of evil grow stronger by the day. There may very well come a time when we’ve lost any hope of prevailing because we were all too willing to follow the whiners, and denounce the doers.

There is in the patriot (so-called) community, a desire to denounce those who’ve chosen to take up arms for what they thought was a just cause. There are those who will always support the veteran in not only words, but also actions. Few come to mind that will stand by the soldier without passing judgment on all for the crimes of a few.

If it were so easy to win the battle with words then we would have gained a victory long ago, and at each election the miscreant would be ousted, and another more promising representative would replace the incumbent. However, we stand at the edge of an abyss with little taking place except that we find more and more crimes, for which we will do nothing more than SCREAM.

I have no doubt in my mind that the tyrant operates under the old rub that “Sticks and stones may break my bones, but Words will never harm me”. And as panicky as the despot may proclaim that the info war is being lost, the bonds of tyranny are slowly but surely being cast.

This Fourth of July is the Seventieth since the Normandy invasion. In days past, the men and women who fought that war memorialized it by remembering their fallen friends, neighbors, and relatives. There was beer, hotdogs, and hamburgers, but men and women who would do it again if the need arose held them in firm hands.

They did not disparage others for their actions while they themselves dotted the I, and crossed the T so that a government agent would have nothing to lay claim upon.

They did not make specious claims about victories that never actually occurred. They did not celebrate the one who walked away, but rather lamented the 49 others who were forced to surrender.

They did not proclaim as a winning strategy the highlighting of the battle to their neighbor when their neighbor was already overrun.

Long before the invasion of Normandy, real men, Minute Men stood shoulder to shoulder against what may have seemed to be insurmountable odds. But those men, trained as “well regulated” Militia took their assault rifles to the Green, and had at it.

This Fourth of July let us remember that actions speak louder than words. That those who wrote the law expected the standard to be kept, no matter what the cost.

Nick Testaccio