Restore The Republic,Militia,Constitution,Founding Fathers,Republic

Restore the Republic

“to execute the Laws of the Union”

September 7, 2017 | 2nd Amendment, Civil Liberties, Constitution, Founders, Founding Documents, Militia, Sovereignty

by Nicholas Testaccio

Execution of the law requires some means of actually enforcing in terms of bringing about a form of relief, bringing a perpetrator to justice, or enforcing a judgment. A principle that is at best a clouded issue in our system wherein sovereignty is supposed to remain with the People.

In response to the Supreme Courts decision in Worcester v Georgia, President Andrew Jackson said, “John Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it.” Jackson was saying that I am the enforcement branch of this government, but I have no intention of forcing compliance with a decision, for which I do not agree.

“The government of the United States has been emphatically termed a government of laws, and not of men.” That is to say that “We the People” have delegated certain sovereign powers to agencies of government, and we expect that representatives of the People abide by those rules. If they do not, if they overstep their bounds, and the rule is enforced by created agencies, how do we reconcile the abuses, and corruption?

Let us start with some basic principles. 

“The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government, are few and defined. *** The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State.” – Federalist 45, written by James Madison

To which the Supreme Court declared in kind; “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  

“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, written by Alexander Hamilton

To that fundamental idea of government the Supreme Court confirmed that “Certainly all those who have framed written constitutions contemplate them as forming the fundamental and paramount law of the nation, and consequently the theory of every such government must be, that an act of the legislature repugnant to the constitution is void.

“This theory is essentially attached to a written constitution, and is consequently to be considered by this court as one of the fundamental principles of our society.” – Marbury v Madison.

What’s that you say? We have laws, and the states have unlimited powers. NONSENSE!

First, and foremost in any logical thinking persons mind is whether, or not the political genius of the Founders created a document that reads “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof *** shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding”, but then turned a blind eye to the possibility of abuses that may be perpetrated in any given state. The conclusion can only be no, because tyranny can spread much the same as ignorance, greed, and corruption across all boundaries as the Founders experienced first hand.

If you are not convinced of the fact that the states must comply in all matters within the federal Constitution, you need only look to the Fourteenth Amendment that reads in part; “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

What would be the solution, if any, to abuses of government at any level? Could the People maintain a free and independent life if bureaucrats, or elected representatives at local, state, or federal positions declared that they were not obliged to adhere to the principles of limited delegated authority? Would a slow decay of society bring us full circle, and back into the hands of an oligarchy if there were no means of control for the general public?

The Founders recognized what had already been established and relied upon to enforce the law, and help to prosecute the Revolution. They drew upon what they experienced for decades, and years of guerrilla fighting.

The Founders added a Bill of Rights with restrictions, and guarantees that incorporated a body of law enforcement designated as “necessary to the security of a free State” so that in any one given district, county, or state, the good People could employ their arm “to execute the Laws of the Union”, and thereby obtain justice. Restraining government could be as easy as placing power in the hands of the People to determine, and then alter abuses perpetrated by bureaucrats. 

As we study the nature of our institution of government and its development, more questions should form in any thinking mind. Would the Fifty-Six men who signed the Declaration of Independence, and essentially their own death warrants, have written the words “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” without recognizing and institutionalizing a lawful method for the People to not only prevent, but to also arrest, prosecute, and jail those who run afoul of our “rule of law”?

I’ve presented some questions in a different manner. I showed how the courts originally looked at the rule of law. I’ve gone on a bit about how conflicts between what takes place in the world, and what was intended dilutes the authority of a government of the People. I’ve done so in hopes that I would stir some thought as to what would even be the point of a written Constitution if those who seek power interpret it away? Why bother with a piece of parchment? Was it worth the time, effort, money, and blood it cost to print the document if there are those who, not only ignore it, but also tell us its black when we know that it’s white?

Article IV, Clause 3 reads, “The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution”.

Why even suggest adding such an oath to the document unless it would be enforced by “We the People”?

The concept of enforcing the document so that the government will redress grievances to our satisfaction seems to be beyond the scope of comprehension for almost all of the general public. It was not past the understanding of those opposed to the Constitution. They were cognizant of the character of man. They fought for, and obtained a Bill of Rights.

In that Bill of Rights, there is one word that sticks out. It was so important to the men who wrote our Constitution that it is repeated Four times in the body of the Constitution. It is the only institution that the Founders deemed “necessary”.

George Mason, co-author of the Bill of Rights; “I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them.”  

With that in mind lets think of the Second Amendment in full context, as it was recognized in each of the Thirteen Colonial Constitutions, as our Forefathers understood, and practiced; The whole of the People, well trained, and well armed is the best, and most effective way to maintain freedom, justice, peace, and the welfare of our posterity.

The men who vigorously debated, and ratified the Constitution were fully aware that they were creating a system, in which the People would firmly hold the sword so that we could keep sovereignty with the good People. In order for us to maintain our freedom, we must recognize that the duty “to execute the Laws of the Union” rests with us, and then admit to ourselves that we have forsaken the responsibility to enforce the law.

This Fourth of July – 2017

June 30, 2017 | General

by Nicholas Testaccio

Some One Hundred Years ago my maternal grandfather came here on a merchant ship. He left that vessel, walked down to the local recruitment office and enlisted.

He was assigned to the “Fighting 69th”, so back he went to Europe in the midst of WWI.

He cautioned those in his family who followed that “War is a horrible, horrible thing. It’s not what you think it is.” I heard that as a young boy who could not quite grasp the sense of what was being said. I did not even know what grandpa’s role was, but each day I visited my grandparents, I saw the uniform of a Doughboy hanging in the corner.

To this day, I regret not knowing more, or being able to question grandpa on the horrors of war, and devastation heaped upon both the victor, and the vanquished. The tears shed by mothers, fathers, wives, sons, daughters, and the whole of the community. The heartbreak that comes with the knowledge that you’ll never see that sparkle in the eyes of a lost one, or knowing that a child will grow not knowing that person who brought him into this world. Forgetting the laughter, or the caress of that significant being in your life, and instead eliciting screams from the bottom of your heart for the irreconcilable loss is all that is left.

Yet here we are, some One Hundred Years after my grandpa, and perhaps yours who dug a trench, huddled in fear, cried in pain, and fired a round ending the life of someone else’s (someone you and I will never know) grandpa.

There are factions in our government pushing us into what could be an Extinction Level Event. War today may, or should I say would, lead to a nuclear exchange.

This can be prevented, but it is up to “We the People” in our role as sovereigns to regain control of our government, and hopefully prevent a war, in which the death toll may be counted in the billions.

Even if cooler heads prevail and it doesn’t turn nuclear, look at what is taking place around the Globe. Civil war could commence in any one of a number of countries due to ongoing conflicts, migrations, terror attacks, racial strife, and even political discord.

It seems that politicians, across the board, are hell bent on placing us smack in the middle of a war that will have the streets running red. It could be you, it could be me who become one of the many victim’s of the propaganda spewed out from the halls of government, and echoed in the voices of talking heads paid to sell out their fellow Americans.

Madness appears to be the norm in the Congress where they pat each other on the back for doing such a great job despite the fact that the vast majority are criminally insane. I don’t want to hear the compliments upon which they lavish each other. I want to hear righteous indignation at the corruption, treachery, and tyranny.

It is not just in the halls of the legislatures, or from the benches of the courts, but also everywhere around you. Look at the NY Times, the LA Times, the Washington Post, the Hill, the Huffington Post, ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, and the list goes on. Those media outlets are staffed with those who are willing to follow orders, deceive, and promote, in every which way, the means of your enslavement.

The lies, propaganda, and the agenda to destroy the basic principles of this Republic must end.

Those who have laid the path to tyranny, and their accomplices who hide behind the First amendment as a means of promoting an end to this nation, must be brought to justice. There must be long, and harsh prison sentences. They need to be reminded that the rule of law is not a plaything that can be changed to suit a certain ideology, but rather a basis for maintaining a free country.

Remember my friends that while you twist your facts to suit your beliefs, your children, grandchildren, and their children may suffer the consequences of you turning a blind eye to what is taking place.

The horror of war will find its way to your doorstep if you are unwilling to take charge as was intended two hundred forty one years ago. This was meant to be a nation in which the People maintained ultimate control. We are now a nation fighting over this agenda or that. Squabbling over what this or that means, but also, and disturbingly, over whether or not you and I should be free from the bonds of government intervention.

Law is not an opinion, although we’ve made it into that, which can be easily obfuscated by powerful people wearing black robes.

The law must mean that the People may challenge any aspect of “Governments instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed…”

In the face of courts ruling with one side taking one point and the other who may or may not conform to the delegated powers granted to the state, how can we, in all honesty, claim we have a legitimate government?

This Fourth of July think about your children, how they will grow, how they will prosper, and how they may be forced to fight for their freedom when you’ve subscribed to the idea that law is based on a Five to Four decision, and not the struggle that our Forefathers endured.

The Imperial State

June 6, 2017 | 2nd Amendment, Civil Liberties, Constitution, Founders, Militia, Sovereignty

by Nicholas Testaccio

The United States of America is a Constitutional Federal Republic, wherein all power “to execute the Laws of the Union” is vested in the People in their status as Sovereigns.

This is a long-standing principle of our rule of law as the court had stated in Chisolm v Georgia, “[o]ne constructed on the principle that the Supreme Power resides in the body of the people.”

The Supreme Court later opined, “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

A government so corrupt that it does not resemble that, which the Founders devised, has obfuscated the principles of our law. It is now a government that ignores the doctrine that it “deriv[es] its just power from the consent of the governed”, and therefore can only operate as that entity the People have the authority “to alter or to abolish.”

The principles of popular sovereignty, and the explicit recognition in the Constitution that it is only the good People that have the authority “to execute the Laws of the Union” would be in full force were it not for a completely corrupt judiciary, and its accomplices in the executive, and the legislative branches. Sadly, many groups and organizations of self-proclaimed patriots have also helped to misinform the public.

Mentioning only a small part of the history and law surrounding the fact that this was meant to be “a government of laws, and not of men,” I am perplexed, but not surprised, by a recent statement by Justice Neil Gorsuch. This newly appointed Supreme Court justice does not share a “cynicism about government and the rule of law”.

I wonder if Justice Gorsuch, or the legal profession in general have read the Constitution and understand what it means???

I can state from personal experience that many lawyers, perhaps the vast majority, do not display any indication that they have read the Federalist Papers, the Anti-Federalist Papers, or any of the ratifying convention debates. Perhaps, if they did, they would then know “[w]hat *** those who framed and adopted [the Constitution] underst[oo]d [its] terms to designate and include.” Reading and comprehending what the Founders thought might just preclude a good deal of the judicial tyranny, to which we are now subject.

What lawyers seem to know is what they are told by an Imperial Judiciary. The legal profession, or as some have noted, a good-ole boys club, is a rubber stamp for abuses of power. Rather than questioning, it acts in accordance with decisions of the court, whether or not the court acts to defend the Constitution.

The rule of law be damned is the philosophy of the judiciary. The mission of those who crave power is to circumvent the sovereignty vested in the good People, and centralize it to suit the crazed and corrupt appetite of the few elite who have attained office through whatever perverted means available.

On tape for all to see and hear, Justice Sotomayor states that the role of the court of appeals is to legislate from the bench. Instead of being impeached, Sotomayor was given a seat on the highest court.

The role of the judiciary, for those who can’t comprehend the clear words of the Constitution is to be an advocate for the strict adherence to the rule of law. There is no wording that grants an authority for interpretations by political activist, power hungry black robed administrators and their co-conspirators.

As Alexander Hamilton wrote in Federalist 78, “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.”

Who would protect our prime doctrine?

Benjamin Austin wrote, “Certain characters now on the stage, we have reason to venerate, but though this country is now blessed with a Washington, Franklin, Hancock and Adams, yet posterity may have reason to rue the day when their political welfare depends on the decision of men who may fill the places of these worthies. . . .”

Who has followed?

Bush, Clinton, Obama, Roberts, Ginsberg, Sotomayor, Cuomo, Bloomberg, Brown, Ryan, Kasich, just a short list of the many for whom “we have [no] reason to venerate”, or trust at any level. Still we re-elect them, or allow them to sit in positions that they consistently corrupt.

We have a judiciary from the lowest to the highest court filled with those who have no respect at all for the Constitution. We have executive and legislative branches around the nation that act in a manner so contrary to both the federal and state Constitutions that their disrespect and lawlessness is immeasurable.

We have lawyers destroying every principle of law in every branch of government. No one has put it more succinctly than journalist, author, and political commentator H.L. Menchen; “All the extravagance and incompetence of our present Government is due, in the main, to lawyers, and, in part at least, to good ones. They are responsible for nine-tenths of the useless and vicious laws that now clutter the statute-books, and for all the evils that go with the vain attempt to enforce them. Every Federal judge is a lawyer. So are most Congressmen. Every invasion of the plain rights of the citizens has a lawyer behind it. If all lawyers were hanged tomorrow, and their bones sold to a mah jong factory, we’d be freer and safer, and our taxes would be reduced by almost a half.”

We were warned from the very beginning.

Robert Yates wrote, as one who opposed the ratification, “The supreme court under this constitution would be exalted above all other power in the government, and subject to no control”. He goes on to comment that we will have “a court of justice invested with such immense powers, and yet placed in a situation so little responsible.”

Yates doesn’t “object to the judges holding their commissions during good behavior. I suppose it a proper provision provided they were made properly responsible.” His acceptance of the “good behavior” premise was obviously made at a different time. The character of men and women were so different than “We the People” of today that it seems more myth than reality.

From the Life and Times of Davy Crockett there is this account that is a testament to how far we have fallen from the values of our forbearers.

One day in the House of Representatives, a bill was taken up appropriating money for the benefit of a widow of a distinguished naval officer. Several beautiful speeches had been made in its support. The Speaker was just about to put the question when Davy Crockett arose:

“Mr. Speaker–I have as much respect for the memory of the deceased, and as much sympathy for the sufferings of the living, if suffering there be, as any man in this House, but we must not permit our respect for the dead or our sympathy for a part of the living to lead us into an act of injustice to the balance of the living. I will not go into an argument to prove that Congress has no power to appropriate this money as an act of charity. Every member upon this floor knows it. We have the right, as individuals, to give away as much of our own money as we please in charity; but as members of Congress we have no right so to appropriate a dollar of the public money. Some eloquent appeals have been made to us upon the ground that it is a debt due the deceased. Mr. Speaker, the deceased lived long after the close of the war; he was in office to the day of his death, and I have never heard that the government was in arrears to him.

Every man in this House knows it is not a debt. We cannot, without the grossest corruption, appropriate this money as the payment of a debt. We have not the semblance of authority to appropriate it as a charity. Mr. Speaker, I have said we have the right to give as much money of our own as we please. I am the poorest man on this floor. I cannot vote for this bill, but I will give one week’s pay to the object, and if every member of Congress will do the same, it will amount to more than the bill asks.”

He took his seat. Nobody replied. The bill was put upon its passage, and, instead of passing unanimously, as was generally supposed, and as, no doubt, it would, but for that speech, it received but few votes, and, of course, was lost.

Later, when asked by a friend why he had opposed the appropriation, Crockett gave this explanation:

“Several years ago I was one evening standing on the steps of the Capitol with some other members of Congress, when our attention was attracted by a great light over in Georgetown . It was evidently a large fire. We jumped into a hack and drove over as fast as we could. In spite of all that could be done, many houses were burned and many families made homeless, and, besides, some of them had lost all but the clothes they had on. The weather was very cold, and when I saw so many women and children suffering, I felt that something ought to be done for them. The next morning a bill was introduced appropriating $20,000 for their relief. We put aside all other business and rushed it through as soon as it could be done.

“The next summer, when it began to be time to think about the election, I concluded I would take a scout around among the boys of my district. I had no opposition there, but, as the election was some time off, I did not know what might turn up. When riding one day in a part of my district in which I was more of a stranger than any other, I saw a man in a field plowing and coming toward the road. I gauged my gait so that we should meet as he came to the fence. As he came up, I spoke to the man. He replied politely, but, as I thought, rather coldly.

“I began: ‘Well, friend, I am one of those unfortunate beings called candidates, and–’

“‘Yes, I know you; you are Colonel Crockett, I have seen you once before, and voted for you the last time you were elected. I suppose you are out electioneering now, but you had better not waste your time or mine. I shall not vote for you again.’

“This was a sockdolager . . . I begged him to tell me what was the matter.

“‘Well, Colonel, it is hardly worth-while to waste time or words upon it. I do not see how it can be mended, but you gave a vote last winter which shows that either you have not capacity to understand the Constitution, or that you are wanting in the honesty and firmness to be guided by it. In either case you are not the man to represent me. But I beg your pardon for expressing it in that way. I did not intend to avail myself of the privilege of the constituent to speak plainly to a candidate for the purpose of insulting or wounding you. I intend by it only to say that your understanding of the Constitution is very different from mine; and I will say to you what, but for my rudeness, I should not have said, that I believe you to be honest. . . . But an understanding of the Constitution different from mine I cannot overlook, because the Constitution, to be worth anything, must be held sacred, and rigidly observed in all its provisions. The man who wields power and misinterprets it is the more dangerous the more honest he is.’

“‘I admit the truth of all you say, but there must be some mistake about it, for I do not remember that I gave any vote last winter upon any constitutional question.’

“‘No, Colonel, there’s no mistake. Though I live here in the backwoods and seldom go from home, I take the papers from Washington and read very carefully all the proceedings of Congress. My papers say that last winter you voted for a bill to appropriate $20,000 to some sufferers by a fire in Georgetown . Is that true?’

“‘Well, my friend; I may as well own up. You have got me there. But certainly nobody will complain that a great and rich country like ours should give the insignificant sum of $20,000 to relieve its suffering women and children, particularly with a full and overflowing Treasury, and I am sure, if you had been there, you would have done just as I did.’

“‘It is not the amount, Colonel, that I complain of; it is the principle. In the first place, the government ought to have in the Treasury no more than enough for its legitimate purposes. But that has nothing to do with the question. The power of collecting and disbursing money at pleasure is the most dangerous power that can be intrusted to man, particularly under our system of collecting revenue by a tariff, which reaches every man in the country, no matter how poor he may be, and the poorer he is the more he pays in proportion to his means. What is worse, it presses upon him without his knowledge where the weight centers, for there is not a man in the United States who can ever guess how much he pays to the government. So you see, that while you are contributing to relieve one, you are drawing it from thousands who are even worse off than he. If you had the right to give anything, the amount was simply a matter of discretion with you, and you had as much right to give $20,000,000 as $20,000. If you have the right to give to one, you have the right to give to all; and, as the Constitution neither defines charity nor stipulates the amount, you are at liberty to give to any and everything which you may believe, or profess to believe, is a charity, and to any amount you may think proper. You will very easily perceive what a wide door this would open for fraud and corruption and favoritism, on the one hand, and for robbing the people on the other. No, Colonel, Congress has no right to give charity. Individual members may give as much of their own money as they please, but they have no right to touch a dollar of the public money for that purpose. If twice as many houses had been burned in this county as in Georgetown , neither you nor any other member of Congress would have thought of appropriating a dollar for our relief. There are about two hundred and forty members of Congress. If they had shown their sympathy for the sufferers by contributing each one week’s pay, it would have made over $13,000. There are plenty of wealthy men in and around Washington who could have given $20,000 without depriving themselves of even a luxury of life. The congressmen chose to keep their own money, which, if reports be true, some of them spend not very creditably; and the people about Washington , no doubt, applauded you for relieving them from the necessity of giving by giving what was not yours to give. The people have delegated to Congress, by the Constitution, the power to do certain things. To do these, it is authorized to collect and pay moneys, and for nothing else. Everything beyond this is usurpation, and a violation of the Constitution.

“‘So you see, Colonel, you have violated the Constitution in what I consider a vital point. It is a precedent fraught with danger to the country, for when Congress once begins to stretch its power beyond the limits of the Constitution, there is no limit to it, and no security for the people. I have no doubt you acted honestly, but that does not make it any better, except as far as you are personally concerned, and you see that I cannot vote for you.’

“I tell you I felt streaked. I saw if I should have opposition, and this man should go to talking, he would set others to talking, and in that district I was a gone fawn-skin. I could not answer him, and the fact is, I was so fully convinced that he was right, I did not want to. But I must satisfy him, and I said to him:

“‘Well, my friend, you hit the nail upon the head when you said I had not sense enough to understand the Constitution. I intended to be guided by it, and thought I had studied it fully. I have heard many speeches in Congress about the powers of Congress, but what you have said here at your plow has got more hard, sound sense in it than all the fine speeches I ever heard. If I had ever taken the view of it that you have, I would have put my head into the fire before I would have given that vote; and if you will forgive me and vote for me again, if I ever vote for another unconstitutional law I wish I may be shot.’

“He laughingly replied: ‘Yes, Colonel, you have sworn to that once before, but I will trust you again upon one condition. You say that you are convinced that your vote was wrong. Your acknowledgment of it will do more good than beating you for it. If, as you go around the district, you will tell people about this vote, and that you are satisfied it was wrong, I will not only vote for you, but will do what I can to keep down opposition, and, perhaps, I may exert some little influence in that way.’

“‘If I don’t,’ said I, ‘I wish I may be shot; and to convince you that I am in earnest in what I say I will come back this way in a week or ten days, and if you will get up a gathering of the people, I will make a speech to them. Get up a barbecue, and I will pay for it.’

“‘No, Colonel, we are not rich people in this section, but we have plenty of provisions to contribute for a barbecue, and some to spare for those who have none. The push of crops will be over in a few days, and we can then afford a day for a barbecue. This is Thursday; I will see to getting it up on Saturday week. Come to my house on Friday, and we will go together, and I promise you a very respectable crowd to see and hear you.’

“‘Well, I will be here. But one thing more before I say good-by. I must know your name.’

“‘My name is Bunce.’

“‘Not Horatio Bunce?’


“‘Well, Mr. Bunce, I never saw you before, though you say you have seen me, but I know you very well. I am glad I have met you, and very proud that I may hope to have you for my friend.’

“It was one of the luckiest hits of my life that I met him. He mingled but little with the public, but was widely known for his remarkable intelligence and incorruptible integrity, and for a heart brimful and running over with kindness and benevolence, which showed themselves not only in words but in acts. He was the oracle of the whole country around him, and his fame had extended far beyond the circle of his immediate acquaintance. Though I had never met him before, I had heard much of him, and but for this meeting it is very likely I should have had opposition, and had been beaten. One thing is very certain, no man could now stand up in that district under such a vote.

“At the appointed time I was at his house, having told our conversation to every crowd I had met, and to every man I stayed all night with, and I found that it gave the people an interest and a confidence in me stronger than I had every seen manifested before.

“Though I was considerably fatigued when I reached his house, and, under ordinary circumstances, should have gone early to bed, I kept him up until midnight, talking about the principles and affairs of government, and got more real, true knowledge of them than I had got all my life before.

“I have known and seen much of him since, for I respect him–no, that is not the word–I reverence and love him more than any living man, and I go to see him two or three times every year; and I will tell you, sir, if every one who professes to be a Christian lived and acted and enjoyed it as he does, the religion of Christ would take the world by storm.

“But to return to my story. The next morning we went to the barbecue, and, to my surprise, found about a thousand men there. I met a good many whom I had not known before, and they and my friend introduced me around until I had got pretty well acquainted–at least, they all knew me.

“In due time notice was given that I would speak to them. They gathered up around a stand that had been erected. I opened my speech by saying:

“‘Fellow-citizens–I present myself before you today feeling like a new man. My eyes have lately been opened to truths which ignorance or prejudice, or both, had heretofore hidden from my view. I feel that I can today offer you the ability to render you more valuable service than I have ever been able to render before. I am here today more for the purpose of acknowledging my error than to seek your votes. That I should make this acknowledgment is due to myself as well as to you. Whether you will vote for me is a matter for your consideration only.’

“I went on to tell them about the fire and my vote for the appropriation and then told them why I was satisfied it was wrong. I closed by saying:

“‘And now, fellow-citizens, it remains only for me to tell you that the most of the speech you have listened to with so much interest was simply a repetition of the arguments by which your neighbor, Mr. Bunce, convinced me of my error.

“‘It is the best speech I ever made in my life, but he is entitled to the credit for it. And now I hope he is satisfied with his convert and that he will get up here and tell you so.’

“He came upon the stand and said:

“‘Fellow-citizens–It affords me great pleasure to comply with the request of Colonel Crockett. I have always considered him a thoroughly honest man, and I am satisfied that he will faithfully perform all that he has promised you today.’

“He went down, and there went up from that crowd such a shout for Davy Crockett as his name never called forth before.

“I am not much given to tears, but I was taken with a choking then and felt some big drops rolling down my cheeks. And I tell you now that the remembrance of those few words spoken by such a man, and the honest, hearty shout they produced, is worth more to me than all the honors I have received and all the reputation I have ever made, or ever shall make, as a member of Congress.

“Now, sir,” concluded Crockett, “you know why I made that speech yesterday.

As you read through the Constitution you will note that the Supreme Court was never granted the delegated authority to legislate, grant immunity, change the restrictions and authorities, or redefine “the sense in which [the words were] generally used by those for whom the instrument was intended”, “the common parlance of the times in which the Constitution was written”, “and the accepted meaning [of the words] in that day.”

“We the People” never granted the authority to the state to alter definitions, promote imperial edicts, establish law enforcement agencies, create powers over and above the sovereignty of the citizen, nor deprive the good People of their ultimate power “to execute the Laws of the Union.”

What we have today is an Oligarchy redefining the foundation of this nation to suit its goal of a cowed, and compliant people that believes the fallacy of an omnipotent State with the usurped supremacy to legislate in any manner it so pleases.

The Founders recognized a tool, and incorporated it in our Constitution at Article 1, Section 8, Clause’s 15 & 16. In order that no one could alter, diminish, or obfuscate that powerful authority they enshrined it as an unalienable right in the Second Amendment.

It is not a last resort when the chance of saving the Republic is dim, bur rather a first line of defense against bureaucrats, and black robbed administrators claiming undefined authority, and unlimited powers.

It is the body of the People with the authority to arrest “upon probable cause” any criminal on the streets, in the halls of the legislatures, or sitting on the bench. That body of the People is not restricted by some immunity by fiat, and decrees.

John Locke wrote, “…whenever the Legislators endeavour to take away, and destroy the Property of the People, or to reduce them to Slavery under Arbitrary Power, they put themselves into a state of War with the People, who are thereupon absolved from any farther Obedience, and are left to the common Refuge, which God hath provided for all Men, against Force and Violence.”

Are we there, but too complacent to see it, admit it, or fight it?

“I Want the Truth”

April 14, 2017 | 1st Amendment, General, Sovereignty

by Nicholas Testaccio

Are Americans willing to see, or hear the truth? Can they handle it, or even comprehend the truth when it is spelled out for them?

“I want the truth.” The now famous line uttered by Tom Cruise in the movie “A Few Good Men” tells us much about our character today. We either can’t handle it, or have been blinded by so much propaganda that we’re incapable of recognizing the truth.

America is under attack “by enemies both foreign and domestic”. I have no qualms in stating that we have those in government who are feverishly working to put an end to this once great experiment. This last election exhibited the depths, to which the “elite” will go to destroy this country. They’ve worked for years to rape the common man. They can’t afford to allow you and I to have a true say in the running of this nation.

The saddest part of this is that we have those, with rather loud mouths, who profess to know the truth, but do not comprehend what they are to do with their platform. Unintentionally, or perhaps intentionally they’ve built themselves a following of misguided, and misinformed. There is plenty of backslapping, and celebrations for victories that are at best temporary, or fleeting, but as I’ve asked in the past, have we put one of the scoundrels behind bars?

When bombs drop, bullets fly, and truth becomes a casualty, lives are ruined or lost. Whatever the motives, the means, the directions, or underlying force, be it spiritual, alien, or human, there is no doubt that suffering is a mark of the latest tragedy. Something we see, and can lay hand upon is a task to comprehend and resolve. As Patrick Henry stated, “But different men often see the same subject in different lights”, and therein lies the path to our defeat. The vast majority seems incapable of recognizing what is right in front of them.

You cannot keep yelling, “the sky is falling” while telling your intended audience that they need to stand under the debris and take the brunt of the damage. No matter what side of the fence you stand, or what your beliefs are, this is a physical world. As Morpheus explained to Neo, “Your mind makes it feel real”. So it is in that condition that you currently live whether you like it or not. You cannot transcend the current state until you are willing to accept and overcome it on the terms and conditions that make it feel real.

In other words, there is no passage through a locked door, for which you have no key. Build the key with what you have, and you will gain further knowledge that helps you to rise above what makes it feel real.

For the conspiracy theorist, the fervent believers in a one true God, or however else you define your present state, may I point you to the King James bible, Luke 10:19; “Behold, I give unto you power to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy: and nothing shall by any means hurt you.” Whether you believe that those are the words of one Creator, or some alien race that planted us here, they translate to a simple instruction. You, in whatever reality you choose to place yourself, are responsible for the outcome.

It is up to you to resolve the issues you confront. There is no deity, superior being, or “one-eyed one horned flying purple people eater” that is going to come down and save you from you. What do I mean by this?

Your challenge, should you choose to accept it, is to take the tools you have at hand and build the means, by which you will overcome whatever obstacle or threat is placed in your path. It should be obvious that you cannot fight with tools you neither have at hand, nor have the means of building at this particular time.

Take what you have, build on that in order to find what is beyond the veil that we see in front of our eyes. This of course leads me to what I see in front of me, and what it is that I will do with my meager skills and knowledge. For if there is one thing in this World, of which I am certain, it is the fact that my beliefs can be shattered in a heart beat. I make no pretense as to knowing what lies out there in what appears to be an ever-expanding Universe.

I could write about the things I’ve seen, the spiritual encounters, or experiences that I’ve had, but I choose not to. I do so because my reality doesn’t fit into what anyone else believes. If I’ve seen the unbelievable, someone else has seen more, and therefore I’m irrelevant. If I’ve had a spiritual encounter, I’ve witnessed the works of the devil because it falls on ears that can’t believe they are not superior in spirit to me. If I were to relate other aspects of my life, according to those who know more than me, someone, or some thing has duped me.

I can tell you that in my life I’ve been fed so much tripe that turns out to be wrong that it boggles the mind. Even with that, the same folks come back and keep telling me that I’m the one who doesn’t know. When I write here, it is about the state of affairs that I can combat.

So, until that day that I must face some horrible entity, Predators, creatures from the Black Lagoon, or the day comes that the good Lord calls me, and I can actually see what lies beyond this mortal plane, I will continue the battle with those tools that I have in front of me. I know that any entity that is an enemy of mankind will not give me access to whatever I might use to overcome evil, and until the day comes that I can design, acquire, or build the means of success I need to fight with what I have.

There is a simple logic in all of this that I subscribe to. I have been given limited gifts, from which I will build my life. I will lay the foundation for what I can define, and ascend my spirit to the next level. Without that belief, all I have is speculation, theory, and inferences from sources that may or may not be friendly to my health and welfare.

My reality is not your reality. That may be conceptual as I see it because my essence could be on a different level than others. My reality may conflict with yours because I believe I understand the nature of life. We are here to learn, and build upon those lessons based on our needs in what very well might be an evolution of spirit that takes us through a million life times.

If I’ve learned one thing in this life, it is that love is eternal. Beyond that, I know this. If there is one reality to be had in this World it is that in the great expanse of the Universe, there is more than I could absorb were I capable of using One Hundred percent of my brain. So it is not the destination that is the goal, but rather the journey.

If my journey was paved by those who toiled, strove, and overcame long before this day, it is my duty to take their knowledge to build upon. I say duty because a foundation was laid that was successful. I either can spend my time hoping for the best, or I can use the tools that have been past down. Sharpen the old sword, clean the old rifle, and keep them in shape for the day we finally understand that it is up to us “to execute” the rules to our favor. Hope is fine, but it is simply a mindset that only moves our emotions.

And thus ends my rant for today.