Published on Jan 30, 2017
Event Is Coming Soon - Who Owns and Controls the Military-Industrial Complex
We are not only incensed that our elected officials are turning a blind eye to the transnational enemy within our country and around the world, we are disgusted with these warlords, both military and corporate, that send our sons and daughters to wars-for-profit to have their blood spilled for their own families’ profits. As citizens of the world, we are filled with anger when we see men, women, and children slaughtered and displaced so that the few at the top can earn profits from blood and guns. We are sick and tired of wars ad nauseam, from our fathers who were killed in Viet Nam, our neighbors on 9-11, displaced war refugees around the world, not to mention the millions of starving children around the world who could use the money we spend on DARPA and their war tools for clean water, food, and education.
This anger has arisen in us to the point that we had to find out WHO IS IN CHARGE. Unlike many of our politicians, we know that naming our enemy is the first step towards identifying and disarming them.
The AG is the Executives chief legal advisor
From the Website
The Judiciary Act of 1789 created the Office of the Attorney General which evolved over the years into the head of the Department of Justice and chief law enforcement officer of the Federal Government. The Attorney General represents the United States in legal matters generally and gives advice and opinions to the President and to the heads of the executive departments of the Government when so requested. In matters of exceptional gravity or importance the Attorney General appears in person before the Supreme Court. Since the 1870 Act that established the Department of Justice as an executive department of the government of the United States, the Attorney General has guided the world's largest law office and the central agency for enforcement of federal laws.
She does not want to do what her boss wants...goodbye
Now if Trump had tried to get rid of a sitting judge that would be a different matter.
See, there is the Executive, Legislatures and the Judiciary.
Judges take their independence very seriously.
More than 300 years ago, a case arose in England that changed the course of history, especially the role of the judiciary in democratic countries. The abbreviated and best-known name for the case is the Knowles’ Trial. In 1692, Chief Justice Holt and Justice Eyre were summoned before a committee of the English House of Lords to explain their reasons for the decisionthey had rendered. They attended but refused to speak of the reasons for their decision. The response of Chief Justice Holt is reported in part as follows: “I never heard of any such thing demanded of any judge as to give reasons for his judgment. I did think myself not obliged by law to give that answer.”
The judges’ refusal 300 years ago to give evidence was hardly some academic assertion of abstract privileges or immunities. It was a clear refusal to submit to a parliamentary inquiry into a judicial decision that did not meet with the parliamentarians’ approval. This happened in an era when Kings, barons and attorneys general were imprisoned in the Tower of London or beheaded for “crimes” arguably less “treasonous.” Those two judges recognized that their independence and the future independence of all judges would cease to exist if they could be called upon to explain their deliberations to a state- sanctioned inquisitorial tribunal.
The courage of the judges in the Knowles’ Trial led to the Act of Settlement, 1701. By that British statute, the independence of judges to do their job, immune from pressure or outside influence, was enshrined in the law. Up to that point, their selection and tenure depended on the King’s pleasure. Beginning with the Act of Settlement, 1701, judges’ salaries and security of office were guaranteed by law subject only to the requirement that judges hold their offices during good behaviour
[What arethe attributes of judicial independence?].
By the 1830s, these principles of judicial independence had been extended to judges in Britain’s North American colonies, and were later enshrined in the British North America Act – the forerunner of our Constitution – in 1867. The Charter of Rights and Freedoms (1982) guarantees every Canadian charged with a crime the right to receive a fair trial before a court that is independent and impartial
[ Section 11 d) Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Constitution Act, 1982].
Judicial independence is a cornerstone of Canadian democracy. As an institution, the judiciary is independent from all other branches of government, and individual judges are independent not only from government but from each other
[What is the “separationof powers?”].
So let's not get all wound up about this. It is just a re-org of the executive branch of government and not a disregard for the rule of law.
The US system is structured the same as the UK and the same as Canada. This is not an assault on the judiciary but rather the removal of an employee who does not like her new boss.
Next diversion please
Silver66 Rage against the dying of the light
Thanks for your advise. I guess that you just need an old story tonight. >>>>> I remember when my nephew and I decided to have a sleep out, back in the '50's. There was an old shed with a roof and a nice stairway to the upper loft. We planned everything. A warm sleeping bag, lots of chips, pop, a good flashlight, a pillow and a boy scout knife for safety. Everything went well until late in the night and we found that we had not prepared for unseen forces. We heard something coming up the stairs in the dark. We hid under the sleeping bag. Our problem was much larger than what we had prepared for. IT WAS A SKUNK! There was not time to prepare for this new event. There was not a place to run, it was in our pathway. Yes it sprayed everywhere and we could not even find enough air to breathe. My sister did not want us stinkers back in the house and we did not have a gallon of tomato juice to pour on our bodies.
Your quote is true:
"It's a matter of perspective I guess. "
My view of our state:
Things that once were illegal and sinful are now a great source of revenue for the state. Millions of dollars, every month, and they, along with the building dept., are happy. The pot shops are open and there are new ones opening and often. There are many, many homeless on our streets, drug addiction is everywhere, "foot massage" businesses have opened up shops everywhere and we have a huge snowflake college, right here in our midst. (Side note for you only Mr. Fix: I was having some foot problems awhile back and told Linda that I might try out one of these places. I said it would feel good to get a great foot rub. She informed me that I was heading into trouble if I walked into that business, I did not understand the nature of their income).
Back to my view: We are only about a week into the changes coming upon America and the world. Mr. Trump is an expert on pushing the buttons of the blinded world and we have only began to see the marches and results. I have watched the degeneration of the culture from the days of the hippies, the California Dreamers, the college riots and the gay pride invasions of the large cities and other nations. The people have voted and placed their selections into the positions of control and power. Now these same leaders are pushing the buttons of their followers. One must ask: What have I placed within my inner bug out bag? Will a herd of skunks overtake me and my family? Will the nation finally wake up and return to the values of 1950? Will the government return to the concepts of the original signers? Will Mr. Trump be able to quiet the insanity of the majority? Will the religions of the world come to true repentance?
I am not concerned over the daily changes in our state nor the nation. I am not moved! We see a different vision for the future and have made that stand. Let the state continue in corruption, it is not new. He who allows anything to rob his inner peace is one who has been conquered. Let the dead bury the dead. jmo Jim
There is no jurisdiction between two separate languages appearing on one document. This is the guts of their deceptive crime: “English” and “Latin” or “DOG-LATIN” can not exist as one jurisdiction. Reference: Article: 11:147 Chicago Manual of Styles: Sixteenth Edition: Foreign Languages.
The reason why “DOG-LATIN” is used to deceive the public, is because, as a foreign written language, it resembles English text closer than any other written foreign text. It has deceived the best of the best… “EVEN THOUGH YOU ASSUME YOU CAN READ THIS TEXT AS ENGLISH”, Grammatically, its impossible, and this is how they can claim that “their” law is a “presumption”, because it grammatically does not exist.
According to the Blacks Law Dictionary 4th Edition, DOG-LATIN, is the language of the illiterate, it is the: LATIN-ALL-UPPERCASE-TEXT usurped into the English Descriptive text, appearing under the grammatical rules of Descriptive English Text, (ALL UPPERCASE SYMBOLIC TEXT without the hyphens) and not appearing under the true correct grammatical rules of Latin and done in order to deceive the illiterate, being the ignorant masses. “Ignorance is negligence”. It is the hidden secret that destroys the dominion of living man over the land, the sky, the sea and the thing that creep, (SURNAME). (Genesis 1:26) DOG-LATIN is the “Babylonian” language of the VASSAL, being the third party, debtor of the debtor. (Vassal of the Vessel) It is found on the ledger, (TOMB-STONES) and by you being attached to it, renders the presumption of conformation “SIGN” that you have sinned and you are dead. You are no longer the servant of the God of living man, you have become the servant of the underworld, the Gods of the dead Corporation, the servant of the VATICAN, the debtor of the debtor, subject to the Justinian Corpus Juries, (Language of the DEAD). The VATICAN holds the souls of the dead and the DOG-LATIN is the language of the DEAD.
Mr. Fix wrote:
Paid Protesters Hit Airports Nation Wide
Green Lantern, The book that Dr. Jerome shared with me, was written by him, and as of three or four years ago, was not yet named. I think it was a work in progress. I would have to go through several thousand emails on my old MacBook Pro, to see if I could find it, or, maybe I'll just send Dr. Jerome a message, and see if he has an update. Apparently, Dr. Jerome is a college professor, and teaches rhetoric. It's his area of expertise. It was damn good stuff. I think my daughter has it memorized. Personally, I can't remember shit. Edit: I just sent Dr. Jerome a PM. I'll let you know what he comes up with.
The book that Dr. Jerome shared with me, was written by him, and as of three or four years ago, was not yet named.
I think it was a work in progress.
I would have to go through several thousand emails on my old MacBook Pro, to see if I could find it, or, maybe I'll just send Dr. Jerome a message, and see if he has an update.
Apparently, Dr. Jerome is a college professor, and teaches rhetoric. It's his area of expertise.
It was damn good stuff.
I think my daughter has it memorized.
Personally, I can't remember shit.
I just sent Dr. Jerome a PM.
I'll let you know what he comes up with.
Your expertise fits perfectly with our running topic. Feel free to provide input.
DOTS 2017!!! The best year ever.
federal statute 50 U.S. Code 3021 has been circumvented. Should that statued be eliminated due to declaration of a civil war?
Another expert on rhetoric chimes in.. Balanced... Some good things about Donnie, and some things to consider when repeating what he says. The question of "expert" was an interesting point raised by Dr. JErome.
And President Trump is no expert on torture. But keep in mind that President Trump is a Master Persuader who can detect bullshit faster than normal people.
You might even call him an expert at detecting bullshit.
When President Trump presents something as fact, the odds are high that it is hyperbole or just persuasion. You don’t want to assume his facts are literally true, although they are usually emotionally or directionally true.
But if President Trump – The Master Persuader – tells you someone else’s facts are bullshit, you can usually take that to the bank. The man knows bullshit when he sees it. And with his skillset he can also smell it coming from miles away.
On an unrelated topic, when you see President Trump disagreeing with the experts on climate change, you assume he has no credibility. He’s not an expert in the field. But he does know bullshit when he sees it. And I think he
POST HYPNOTIC SUGGESTION. You'll never forget his works are meant to persuade you, not tell you the truth. That's your job.
How has the establishment and running of the National Security Council being circumvented?
What I learned from Little Fix is I gots to know the argument before I can debate it
Dr. Jerome already mailed me a fresh copy of his book, unfortunately, it was to my old email address, which no longer functions. I sent him my new email address, and hopefully, I will have access to his book later today.
You're going to love it.
I really do get that at least theoretically, the United States, Canada, and England, share the same basic principles of law.
As convoluted as it is, the outcomes should be similar, but they are not.
Just a very basic investigation into "Sovereign citizens" shows a profound difference.
Now maybe your Canadian judges are truly independent arbiters of the law, but here in America, they are extraordinarily corrupt political appointees, usually owned lock stock and barrel by the political overlords who appoint them.
Even on a local level, if they're running for election, they still only serve the interests of the town and county who employs them. In other words, they are self-serving psychopaths, who always rule on the side of the jurisdiction that employs them.
They can easily be bought for cash by corporate entities, and since everything is a corporate entity these days, they are simply sold to the highest bidder.
So in actuality, a political appointee such as an Atty. Gen., has no real regard for any written law, they are there to serve the political interests of whoever won the most recent election.
In this particular case, the difference between an Obama appointee, and a Trump appointee, will most likely have a polar opposite agenda to put forward. (Of course, I'm speaking hypothetically).
For example, the job of an Obama appointed attorney general or judge, isn't one of "draining the swamp". Their job is to protect the Swamp creatures, mostly comprised of pedophiles and Satanists from ever experiencing any negative repercussions from their dastardly exploits.
On the other hand, at least hypothetically speaking, if the agenda were suddenly changed to actual law interpretation and enforcement, which has been unknown in this country for decades, a new crew would be required.
From what I gather, in your country, some interpretation of the law seems to be a prerequisite for those who enforce it.
In my country, law-enforcement only serves and protects the establishment. All interpretations are invented out of thin air to serve this purpose, at least that's how it's been in my lifetime.
In your country, the letter of the law actually means something,
In my country, it is meaningless, and if that's a problem, it is regularly rewritten to close any possible loophole that a citizen might use to exploit against the establishment in one's own self defense.
The administrative courts in the United States under Maritime law, administrative law, which is essentially a Satanic Vatican invention, written to deceive, pillage, plunder, and steal from the populace, always favors the state.
We do still have the opportunity to file a cause of action, or essentially, a lawsuit, which can be presented in front of a jury of our peers. Even in such circumstances, the state does not even have to abide by a ruling.
I'll give you an example: The federal case against the Bundys in Oregon. It finally got to a jury trial, and all of the defendants were found innocent of all of the charges.
The judge refused to release of the defendants, since the feds simply filed new charges in another state.
When the defense attorney argued how improper this was, the defense attorney himself was arrested, and now shares a jail cell with the rest of the defendants. Even Pete Santilli who was simply reporting on the events, is still rotting in jail.
The men who murdered one of them in cold blood, while they were trying to get to a safe jurisdiction with the hard evidence to prove their case against the feds, still walk free, with no charges pending. This cold blooded murder was even videotaped, and is publicly available on YouTube, but that doesn't even matter here.
There are literally hundreds of similar cases.
So yes, you can site what the law says to me, but in America, it is ultimately meaningless.
A new Atty. Gen., could conceivably change that, but we will have to wait and see.
The fact that we have jails full of people who have never harmed anyone, points to the insidiousness of our system.
If the rule of law actually does get restored in the United States, there are literally thousands of politicians and political appointees that need to serve hard time for their crimes.
This might be a diversion for you, but it has genuine consequences for most of us who live here.
America is a land of lawlessness. A man who was elected by promising to change that, has his work cut out for him.
To restore law, he legally needs an attorney general willing to enforce it.
Let's see what happens next.
Democrats Hammer "Tyrannical" Trump For "Monday Night Massacre"
“President Trump has commenced a course of conduct that is Nixonian in its design and execution and threatens the long-vaunted independence of the Justice Department," said John Conyers, senior Democratic on the House Judiciary Committee. "If dedicated government officials deem his directives to be unlawful and unconstitutional, he will simply fire them as if government is a reality show."
Terrible title on this video. But, what is best for the refugees?
Fix, you Wrote
That is 100% correct. The AG is the chief legal advisor to the President. Since Trump won the last election he IS the Chief Executive Officer of the United States of America.Now I have not looked into the duties that are given by law to the AG in the USA, but I would assume that somewhere is a clause that says the office can enforce no law that violates a mans rights.
If I recall correctly with your recent speeding tickets the Judge withdrew the case(or found you not guilty)and you were successful in your defense.Sounds to me like the judge upheld the rules of law in your situation. Did they take you to a star chamber out back and give a new charge against you? No you researched the statutory law and the Judge upheld your rights.
Are there corrupt judges, no doubt there are some. It is my opinion that people argue for their rights within the wrong law boundary
I can't comment on the Bundy case as I have not read the court file.
Are very interesting people, I get what they argue but IMO are mis guided. They often claim the law does not apply to them and then use a common law defense.
Canada recently did it census. By Law every citizen must fill out the short form and if selected they must fill out a long form(which is quite intrusive). The Silver66 household was selected for a long form census. I bet you can guess where this is going. I wrote a letter (sent registered mail) to the Chief Statistician of Canada and informed him that I would not be complying and gave my legal reasoning. The day my letter was signed and received by the Chief, a response letter was returned by the second in command telling me that I had to comply and citing how citizens had a duty. As I know my rights and I responded to the Chief Statistician, restated the law and informed him he was welcome to pursue me in a court of law with inherent jurisdiction if he felt he had grounds to compel me to comply to do the long form.I am still waiting to be taken to court. Funny thing , there was a news article and the department official stated that no one had failed to comply with the long form in Canada(cause everything a government official says is true).
P.S. I would love a copy of Dr J's book if you are so inclined to send along
Ron Paul has a 3 pronged solution to the problem of illegal immigration.
A Better Solution Than Trump’s Border Wall
Just one week in office, President Trump is already following through on his pledge to address illegal immigration. His January 25th executive order called for the construction of a wall along the entire length of the US-Mexico border. While he is right to focus on the issue, there are several reasons why his proposed solution will unfortunately not lead us anywhere closer to solving the problem.
First, the wall will not work. Texas already started building a border fence about ten years ago. It divided people from their own property across the border, it deprived people of their land through the use of eminent domain, and in the end the problem of drug and human smuggling was not solved.
Second, the wall will be expensive. The wall is estimated to cost between 12 and 15 billion dollars. You can bet it will be more than that. President Trump has claimed that if the Mexican government doesn’t pay for it, he will impose a 20 percent duty on products imported from Mexico. Who will pay this tax? Ultimately, the American consumer, as the additional costs will be passed on. This will of course hurt the poorest Americans the most.
Third, building a wall ignores the real causes of illegal border crossings into the United States. Though President Trump is right to prioritize the problem of border security, he misses the point on how it can be done effectively and at an actual financial benefit to the country rather than a huge economic drain.
The solution to really addressing the problem of illegal immigration, drug smuggling, and the threat of cross-border terrorism is clear: remove the welfare magnet that attracts so many to cross the border illegally, stop the 25 year US war in the Middle East, and end the drug war that incentivizes smugglers to cross the border.
The various taxpayer-funded programs that benefit illegal immigrants in the United States, such as direct financial transfers, medical benefits, food assistance, and education, cost an estimated $100 billion dollars per year. That is a significant burden on citizens and legal residents. The promise of free money, free food, free education, and free medical care if you cross the border illegally is a powerful incentive for people to do so. It especially makes no sense for the United States government to provide these services to those who are not in the US legally.
Likewise, the 40 year war on drugs has produced no benefit to the American people at a great cost. It is estimated that since President Nixon declared a war on drugs, the US has spent more than a trillion dollars to fight what is a losing battle. That is because just as with the welfare magnet, there is an enormous incentive to smuggle drugs into the United States.
We already know the effect that ending the war on drugs has on illegal smuggling: as more and more US states decriminalize marijuana for medical and recreational uses, marijuana smuggling from Mexico to the US has dropped by 50 percent from 2010.
Finally, the threat of terrorists crossing into the United States from Mexico must be taken seriously, however once again we must soberly consider why they may seek to do us harm. We have been dropping bombs on the Middle East since at least 1990. Last year President Obama dropped more than 26,000 bombs. Thousands of civilians have been killed in US drone attacks. The grand US plan to “remake” the Middle East has produced only misery, bloodshed, and terrorism. Ending this senseless intervention will go a long way toward removing the incentive to attack the United States.
I believe it is important for the United States to have secure borders, but unfortunately President Trump’s plan to build a wall will end up costing a fortune while ignoring the real problem of why people cross the borders illegally. They will keep coming as long as those incentives remain.
Quotes from the article...
The Daily Caller reports: “federal officials have launched an investigation into why the Department of Homeland Security hacked into the Georgia state governmental network, including its election system…
You remember the fear that the election was going to be rigged for Hillary, because Obama had decided to reclassify Georgia’s voting machines as federal property? People were worried that Obama’s power move was a way to hack into the machines, and right before Election Day.
Well, as it turns out, the machines were hacked. By the Department of Homeland Security. This is not a joke.
“Roth notified Kemp his office was officially ‘investigating a series of ten alleged scanning events of the Georgia Secretary of State’s network that may have originated from DHS-affiliated IP addresses.’ A firewall in Georgia’s system thwarted each attempt.”
Ruffian wrote: did accommodating outsiders in Rome make it great or make it fall???? Just what exactly led to the dark ages?
did accommodating outsiders in Rome make it great or make it fall???? Just what exactly led to the dark ages?
You're blaming the outsiders. Blaming others is a refusal to take responsibility for our own actions. Whether it be on a collective national level, or our own lifes.
Any economic system that operates on the basis of coercion, domination, and super exploitation gives rise to resistance. This in turn leads to more force, more military power, having to be deployed to maintain the status quo. However this can only succeed in fomenting further resistance and with it destabilization, which in turn acts as a catalyst for the mass movement of people seeking sanctuary from the chaos that results.
Rome fell because it wanted to own everything. It's material quest resulted in it's weakness.
Multiculturalism has always existed in the world and I can think of many case's where it was peacefully done with corporation. This versus a Soro's like policy of destabilizing a people and forcing people together. That sort of forced multiculturalism is a cute name for war.
The propoganda tells you America was a bunch of Native American's before Columbus arrived-WRONG. They are now translating books where the Celtics were living here among the Native American's teaching them about medicine, and crops. It was the Celtics that gave America the name America. Muslims were here before you were here. Japanese, Chinese, African's, the Norse etc, etc, etc,
But I'll tell you what, let's do a little thought experiment. Let's wipe away all traces of multicultalism in your life.
Throw away all your jazz records, blues records when that disappears so does the Rolling Stones, Pink Floyd, Led Zepplin, your Larry Corryell, and Gato Barberi. Disappear. Michael Jackson, Elvis Presely, The Beatles and BB King disappear.
You will never eat a french fry again because potato's was a result of multiculturalism when the Spanish conquered Peru bringing back to Europe. Corn disappears because the memory of Egyptians teaching Native American's how to plant it disappears, and the many varieties of South American. Probably 100's or 1000's of foods, recipes disappear because most culinary traditions are some form of multiculturalism. Sorry, ITalians, Pasta dies! Pizza, hot dogs, bye, bye. Multicultural food.
Algebra, coffee and thousand of other contributions to your culture by Arabs. Gone!!
We are responsible for the Mexicans that have come here to take our jobs. Not Mexico. We took their land, they didn't give it to us. We introduced welfare and made our people lazy. NOt the Mexican's. We destabilized the Middle East. We joined Britain's appetite to rule the world. Nobody complains when things are going well, but when it comes back to bite us in the ass, we blame everybody else.
We are eternal victims. It's never us. And you'd point out that it was the government that did it, not you.
I guarantee if I took a lie detector test of loyal turdites, you'd find that a majority here at some point voted for somebody that perputated the lies. You know their favorite president. They bought into a system that was a lie from the start. Ok, and probably so did I a long the way.
We the people created our situation and now we have elected a person who is using band-aide therapy to try to reverse 100's of years of bad policies. I'm on the record saying, it doesn't work.
She likes the ban and thinks it is important to prevent the radical ideologues in...