Free Country News: Feds raid Texas secessionist meeting

[Dana7360]

"The pretext of the raid was that two individuals from the group had reportedly sent out “simulated court documents” — summonses for a judge and a banker to appear before the Republic of Texas to discuss the matter of a foreclosure.

These “simulated documents” were rejected and the authorities decided to react with a “show of force” — twenty officers and an extremely broad search warrant."

Ah, do be careful when attempting to overthrow the government, it tends to overthrow you, off the nearest bridge. And be careful who you associate with, they may be the wrong kinds since fringe movements like this are full of nutters.

There are dangerous fringe groups out there, this does not appear to be one of them and it does present the image of overkill on the part of Law Enforcement.
Given that I'd like to get more from the side of the raiders and why they determined this style, level of raid was necessary, there could be other unreported aspects here that justifies what Law Enforcement did.
By law if someone is not advocating the use of force or violence to overthrow the Federal government, any local, county or state government he/she/they are withing their rights as protected by the First Amendment however if they are participating in other actions that are illegal then it's a whole nother story.
No one was arrested so this has all the appearances of an intimidation tactic which would constitute a violation of their Civil Rights. Personally I believe (I have a law enforcement background) those who ordered and orchestrated the raid have some explaining to do.

The benefit of the doubt, rightly or wrongly, tends to go to law enforcement here. You guys just don't like it when the shoe is on the other foot. Had this been the Communists you'd be mad because they all weren't still in jail...

The police did it all legally. They went to court and obtained search warrants. That is a real court and not some fake made up conservative court.

What these conservatives don't realize is that America already fought a war when states wanted to leave the union. Those states lost the war. It's been around 150 years and these stupid conservatives are still fighting that stupid war.

Personally, I have no problem with Texas leaving the union. However the US government will have to be paid proper compensation for all US government land, buildings and infrastructure that are in Texas. They can't just keep US military bases. They need to pay for them. They just can't keep all the NASA facilities, they need to pay for them. If they want to keep those federally funded interstate freeways, they need to pay for them.

If they want to leave the union fine, I couldn't be happier to get people like ted cruz out of our congress. But if they want to keep federal US government property they need to pay for it.

 

[Dana7360]

So they aren't even allowed to peacefully assemble to discuss a peaceful exit from the Union?

They are, but it brings out the nutters. obviously, and there's really no such thing as a peaceful exist. We fought a bloody terrible civil war to keep the thing together. There are no plans to split it apart now and doing so tends to draw the eye of the government.

The thing is they weren't just discussing.

They were sending out fraudulent court documents to public officials to show up in their fraudulent courts that have absolutely no authority to do anything in America.

There's a huge difference between talking and actually taking action. Those people took action and their actions are probably illegal. At the very least those actions are worthless since they aren't recognized as any sort of judicial or government authority.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Let him them have their little own Republic reservation, like the Indians, but still subject to federal jurisdiction.

 

[OKTexas]

". . . in TX you can't have your property seized, like cell phones or be fingerprinted or photographed except subsequent to arrest." Of course such can be taken then returned without arrest

Sure if done so on the spot, you can't download the contents without a warrant, and that warrant has to specify exactly what they are looking for. Tell me, how do they get a warrant for all the devices of 60+ unknown individuals, they had no advanced information of who would be attending the meeting.

 

[Ringel05]

Wrong, it is only illegal if the threat of armed insurrection, use of violence is promoted. Now if I refuse to pay my taxes, Forcibly deny or use orther violence against legal representatives of the government with appropriate legal "warrant" etc then I can be prosecuted for that but you cannot be prosecuted for simply declaring your property a sovereign state.

Hold on for a second...are you saying that by declaring themselves the "legitimate" government of Texas, and declaring Texas a sovereign nation unto itself, and declaring the United States an illegitimate occupying force, and by holding governmental functions and attempting to exercise sovereignty....that they're not engaging in rebellion?

Da fuk?

I'm talking law, and what the law says. Doesn't mean there aren't other ways the courts can't come after them but no, as long as they remain within the confines of written law there's nothing to legally go after them for. That's how a lot of these "organizations" get away with what they claim.
If they continue to pay their taxes, abide by legal mandates, etc they are not "technically" in rebellion.

 

[JakeStarkey]

". . . in TX you can't have your property seized, like cell phones or be fingerprinted or photographed except subsequent to arrest." Of course such can be taken then returned without arrest

Sure if done so on the spot, you can't download the contents without a warrant, and that warrant has to specify exactly what they are looking for. Tell me, how do they get a warrant for all the devices of 60+ unknown individuals, they had no advanced information of who would be attending the meeting.

Sure, they can, you show you do not know how the law works.

 

[SwimExpert]

Personally, I have no problem with Texas leaving the union. However the US government will have to be paid proper compensation for all US government land, buildings and infrastructure that are in Texas. They can't just keep US military bases. They need to pay for them. They just can't keep all the NASA facilities, they need to pay for them. If they want to keep those federally funded interstate freeways, they need to pay for them.

I would say that what they really need to do is to pay the government that state's portion of the public debt, being an amount proportionate to the proportion of the US population comprising the state. Never bothered to consider the US evacuating military facilities. After all, we have military bases in other countries.

By my calculations, Texas will need to pony up $1,659,369,165,360 ($1.7 trillion) to cover their share.

 

[bripat9643]

Using force to prevent secession is like an abusive boyfriend who ties up his girlfriend who decides to leave him.

What force? Oh right, there wasn't any.

OH, right. The Civil War wasn't force, just a friendly pursueder.

 

[bripat9643]

Using force to prevent secession is like an abusive boyfriend who ties up his girlfriend who decides to leave him.

Not really, but nice try. There's a lot more to it legally and the argument still rages as whether or not any state or group of states have the constitutional authority to separate from the Union.

True, government boot-lickers will maintain secession is illegal until their last breath. That doesn't mean the truth isn't fairly obvious to any rational person.

 

[bripat9643]

Patriots and freedom lovers are the biggest threat to totalitarian dictators such as Obama. This is very disturbing but not at all surprising.

Do you even hear yourself? Are you seriously this stupid. This is a group of people who believe that the United States is an illegitimate occupying force and pay their loyalty to a defunct country from nearly two centuries ago. And you call them patriots?

In other words, they know the facts.

 

[bripat9643]

Anyone can discuss secession.

But if two who are associated with a group have sent fictitious summons out to legal office holders, the LEO have the right to identify anyone found at such a meeting.

No private association under law exists to protect the identify of possible conspirators.

Is there a law against issuing a fictitious summons?

 

[SwimExpert]

I'm talking law, and what the law says. Doesn't mean there aren't other ways the courts can't come after them but no, as long as they remain within the confines of written law there's nothing to legally go after them for. That's how a lot of these "organizations" get away with what they claim.
If they continue to pay their taxes, abide by legal mandates, etc they are not "technically" in rebellion.

-They declare the power to coin money (that power belongs to Congress per the constitution).
-They attempt to exercise sovereignty by convening an alternative government.
-They attempt to execute court summons.
-They attempt to hold bankruptcy proceedings (that power belongs to the federal government, per the constitution).

All this is within the "confines" of written law? None of this is an act of rebellion? You really mean to tell me that the power of the government to lay down rebellions doesn't apply as long as it's a "peaceful" rebellion? Or as long as the government doesn't lose money?

 

[OKTexas]

". . . in TX you can't have your property seized, like cell phones or be fingerprinted or photographed except subsequent to arrest." Of course such can be taken then returned without arrest

Sure if done so on the spot, you can't download the contents without a warrant, and that warrant has to specify exactly what they are looking for. Tell me, how do they get a warrant for all the devices of 60+ unknown individuals, they had no advanced information of who would be attending the meeting.

Sure, they can, you show you do not know how the law works.

I know how the fourth amendment works and how courts have disallowed discovery gathered by such broad, non-specific warrants.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Using force to prevent secession is like an abusive boyfriend who ties up his girlfriend who decides to leave him.

Not really, but nice try. There's a lot more to it legally and the argument still rages as whether or not any state or group of states have the constitutional authority to separate from the Union.

LOL! The Constitution clearly provides for the right to such... and it is there that we can know that the Constitution is IRRELEVANT to the contest of such.

 

[bripat9643]

By law if someone is not advocating the use of force or violence to overthrow the Federal government, any local, county or state government he/she/they are withing their rights as protected by the First Amendment however if they are participating in other actions that are illegal then it's a whole nother story.

This is a group that sees the United States as an illegitimate government over Texas, and that they are the rightful government exercising sovereignty over the land. The meeting raided was what they call their Congress.

I can claim my property is a country unto itself and claim it's so because I have never sworn allegiance to the United States (I have) or the locality, county and state it resides in. Doesn't make my claim legal.

When you attempt or portend to usurp the sovereignty of the land away from the United States, you are committing an act of rebellion against the sovereignty of the nation.

Secession is not "usurping the sovereignty of the land." States have the right to secede. Nothing in the Constitution forbids it.

This "group" contends to be the legitimate government of a country they call the Republic of Texas, which they claim is the same Republic of Texas that became defunct in the 19th century. They have a President, a Congress, and a judiciary. They attempt to exercise sovereign power (this raid was initiated after they attempted to hold bankruptcy proceedings and attempted to summon someone, who then took the fraudulent court documents to police). As their website says:

There is no need for the republic of Texas to seced from the United States. We never "ceded" the land of Texas to them or to anyone else.

Proclamation

Of course they are not the legitimate government of Texas, but that's a separate issue. They made no attempt to "exercise sovereign power." They sent no police or armed thugs to impose their proclamations. Their documents had no legal force. That's about the extent of their so-called "crime," and they weren't prosecuted for anything.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

I'm talking law, and what the law says. Doesn't mean there aren't other ways the courts can't come after them but no, as long as they remain within the confines of written law there's nothing to legally go after them for. That's how a lot of these "organizations" get away with what they claim.
If they continue to pay their taxes, abide by legal mandates, etc they are not "technically" in rebellion.

-They declare the power to coin money (that power belongs to Congress per the constitution).
-They attempt to exercise sovereignty by convening an alternative government.
-They attempt to execute court summons.
-They attempt to hold bankruptcy proceedings (that power belongs to the federal government, per the constitution).

All this is within the "confines" of written law? None of this is an act of rebellion? You really mean to tell me that the power of the government to lay down rebellions doesn't apply as long as it's a "peaceful" rebellion? Or as long as the government doesn't lose money?

LOL!

SO WHAT?

is their coin worth anything? No...

Every American is a free sovereign.

I execute court summons' all the time... and sooner or later, someone will show up.

LOL! Bankruptcy proceeding?

Again... SO FUCKIN' WHAT?

It's MEANINGLESS... It's no different than two sexual deviant males, pretending to be married to one another. It doesn't change anything.

Who gives a dam', except and until they start demanding that the LAW must be changed and they find sufficient illicil means to change such. At THAT point... they bring war to the US, to shut that nonsense down.

 

[Ringel05]

Using force to prevent secession is like an abusive boyfriend who ties up his girlfriend who decides to leave him.

Not really, but nice try. There's a lot more to it legally and the argument still rages as whether or not any state or group of states have the constitutional authority to separate from the Union.

True, government boot-lickers will maintain secession is illegal until their last breath. That doesn't mean the truth isn't fairly obvious to any rational person.

Once again the debate still rages, you have your position based on what you believe, they have their position based on what they believe. I have no intention or desire to debate the pros and cons, facts and myths surrounding the issue, we're talking about whether the raid was legal or not, what was the basis, and the actual laws surrounding this particular incident. Besides, based on that groups claim, they're not secessionists, they claim Texas was never legally ceded to the US, basically a argument based in semantics.

 

[aaronleland]

Anyone can discuss secession.

But if two who are associated with a group have sent fictitious summons out to legal office holders, the LEO have the right to identify anyone found at such a meeting.

No private association under law exists to protect the identify of possible conspirators.

Is there a law against issuing a fictitious summons?

Is there a law against forging government documents? Yeah. Retard.

 

[OKTexas]

I'm talking law, and what the law says. Doesn't mean there aren't other ways the courts can't come after them but no, as long as they remain within the confines of written law there's nothing to legally go after them for. That's how a lot of these "organizations" get away with what they claim.
If they continue to pay their taxes, abide by legal mandates, etc they are not "technically" in rebellion.

-They declare the power to coin money (that power belongs to Congress per the constitution).
-They attempt to exercise sovereignty by convening an alternative government.
-They attempt to execute court summons.
-They attempt to hold bankruptcy proceedings (that power belongs to the federal government, per the constitution).

All this is within the "confines" of written law? None of this is an act of rebellion? You really mean to tell me that the power of the government to lay down rebellions doesn't apply as long as it's a "peaceful" rebellion? Or as long as the government doesn't lose money?

Keep talking, you're proving how ignorant you really are. Here's a hint on how you might resolve some of your ignorance, Article 1, Section 10, Clause 1.

 

[JakeStarkey]

You are not the authority, OKTexas, on constitutional law. You can have an opinion,nothing more, and your opinion is not warrant to violate the law.