Archive for the ‘Civil Liberties’ Category
by Nicholas Testaccio
The charge of Treason has been bandied about for some time now in light of government infringing on the right to keep and bear arms. After years of listening to the charge cast, I have decided to examine the issue in order to ascertain whether I could make the case beyond a reasonable doubt.
Article III, § 3, Cl. 1 – “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 Constitution is clear as to how such an indictment might come about. To start I must ask the following questions:
Is there someone, entity, agency, or organization engaged in “levying War” against the United States?
Does war include covert acts, propaganda, sabotage, and acts subverting our ability to wage a war and defense of the nation?
Is there someone, entity, agency, or organization who “in adhering to their Enemies, [is] giving them Aid and Comfort”?
Considering the unique form of government in the United States, do the definitions of “levying War”, “Aid and Comfort” expand the criteria by function and implication of our law?
Does disarming “the body of the people” rise to the level of treason?
In his commentaries, William Blackstone wrote, “Treason, proditio, in it's very name (which is borrowed from the French) imports a betraying, treachery, or breach of faith. It therefore happens only between allies, *** This is looked upon as proceeding from the same principle of treachery in private life, as would have urged him who harbours it to have conspired in public against his liege lord and sovereign: *** [W]hen disloyalty so rears it's crest, as to attack even majesty itself, it is called by way of eminent distinction high treason, alta proditio”.
Sir Michael Foster, Discourse on High Treason. “High Treason being an Offence committed against the Duty of Allegiance, it may be proper before I proceed to the several Species of that Offence which will be the Subject of this Discourse, to consider From whom, and To whom Allegiance is due.” Foster goes on to explain that “Natural Allegiance is founded in the Relation every Man standeth in to the Crown considered as the Head of that Society whereof He is born a Member”.
Foster wrote his Discourse in 1762, a time when monarchs ruled, and the not yet formed United States was nothing more than a hope and dream of a few who wished to throw off the bonds of allegiance to royalty. Someone who came to power in birth under the divine right of kings. Those who claimed the loyalty of the people simply by being born into the right family.
In 1776 a new nation was formed with the unique concept “That all men are created equal, That they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, *** That to secure these rights governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”. Within those words are the construct of a government of, by, and for the People. It was an idea so novel as to foster a revolution here and in nations so inspired by our Declaration. Sadly, in today’s world, the principle of the rule of law for this nation has died through years of judicial and legislative twists that “evinces a design to reduce [us] under absolute Despotism”. Be that as it may, this country remains, in the rule of law, a Nation “constructed on the principle that the Supreme Power resides in the body of the people”.- Chisholm v Georgia 2 U.S. 419, 457
The United States Constitution requires an oath of allegiance that we have assigned to every officer, from dog catcher, to jurist, to representative, to the president. In so doing we bind those public officials, and ourselves to adhere to the powers and restrictions laid out in the Constitution. The contract and the rule are pointless if both parties avoid and deny the force of law as it was laid out in plain language.
That “the Supreme Power” be the doctrine of this nation, it is only logical that the people constructed the State, and therefore the central government subordinate to the State. In 1776 when the Colonies “dissolve[d] the political bands” with England, they created a unique nation in law by vesting authority in the People who would be the caretakers of their freedom, rights, and liberty. The first act of the Continental Congress was to lay out the doctrine of law, by which all law is to follow the fundamental principal that “Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed”.
In simplest terms, this is a nation based on popular sovereignty. Everyone owes allegiance to the Constitution created by “We the People”. The sovereign, in international law, claims the right to prosecute, to defend, to wage war, and ultimately to control all that is within his/her sphere of influence. As a sovereign, I do not consent to any “statute *** extending beyond those matters which it was within the constitutional power of the legislature to reach.”. - McCullough v. Commonwealth Of Virginia, 172 U.S. 102
While our form of government is unique throughout the world, it is nonetheless a fact of law instituted and defined in our first two documents of Law: The Declaration, and the Constitution. They clearly establish that in our nation, “Sovereignty, is of course, not subject to the law, for it is the author and source of the law, but in our system, while sovereign powers are delegated to 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
To protect and defend the principle function of a nation so fashioned in the matter that “the Supreme Power resides in the body of the people” there must be a method for caretaking. Of course, it ...
1 Comment »
by Nicholas Testaccio
The idiom, “Stupid is as stupid does”, popularized by the film “Forrest Gump” indicates one’s level of ignorance or stupidity. Some definitions grant that it could also indicate one’s level of intelligence but given the fact that the word stupid is emphasized, I am going with the negative.
This is a constitutional Republic as I have noted many times in the past. Yet, we allow the people we send to congress, other public officials, and the media to continually label our nation a democracy. It cannot be a simple mistake because the U.S. Constitution commands that “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government”.
So, is the constant rhetoric about democracy a mistake, a clear violation of the law, or insidious propaganda? Vladimir Lennon is credited with saying that “A lie told often enough becomes the truth”. That particular mode of propaganda has been used quite effectively over the years. For anyone paying attention, we are deluged with it from the same political bent from which it arose. That is to say that it is a tool of the Marxist, elitist, oligarchs, and mainstream media who are all part of the cabal to overthrow liberty. If you question this, refer to the title because I am almost certain that others besides myself see the same picture.
The Founders of this nation were wary and skeptical as to whether we could keep a Republic. They were students of history, and as Patrick Henry conceded, “I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided; and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging of the future but by the past.”. Given the history gone by, and the character of man, both good and evil, Thomas Jefferson lamented “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.”.
It is easy enough to look back at history, and second guess those who lived in some of the most interesting times. We can accuse those who lived in a moment of great importance and question their actions. We can celebrate those who fought for freedom, denounce the evil doers for their wrongs, and learn from the errors that all of mankind makes. Abandoning our history is akin to ignoring that “one lamp by which [our] feet are guided”. That certainly would not be wise for within the dusty pages that comprise our past are the building blocks for a better future.
As astute as the Founders were, they knew that liberty shines brightest when the people, who are for the most part peaceful, have the means to maintain their freedom without the corrosive interference of bureaucrats. Evil doers abound, the murderers, the thieves, the greedy, the power hungry, and the genocidal maniacs do not disappear from the pages of news simply because the law exists to prevent their ambitions. With that in mind, the Framers recognized for the people the tool that they deemed “necessary to the security of a free State”.
It would be simple enough to read the law of the land, and the papers written by those who explained, in detail, what the words meant, and the recognition of the pitfalls that might ensue. Given the predilection of man to be swayed, particularly in today’s world, by silver-tongued viper’s claiming the title of expert, I have little hope that reading every word in the Constitution, and comprehending that it not only must be interpreted by what the Framers understood, it must be enforced as detailed.
I took to writing these articles with the hope that, in their short version, people would take the few minutes needed to read, and gain some understanding of our law. I was prompted to this when I made a statement, years back when debating the application and enforcement of the income tax, that the American people are stupid. I made the claim because the facts are spelled out, and those facts of law are not the same as policies enforced by bureaucrats, and dishonest judges. I was immediately rebutted by another stating that the American people aren’t stupid, they just don’t know. I handed him a stack of papers proving the law as I had claimed, to which he responded, “I haven’t got time to read that shit”, thus validating Forrest Gump’s now famous idiom.
I spend my days reading articles, listening to the opinions of others, and trying to make heads or tails of today’s issues. Sometimes, I am asked to comment on a particularly high-profile case. In many cases, I find that the interpretation does not square with what was opined, ruled, or decreed. I remember the words Paul Simon wrote in “The Boxer”; “Still, a man hears what he wants to hear And disregards the rest…”
How poignant when we consider the rule of law, and the Forty-Two Hundred words of the U.S. Constitution. The document requires that every public official of the federal and State governments, be they elected or appointed, swear an oath to protect and defend. In those Forty-Two Hundred words are delegated authorities, and restrictions that “We the People” have made law. Each word must be given its due force as the Constitution must be read in its entirety in order that the rule of law “[o]ne constructed on the principle that the Supreme Power resides in the body of the people”, be interpreted by “[w]hat *** those who framed and adopted it underst[oo]d [its] terms to designate and include”.
“In expounding the Constitution of the United States, every word must have its due force, and appropriate meaning”, and what could be more important to “the Supreme Power *** of the people” than the ultimate authority “to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections, and repel Invasions”?
John Locke wrote in his Second Treatise “To understand Political Power right, and derive it from its Original, we must consider what State all Men are naturally in, and that is, a State of perfect Freedom to order ...
No Comments »
by Nicholas Testaccio
The most practical way of preparing for our future is to honor our history. How else can we learn from our mistakes, build on our achievements, and pave the way for a better tomorrow?
There is a contingent of society that is destroying the historical record for some injustice that none of us alive have suffered or committed. We are separated by generations from those who laid out the foundation of this nation with triumph and disaster. By trial and error our Forefathers engineered prosperity for any and all who wish to succeed.
It would appear that we are on the path to a civil war. Not one in which one contingent takes up arms against another. Our cities are being burnt while lawlessness is condoned by politicians. This war will be one of genocide. One in which the looters and rioters are told that they may run roughshod over a peaceful, docile, ambivalent populous that does not seem to understand what is taking place right before their eyes.
While most sleep, and hope for the best, there are those who plot, plan, and encourage mayhem. Some of those planners are the people we elect to our legislatures, or appoint to our courts. They take advantage of any situation that they might escalate far beyond its beginning, and then corrupt or distort the facts to foment anger and hatred. Their goal is the takeover of America either by stealth or violent bloodshed. We are being pushed to an actual civil war.
No, ladies and gentlemen, this will not be a war where competent leaders march trained able-bodied men shouldering their “weapons of war” to engage the enemy. This civil war will be akin to some of the horrific genocides of the Twentieth Century. What should come to mind is the slaughter of hundreds of thousands who had been disarmed by government forces.
For about One Hundred days in 1994 it is estimated that as many as One Million Rwandan’s were killed. The Hutu’s, armed with anything they could use, hunted down and slaughtered thousands of Tutsis every day. It all began by the death of a man, a Hutu, the then president of the country. No one knows who did it, but it was the catalyst for a confrontation that had been brewing for decades between two different groups.
Over several decades, here in America, one faction has used everything in its power to increase racial tension. Not unlike Rwanda, one group is seen as “privileged” while the other group as second class. One man was killed by police on a street in Minneapolis. From there rioting and looting ensued across the nation. Several people have been injured, attacks by one group against the other have escalated, and if truth be told, we are not hearing the actual death toll.
If I were a foolish man I would ignore what has taken place in this country over the last few decades. I would use the term “conspiracy theory” to set aside what some may call coincidence. I would applaud, and even elect those who denigrate “bitter clingers” who want to hold onto their guns, and the sovereign and fundamental right to self-defense. I would work to “infringe” on the rights of those who I might someday be set loose to exterminate.
While the many sleep comfortably, peacefully, and perhaps pray that God might suddenly appear and smite the evil entities that infest our world, there are those of us who live in the real. If we choose to stand by and watch our cities destroyed by vandals, and criminals supported by the very people we elect to enforce our rights, we will deserve every bit of suffering cast upon us.
The Supreme Court has recently denied certiorari to ten petitions stemming from the second amendment. This has been done in the wake of the fact that several States now deny their citizens the right to own, and train with weapons “necessary to the security of a free State” as was intended by the Founders. The right that stems from the Duty that is commanded by the Constitution, and if truth be told, it is the bulwark of sovereignty that the Framers intended when writing the contract.
In, what appears to be an exercise in insanity, we do the same thing over and over expecting different results. Virginia is celebrating their recent gun restrictions by seeing Virginia City ban guns on city property. Rhode Island has completely banned “ghost guns” and have imposed very harsh penalties on those in possession. Amid this, the insane in the pro-2nd community will stick to the strategy that the Supreme Court has rejected once again.
This Fourth of July I will gaze at the spectacle of a nation in turmoil. Cities torn apart, burning, looting, and rioting will be the perverse entertainment while I enjoy a beer, hotdog, or hamburger. Perhaps I will enjoy a second beer and maybe a cigar to top off the day, in which Fifty-Six fallible men signed their own death warrants to form a nation “conceived in liberty”.
Perhaps I will lament the time I served my country and ask for what reason did I sacrifice. Maybe after another beer the anger will rise to question why I’ve spent two decades fighting with government entities for the truth, and why I spent the time trying to educate the ignorant, the ambivalent, and the foolish who would rather we destroy ourselves in the flames of war than to admit that we have lost all connection with the men and women who shed their blood and tears for what was once the greatest nation on Earth. The one country that welcomed millions of immigrants to liberty, prosperity, and justice for all.
No Comments »
by Nicholas Testaccio
At a time when people were born to serve kings, American colonists were clashing with British troops, and Thomas Jefferson penned a unique doctrine on the relationship between “Governments … instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed”.
American Militia, “civilians primarily, soldiers on occasion”, mustered on Lexington Green, and engaged British regulars all the way back to Boston.
From the time the Declaration of Independence was made the first law of a new nation, until hostilities ended in 1783, the People fought a grueling and costly war for independence, not only from Britain, but also from the old collective of monarchs.
A new nation, “conceived in liberty”, was about to form under a concept that was unique to all the peoples of the world; “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal…”
The concept of rights is not something unique to our form of government, nor was it a novel idea at the time of the revolution. When Henry I ascended the throne in 1100 A.D., he set to doctrine the Charter of Liberties of King Henry I.
More than one hundred years later, on June 15, 1215, King John was forced to sign the Magna Carta to avert a Civil War when confronted by a host of rebellious barons. Ten weeks later, Pope Innocent III nullified the agreement, and the English countryside was plunged into war.
The history of rights acknowledged, and then revoked is long, and often painted with “the blood of patriots, and tyrants”. While the words in the Declaration may ring as a statement of liberty from birth to death, it is a concept that must be enforced by men and women of courage and fortitude. They must be true to their neighbors, and they must be true in their heart that, above all, freedom is our province, and our responsibility.
Jefferson did not write, nor did the signers of the Declaration recognize “that all men are created equal” and they remain so for the rest of their lives. The concept of equality is a notion of status across a spectrum of laws, abilities, consciousness, determination, and a love of liberty. Obviously, the doctrine laid out in the Declaration can only work when the People understand that freedom does not come lightly. It comes at the cost of diligence and duty. It must be ever protected from the tyrant, the ignorant, the ambivalent, the foolish, and the “useful idiots” that help to destroy a nation.
We are amid, what has been labeled, a pandemic; “an outbreak of a disease that occurs over a wide geographic area and affects an exceptionally high proportion of the population.” Whether or not COVID-19 lives up to its label becomes more and more questionable by the day, we are nonetheless acting as if it has the blessings of the Grim Reaper. We have been forced to shelter in place. Schools are closed, only businesses that have been deemed necessary are open, social gatherings of any type are considered inappropriate, and hoarding has become an issue. Many essentials have become scarce. Chicken is often missing from stores, the price of eggs has doubled, milk products will be next as I have noticed scarcity of some brands. Canned goods are in short supply, and prices have risen. I can see the price of pork products rising as Smithfield has closed three plants, and Tyson recently closed a plant.
Political bantering, and a lack of information has made the situation worse. By this time, every year we could have thousands of deaths from some flu in this nation alone. I have not heard anything at all about a flu problem this year, and certainly the numbers from this dreaded COVID-19 don’t reflect any greater stress on society if we actually count those who died because of the virus, but not with the virus.
I have heard different stories from different doctors. A few, the high profile type that the media loves to use to sell an agenda, claim that “the sky is falling”. Others are saying the opposite, but you will not see them on the mainstream media. Recently, I’ve watched YouTube video’s featuring dissenting views by those who call out Dr. Fauci for being a fraud, a tool of big pharma, and essentially a deep- stater.
Once again, with the help of a dishonest and despicable media, we, the common folk, are in the dark as to what is real, and what is fiction. How are we to overcome when we are given only some facts, and half-truths? More importantly, how are we to survive when we allow government to command us into intolerable positions.
Recently, there have been protests against the lockdown. With typical derision, many in governmental positions, and their tools in the media, these protests have been mocked for one reason or another.
There is nothing to say about the propaganda spewed out by the leftists and the corporate media bent on selling us down the path to socialism other than what more would we expect. What I would focus on is the incredible ignorance regarding protests, and civil disobedience.
Once again I must point to the fact that the Declaration of Independence lays out the relationship between “governments … instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed”, wherein all power stems from the People. Later, after a long and arduous rebellion, the Founders proclaimed that “We the People *** establish Justice *** and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity” and set down the rule of Law under the U.S. Constitution.
The Framers did not simply make lame proclamations to be interpreted to suit public officials, but rather recognized, and institutionalized, the fact that the one true force for liberty and freedom could only be the body of the People exercising the power written into the Constitution. A power so distinct that it was accompanied by statutes defining its organization, armament, and discipline. A power so well established as to have it roots dating ...
No Comments »
by Nicholas Testaccio
“I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided; and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging of the future but by the past.” – Patrick Henry, Richmond, Virginia March 23, 1775
History tells us that men are more likely to sit quietly and suffer rather than to right the wrongs that are cast upon them. They make no allowance for what their docile attempts at reconciliation may have on their posterity. “Not a man lives on the continent but fully believes that a separation must some time or other finally take place, and a generous parent should have said, ‘If there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my child may have peace’; and this single reflection, well applied, is sufficient to awaken every man to duty.” – Thomas Paine
Over the
years, I have been called many derogatory names for my stand on the Second
Amendment. I’ve been called an idiot, a dolt, moron, and even a traitor. On
more than one occasion I’ve been told to go back to my masters. Nope! I’ve not
heard that from anyone who wants to take our guns, but rather supposed
supporters of the Right to Keep and Bear Arms. That group of so-called
patriots, as far as I can tell, know little to nothing about the subject. They
parrot much of the false doctrine promoted by groups such as the NRA, and GOA.
In fact, I was asked to leave a group for speaking about what the Second
Amendment clearly states; “A well regulated Militia, being necessary
to the security of a free State…” It does not go on to say that we mean
only the individual, but in the context of the Law as the Framers knew it to
be, the individual was ultimately responsible for acquiring and maintaining his
“weapons of war”, in order to fulfill his requirement to be armed and trained
in the Lawful Militia.
When I started my journey, the first thing I asked was, “What do those words, "A well regulated Militia" mean?” I was told by members of the NRA that they meant nothing. So, the men who debated, and understood the meaning of the words that they placed in the document, were what? Were the words irrelevant? Did someone say, let’s add some words to confuse people? Was the intent to make the document a twisted wrangle of unexplainable non-sense so the good People would eventually lose their rights?
The Constitution begins with “We the People”. It then goes on to delegate certain limited powers to the federal government and impose duties and restrictions on the States. So that the People are firmly in charge, the Framers clearly placed in our hands the authority to enforce the rule of law. Over the years, the judiciary, and its esquire’s have muddled what the Constitution clearly states. Warnings came from those who opposed the Constitution that the judiciary would usurp what the Framers enshrined, and then take justice from the people and centralize it to, what has become an oligarchy.
In debating
the rule of law, I’ve noted over the years that it comes down to one recurring
fault, the People have lost the concept of a free society in which they are the
ultimate authority. It eludes even the most well read among us. In fact, they
will argue assiduously for their own demise by citing every so-called expert
who knows so little as to refer to this as a democracy wherein the branches of
government should decide what the Constitution says.
Thomas
Jefferson wrote the seminal document on the relationship between the people and
the governments they form in order to protect their rights. To some this means
that we have a body that dictates and enforces the law. In our form of
government, what the Founders did was to create a vehicle for the legitimate
enforcement of a set of rules that We the People have prescribed. The
underlying fact is that government was never given any authority to prosecute
without the overriding consent of the People. We have a Grand Jury that
investigates a complaint in order to determine whether a wrong was committed. If
that wrong can legitimately be established, and if that suit can be rectified
to the satisfaction of the person who has been violated then justice is served.
If the
violation cannot be rectified, and the perpetrator is not readily within the
grasp of a sheriff, or marshal, then the Militia is called forth “to execute
the Laws of the Union”. Once the perpetrator is in custody, a Petit Jury is
empaneled so that the facts, and the law may be examined in order to make a
final determination of whether or not a harm has been inflicted, whether or not
the accused is indeed the perpetrator, and if the facts reconcile the complaint.
In the case
of some supposed crime against the State, in other words if a statute that
originates from some limited authority granted by the People, then the Petit
Jury also has the duty to examine the law, and make the determination on the
constitutionality of the law in question. For it is We the People who are the
author and source of the Law. As Justice Joseph Story wrote in his commentaries
on the Constitution, "It is to be
interpreted, as all other solemn instruments are, by endeavoring to ascertain the
true sense and meaning of all the terms and we are neither to narrow them, nor
to enlarge them, by straining them from their just and natural import, for the
purpose of adding to, or diminishing its powers, or bending them to any
favorite theory or dogma or party. It is the language of the people, to be
judged of according to common sense, and not by mere theoretical reasoning. It
is not an instrument for the mere private interpretation of any particular men.
The people have established it and spoken their will; and their will, thus
promulgated, is to be obeyed as the supreme law."
This is a
Constitutional Federal Republic despite the constant repeating of the term
democracy. It is based on a series of laws that “The Senators and Representatives *** and the Members of the several
State Legislatures, and all executive and ...
No Comments »
Recent Form Posts