How to return rule of law competition.

[Josf]

If it is demonstrated well enough that the criminals have taken over at the so called Federal level of so called American government, then there may be a general demand for the return of rule of law so as to pull the plug on the power flowing to those criminals who are now set to run another so called election to replace the current criminal "president" with a new criminal "president," to preside over the criminal federal government for the next 4, or 8, years.

If said demand for a return to rule of law grows to a sufficient level of force, then a number of competitive options for people to invest their time and effort into one, or more, of these competitive options will begin to satisfy, or supply, that demand for a return to rule of law.

Observation: It has been demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt that the criminals have taken over and they keep very good records as to precisely how much they, the criminals, are benefiting from the criminal takeover of the people in America.

Demonstration of said observation in meticulous detail:

U.S. National Debt Clock Real Time

Demonstration of said observation, again in meticulous detail, as said criminal takeover spreads from the Federal level to the local level, as the criminal operation is copied as a franchise, and the franchise invades each locality within the boarders of the place formerly known as The Untied States of America.



Given the demonstrable fact that the criminals actually document their criminal take-over of government from the former federal level on down to the former peaceful, law abiding, city level, those who claim that said criminals are not criminals are aiding and abetting, lending moral support and material support to said criminals in fact, as their crediting, their apologizing for, said criminals constitute said treasonous false statements.

The criminals confess the fact that the criminals have taken over and that is well documented by the criminals who have taken over in fact. The criminals explain, in detail, precisely how they took over, and it is therefore, in that information, a clear path that is marked by which a return to rule of law is mapped out.

1. End the FED

2. End the IRS

3. Bring the Troops home

4. Hold the worst criminals first to account for their crimes and then move toward bringing the lesser criminals to account as investment funds allow.

Number 4 above happens to be necessary in order to accomplish numbers 1, 2, and 3 above.

Number 1 above is required in order to afford to do number 4 above; unless enough people volunteer to work at accomplishing Number 4 above at their own cost; without monetary compensation.

All of that points toward Jury Duty, which has been the form in which rule of law exists for thousands of years in so called Western Civilizations going back to at least ancient Rome and ancient Greece before the Roman Empire demonstrated, once again, how the criminals take over, when the people forget how to hold the criminals to account.

In rule of law, which is formed as trial by jury according to the common laws of free people, an accuser is afforded (at no cost to the accuser) their access to rule of law in the form of an accusation, if the accusation is against someone not part of a corporate entity such as The City, The County, The State, The Federation, or The Church, or the Corporation.

An accuser calls the government locally and states the accusation; an example is a 911 call, and the caller reports a man outside in the yard threating to break into the house and perpetrate unspeakable crimes upon the people inside the home.

What happens when the so called government agents are in the yard shooting innocent people, and the innocent people call 911?



Historically the government agents offered the indisputable fact that they too, those government agents, where, are, and will always be, perpetually, subject to the laws that they claim to be their source of authority.

Here:
A Century of Lawmaking for a New Nation U.S. Congressional Documents and Debates 1774 - 1875

Quote:_______________________________________
5. Freedom of speech and debate in Congress shall not be impeached or questioned in any court or place out of Congress; and the members of Congress shall be protected in their persons from arrests and imprisonments during the time of their going to and from, and attendance on, Congress, except for treason, felony or breach of the peace.
______________________________________________

At this point in explaining competitive methods of returning to rule of law once the criminals takeover government it might help to understand that in every way that defenders defend effectively the criminals will, the criminals MUST, by necessity, counterfeit those defensive methods, and Court is an example by which there is a defensive example according to the rule of law, and there is a counterfeit version of Court in place when the criminals take over.

So victim A calls 911, and victim A is afforded, at no cost to victim A, an officer of government who arrives on the scene to redress the grievance as victim A is defended from the criminal who willfully intends to do unspeakable things to victim A.

What if the criminals pick up the phone when calling 911?

The solution arrives in the form of a more formal Redress of Grievances; and that petition is reported to a Court, and then that Court is duty bound to process, as in due process, that petition whereby the criminals who pick up the phone when calling 911 are named in the petition. The victim, which can be called victim B, reports, by accusation, formally written into a redress of grievance, that named criminal, or criminal conspirators, are posing as the government.

Said redress of grievance is then a test case which tests the viability, the moral authority, of the people operating the Court, to see if the Court is criminal or not criminal according to their own stated laws governing the Court.

If it is a common law Court, then the accusation follows through with the formation of a Grand Jury.

Examples of common law courts, in America, during the federal, perpetual, Union, whereby Congressman offer their words that they too are subject to the same laws that afford them their authority, are here:

RESPUBLICA v. CARLISLE 1 U.S. 35 1778 Justia U.S. Supreme Court Center

U.S. Supreme Court
RESPUBLICA v. CARLISLE, 1 U.S. 35 (1778)
1 U.S. 35 (Dall.)
Respublica v. Abraham Carlisle
Court of Oyer and Terminer, at Philadelphia
September Sessions, 1778

 

[Josf]

Breaking this up slightly.

The September Sessions, 1778, concerned an accusation accusing the former government (British Crown) of turning their coats from voluntary federal Union into involuntary criminal slavery, and how the accusation follows through with common law trial by jury according to the American version as maintained by American volunteers.

Some volunteers volunteered to leave their productive farms where the lives of their whole family depended upon them being there at the farm, and they volunteered to defend everyone from the criminal British invaders. Some volunteered for Jury Duty as Grand Jurists, and some volunteered for duty as Trial Jurists. That case exemplifies how common law works. The accused is presumed to be innocent. The accuser initiates a Grand Jury inquest, where the Grand Jury has the power to investigate the merits of the case, to acquire records, testimony, and that includes any documents written by the accused, and so, by reason, by deduction, said Grand Jurists would have the power to secure documents written by Congressmen at that time, were the accuser to accuse a Congressman of treason, or disturbing the peace.

Example of Common Law in America, also known as the law of the land, exists in this second example:
RESPUBLICA v. CARLISLE 1 U.S. 35 1778 Justia U.S. Supreme Court Center

RESPUBLICA v. SHAFFER
1 U.S. 236 (1788)
U.S. Supreme Court
RESPUBLICA v. SHAFFER, 1 U.S. 236 (1788)
1 U.S. 236 (Dall.)
Respublica v. Shaffer
Court of Oyer and Terminer, at Philadelphia
February Sessions, 1788

That is 10 years after the earlier example. That case brings to light, in part, the meanings behind the words in the Bill of Rights; affording people today their rule of law if people today dare to, care to, honor it, use it, and hold the criminals who take over governments to account, and do so peacefully, according to the laws that the criminals claim to be their source of authority.

The catch 22 here, as there is always a catch when dealing with criminals of even modest intelligence, is such that they have written into their laws that they police themselves.

That seeming Catch 22 is explained here:
Bonding Code

Quote:___________________________________
9.2 - Escalation
Further:
A law enforcement officer will lose his bond if he oppresses a citizen to the point of civil. rebellion when that citizen attempts to obtain redress of grievances (U.S. constitutional 1st so-called amendment).
When a state, by and through its officials and agents, deprives a citizen of all of his remedies by the due process of law and deprives the citizen of the equal protection of the law, the state commits an act of mixed war against the citizen, and, by its behavior, the state declares war on the citizen. The citizen has the right to recognize this act by the publication of a solemn recognition of mixed war. This writing has the same force as the Declaration of Independence. It invokes the citizen's U.S. constitutional 9th and 10th so-called amend guarantees of the right to create an effective remedy where otherwise none exists.
_____________________________________________________

That is precisely how America was formed. Petition, redress of grievance, and instead of remedy, those imposters who take over government attack the very people who FUND said government agents.

The people have tried Redress of Grievances. I was part of a Nation wide effort to do so, those in power ignored the petitions. Every county in America was involved.

The remaining battle, before the already existing Oath Keeper type Militia grows, and grows, while the criminal ranks shrink (because they are running out of FUNDS), is the battle knowable as due process according to the common law, in the form of Grand Jury presentments, whereby those people volunteering to move due process peacefully along, force (by moral authority) prosecutors and sheriffs to assemble common law Grand Juries to begin investigating specific accusations of specific people in government, and why would anyone waste time on the lowest levels of criminals in government when, as the old saying goes, if you cut off the head, then the snake dies.

Or another allegory is to ask which step do you sweep first: the bottom or the top step?

So it is proven, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the criminals have taken over at the federal level, they refuse to police themselves, if they were abiding by the laws that they claim to be their source of authority (they actually don't, but that is another side show event worthy of indictment for treason) then Richard Nixon resigning would have led to a total exposure of all the criminals involved in that so called "scandal" as our moral authority of government would have policed itself based upon that demonstration of crimes by the so called president. That did not happen, just as the recent case where the sheriff hid under his desk in the confrontation between Oath Keepers and Federal (so called federal) troops at the Bundy Ranch in Nevada; which was not going to be another Waco because former government officials, true to their oaths, volunteered, organized, and defended the targeted victims targeted by the criminals who took over the government.

Had the people there known how due process is supposed to work, they would have insisted upon the sheriff (who cowered under his desk), or a new sheriff (who would not cower under his desk) to assemble a Grand Jury to investigate any one of the number of crimes perpetrated by those so called Federal troops obeying criminal orders without question, and then the Grand Jury, made up of randomly selected people in that county, would have all the power of any Supreme Court anywhere in America to assemble all the information they deem necessary (in the true National interest) to afford the accuser every moral authority possible to validate the accusation, so as then to write a presentment, and put the accused on their trial.

One example of one such case today would topple the whole house of cards eventually, as the news would be suppressed by the corporate controlled media, but the news now finds the path of least resistance through ubiquitous interconnectivity known as modern communication or the so called "Internet."

So there you have it, at least one map mapping out, precisely how rule of law has been preserved if only people care enough to known it, and use it.

 

[Carla_Danger]

You should get with PoliticalChic to compare cut n paste postings. I'm thinking you two might be a match made in heaven.

 

[PoliticalChic]

You should get with PoliticalChic to compare cut n paste postings. I'm thinking you two might be a match made in heaven.

You should learn that cut and paste is a method of presenting material, and whining about it is the way cowards attempt to avoid facts therein.

True story.

 

[Carla_Danger]

You should get with PoliticalChic to compare cut n paste postings. I'm thinking you two might be a match made in heaven.

You should learn that cut and paste is a method of presenting material, and whining about it is the way cowards attempt to avoid facts therein.

True story.

Same ol', same ol', and you wouldn't know a fact if one slapped you in the face.

 

[PoliticalChic]

You should get with PoliticalChic to compare cut n paste postings. I'm thinking you two might be a match made in heaven.

You should learn that cut and paste is a method of presenting material, and whining about it is the way cowards attempt to avoid facts therein.

True story.

Same ol', same ol', and you wouldn't know a fact if one slapped you in the face.

That's all ya' got?

I nailed you....revealing how you try to dodge the facts by screaming 'cut and paste.'

 

[I amso IR]

You should get with PoliticalChic to compare cut n paste postings. I'm thinking you two might be a match made in heaven.

You should learn that cut and paste is a method of presenting material, and whining about it is the way cowards attempt to avoid facts therein.

True story.

I am so IR

Interesting post #'s 1 & 2. Also PoliticalChic, in my opinion you are spot on the money. So many folks are far more helpful with what they write than I am. As for Carla_Danger, anyone using an icon such as that cannot, in my opinion, be that smart. Why impeach a puppy? Stupidity!