The Lawful Government and the Constitution Do Not Exist

[Keith Broaders]

In 1787 the people of the states were concerned that if they did not make significant changes in the Articles of Confederation, the government would collapse. They took it upon themselves to call for a Convention to amend the Articles of Confederation. After the people called for the convention, Congress jumped on the bandwagon and supported the plan. 

Once again our government has become dysfunctional and is abusing the rights of the people it was created to protect The People are the ultimate source of the government's authority and it is up to us to hold our government accountable.

Our elected officials must obey the rules as specified in the Constitution or must face criminal prosecution if they refuse honor their oath.

The Union State's Assembly believes that Constitution and the lawful government of the United States no longer exist. When the elected officials abandoned the Constitution with the passage of unconstitutional legislation, the government lost its lawful authority to act in behalf of the people.

Congress is currently nothing more than a collection of lawyers, bankers and thieves that masquerade as public servants. They have no more authority than govern than any other crime syndicate.

We need to arrest all of the impostors who are pretending to represent us and prosecute them for their crimes. 

 

[George Miller]

Been going on for centuries, but accelerating alarmingly.

[James Shelton]

Go to His Advocates.Org   new clip Feb 6

Specialty Conspiracy Facts/Theory

  Posted by Servant Adm.

[George Miller]

From People who learned the HARD way

• SOVEREIGNTY

  Germany's Basic Law ("Grundgesetz") says, "All state authority emanates from the people." The German people are the absolute authority of Germany, not the illegitimate government.

  The German people exercise, by virtue of their Sovereignty, "this Basic Law," not by means of illegitimate authorities. The German people have been declaring "this Basic Law" since May 23, 1949.

  ... at least until they subordinated themselves to unelected fascist bureaucrats in Brussels, which they formerly conquered in a couple of days.

[Mangus Colorado]

Did they have a Constitutional Republic?

[George Miller]

That initiative directly followed the 3rd Reich, so they had to dig out of an even deeper hole than we did.

[George Miller]

We Must Defacto Impeach the Defacto President to Start the Process to Reveal to All the Enemy Within to the Constitution and Remove Him | CDR Kerchner (Ret)'s Blog

http://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2014/02/06/we-must-defacto-impeach...

CDR Charles Kerchner, P.E. (Retired)
Lehigh Valley PA USA
http://www.protectourliberty.org/

[Christopher A. Brown]

Beryl Joan family of the west, good point. The sequence/process is comprehensive and correct.

--"the de-jure Congress adjourned prior to the Civil War and what followed was the Reconstruction Acts. Since 1861 we have not had a de-jure government. We only need to convene and fix the mess."--

Yes, the states need to convene, 38 conventions in 38 states proposing amendments that require retro enforcement of severely in constitutional acts by all three branches of government.

However, your use of the word "WE" is ver constitutional meaning we need to become a "WE". "WE" implies unified. The people are far from unified.

This is the issue I am here for. Unity, and how to create it. To be functional towards conventions in 38 states, our unity needs to be formally based in constitutional intent.

With constitutional intent "WE" can purify our state legislations. Since the civil war we can be certain that a large number of state legislators represent the same infiltration that had overtaken the federal government.

"WE" need to separate from the infiltration. To do that "WE" must test them. "WE" need to get out of the political box created by the infiltration to contain and control us.

Constitutional intent is now mostly, consciously unknown to us. When we see or hear of things unconstitutional, we know something is wrong, but lack the words to perfectly define its unconstitutionality.

There are so many unconstitutional things at the federal level, we will get bogged down trying to even describe them. Particularly since we do not know fundamental constitutional intent in universal, basic terms that cannot be argued against.

This is why starting with something simple like the purpose of freedom of speech is so functional. Yes, on the surface it sounds a bit obscure. But, on the surface we also know that every sincere, sane American can accept that free speech has the purpose of assuring that information vital to survival is shared and understood.

[Rosanna Miller]

OK I am sure this going to sound like a dumb question but in my head it is dumber not to ask it.

If the Constitution is dead why would anybody want to study it?

More importantly why is anybody talking about it like it was alive?

Actually I never knew it was alive. It is a contract with the people that the government will not step outside their chain fence and take our property. It is not living.  It is what it is and protection the government will not ignore or stomp on our God endowed unalienable rights and take what is not theirs.

So again why would we study something that has been throw away. 

I say keep it and ENFORCE it. 

[George Miller]

Not  a dumb question at all:

- To know what some very smart guys thought should be done

'- To understand what we've lost

- To think about how and why we lost it

- As a starting point to where we will go next

 

It is true that it has been disobeyed and case law ruled to death.

[Steve Belttari]

     The fact that we are having discussions on the internet is proof that the 1st Amendment is not dead.  Certain things need to happen for the 10th Amendment to be brought back to life and at this juncture in American history, I don't know if that is the way to go.  I don't think the Constitution should be studied like it is some type of Biblical covenant, compact, contract, etc...  It is more of a blueprint for governing, that is, the people governing themselves through elected representatives.  It is up to the people to enforce the Constitution, but what exactly does this mean?  For many it means that the states as sovereign political entities need to be restored, but can this realistically be accomplished or would it even be desirable to accomplish this.  A better option might be for us to exercise our 9th Amendment right and have our own convention for the purpose of separating ourselves from the socialist-atheist empire and becoming a Theonomy(government based upon religious considerations that has the popular consent of the governed). 

[Mangus Colorado]

In James Madison's Federalist No. 43 he writes "It, moreover, equally enables the general and the State governments to originate the amendment of errors, as they may be pointed out by the experience on one side, or on the other":
Federalist No. 43

In Federalist No. 85, Alexander Hamilton writes "We may safely rely on the disposition of the State legislatures to erect barriers against the encroachments of the national authority":
Federalist No. 85

http://articlevprojecttorestoreliberty.com/article-v-library.html

[James Shelton]

Was't it Hamilton who sold us out to the Banksters?