BREAKING: Marine GENERAL- Military Coup Against Obama

[JakeStarkey]

BREAKING: Marine GENERAL- Military Coup Against Obama

No coup exists.

Do we believe North when he raised his hand to tell the truth to Congress then or now?

Simply, we don't. Kelly and North are the enemies of the Constitution.

 

[bodecea]

BREAKING: Marine GENERAL- Military Coup Against Obama

No coup exists.

Do we believe North when he raised his hand to tell the truth to Congress then or now?

Simply, we don't. Kelly and North are the enemies of the Constitution.

Kelly's in it for the money and the ratings.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Wow! Even more proof that the far left has no clue on any of these documents.

Hey, if you want to come out of your parrot cage and make the argument that armed rebellion against the US is legal under the Constitution,

by all means, entertain us.

WOW! the far left is reaching and continues to show they do not understand said documents.

Please show you understand the Constitution first then we can continue.

I know that the Constitution makes armed insurrection a crime.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The Declaration of Independence didn't protect Timothy McVeigh.

 

[Jarlaxle]

My kind are Liberals. who found countries, like this one, and throw revolutions. Your kind throw coups, and create Dark Ages...

I'll take Coups and Dark Ages, thanks. If this country is the idea of what Liberals and Revolutionaries believe in then you all need to be dragged out and executed on General Principles.

Anytime you want to give it a try, pendejo!

 

[The2ndAmendment]

[\

And one does not need to be a lawyer to know that the Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land while the Declaration of Independence is a.....declaration....not a law. Just like Washington's Farewell Speech and the Federalist Papers.....not law but very valuable historical documents.

If the Declaration of Independence carries no legal weight, then the original 13 Colonies are still under the Crown.

Try to think before you speak, and you won't be a LOLiberal stuck in LOLiberaLand.

Oh...so you want to tell us that we didn't have to actually fight a war against Great Britain to gain our independence....the weight of the legality of the Declaration did that for us......idiot.

If we fought a war with Great Britain, and no Declaration of Independence was written (of any sort), then we would still be part of Great Britain, thus the war would have had no purpose, whether we won or lost.

The Declaration of Independence is also preserved in the Ninth Amendment to the United States Constitution. All rights were conferred from the King to the each and every individual American after the Revolution was won. Americans then delegated some of those rights to the States, and eventually others to the Federal Government. However, as the Ninth Amendment reads, they still retain all other rights that are summarized in the Declaration of Independence.

American courts have recognized this (Popular Sovereignty), so what's the issue?

Chief Justice, John Jay, Chisholm v. Georgia:

at the Revolution, the sovereignty devolved on the people, and they are truly the sovereigns of the country, but they are sovereigns without subjects, and have none to govern but themselves

And that act of devolved Sovereignty is legally embodied by the DoI.

Without the DoI, Chisholm v. Georgia is invalidated, as is the entire US Constitution, since the States would have no authority (not be Sovereign) to create the Constitution, as the King of England would still retain all sovereignty.

Btw, what color is the sky in LOLiberaLand?

 

[MikeK]

Traitor North, maybe he is selling weapons to ISIS, he took US taxpayer money & funded Islamic terror in the past. Of course he kept a percentage.

Oliver North is not to be trusted. He is an opportunistic phony who was deeply involved in the Reagan Administration's destabilizing machinations in Central America -- which are directly responsible for the existing refugee crisis. Those chickens are coming home to roost.

 

[bodecea]

If the Declaration of Independence carries no legal weight, then the original 13 Colonies are still under the Crown.

Try to think before you speak, and you won't be a LOLiberal stuck in LOLiberaLand.

Oh...so you want to tell us that we didn't have to actually fight a war against Great Britain to gain our independence....the weight of the legality of the Declaration did that for us......idiot.

If we fought a war with Great Britain, and no Declaration of Independence was written (of any sort), then we would still be part of Great Britain, thus the war would have had no purpose, whether we won or lost.

The Declaration of Independence is also preserved in the Ninth Amendment to the United States Constitution. All rights were conferred from the King to the each and every individual American after the Revolution was won. Americans then delegated some of those rights to the States, and eventually others to the Federal Government. However, as the Ninth Amendment reads, they still retain all other rights that are summarized in the Declaration of Independence.

American courts have recognized this (Popular Sovereignty), so what's the issue?

Chief Justice, John Jay, Chisholm v. Georgia:

at the Revolution, the sovereignty devolved on the people, and they are truly the sovereigns of the country, but they are sovereigns without subjects, and have none to govern but themselves

And that act of devolved Sovereignty is legally embodied by the DoI.

Without the DoI, Chisholm v. Georgia is invalidated, as is the entire US Constitution, since the States would have no authority (not be Sovereign) to create the Constitution, as the King of England would still retain all sovereignty.

Btw, what color is the sky in LOLiberaLand?

The war without a written Declaration could still be won and we'd still be independent....a written Declaration without the war to enforce it upon the British would have been....a piece of paper only.

 

[JakeStarkey]

2dA is fun: his type of govt would allow the states to set their own gun laws.

 

[Wry Catcher]

They're actually advocating for a military coup for no other reason than the president winning reelection in 2012.

Such is the contempt for the rule of law exhibited by the partisan right.

Truly bizarre and pathetic.

Yep, they're all smoke and no fire.

And the far left can not admit that they voted for worse than Bush twice.

Of course these racist, bigoted far left posters are running on their masters far left programming.

I truly and honestly believe you're insane, or a pathological liar. No sane person would even suggest in jest the things you post as a reality. Get a grip, and a therapist.

 

[Lakhota]

I expect Obama's approval rating will be up around 60% by November. Righties love bombing and killing - of non-Christian foreigners.

Obama is keeping the boogeyman away.

 

[Lakhota]

Yep, they're all smoke and no fire.

And the far left can not admit that they voted for worse than Bush twice.

Of course these racist, bigoted far left posters are running on their masters far left programming.

I truly and honestly believe you're insane, or a pathological liar. No sane person would even suggest in jest the things you post as a reality. Get a grip, and a therapist.

I totally agree! That dude (or dudette) has some serious mental problems.

 

[hazlnut]

See the "(RET)" next to his name -- that means irrelevant.

 

[Political Junky]

Traitor North, maybe he is selling weapons to ISIS, he took US taxpayer money & funded Islamic terror in the past. Of course he kept a percentage.

Nevertheless, the Right trots out Oliver North at every opportunity. They like to pretend.

 

[konradv]

Wow! Even more proof that the far left has no clue on any of these documents.

Hey, if you want to come out of your parrot cage and make the argument that armed rebellion against the US is legal under the Constitution,

by all means, entertain us.

WOW! the far left is reaching and continues to show they do not understand said documents.

Please show you understand the Constitution first then we can continue.

It doesn't matter whether you or I understand, but whether the military does. IMO, the overwhelming number do and would react badly to any coup attempt with the perpetrators rather swiftly facing treason trials.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

The war without a written Declaration could still be won and we'd still be independent....a written Declaration without the war to enforce it upon the British would have been....a piece of paper only.

A war fought with no legal embodiment of its success would have been a war only, with no purpose. Everyone from every part of the 13 colonies would have all claimed different reasons for why they fought the revolution, and chaos and war among the 13 states would have ensued.

Law is order, lawlessness is Chaos. The DoI prevented chaos. What if certain parts of New York still wanted to be part of Great Britain for economic reasons? Oh wait, they signed a contract pledging allegiance to the other 12 Colonies and the other parts of New York.

Those who forsake the Law praise the wicked, and those who keep it resist them - Proverbs 28:4

I'm shocked that we've reached a point in US history where certain Americans are actually denying the authority of the DoI.

However, I am glad that you've finally realized that the Constitution would be a piece of paper only if the Second Amendment didn't exist to back it up with force.

 

[konradv]

However, I am glad that you've finally realized that the Constitution would be a piece of paper only if the Second Amendment didn't exist to back it up with force.

Funny you should mention that. Usually conservatives talk about "natural rights" as if they had some "separate/independent/God-given" existence beyond ones ability to enforce them.

 

[JakeStarkey]

DoI has no legal authority.

It is a statement of Independence, which until Congress passed it meant nothing in itself, and after it passage has no intrinsic legal application.

 

[JakeStarkey]

However, I am glad that you've finally realized that the Constitution would be a piece of paper only if the Second Amendment didn't exist to back it up with force.

Funny you should mention that. Usually conservatives talk about "natural rights" as if they had some "separate/independent/God-given" existence beyond ones ability to enforce them.

the second amendment, according to 2dA's understanding of the Constitution, would allow the states to limit gun rights.

 

[Vandalshandle]

I guess that I am somewhat baffled as to why so much effort has gone into Civil Rights legislation over the last 60 years. All of that would seem to be unnecessary, in light of the fact that the D of I constitutes "Law", and clearly stats that "... all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights..."