Monday, February 26, 2018

The Parkland Shooting. More Questions!

I want to see pictures of funerals!

I want to see videos of funerals!

I want to see Obituaries!

I have seen as much of these as what I have seen with Sandy Hook! 

Where is it all? 

Where is the news coverage of weeping families at burials?

Anyone with anything can you link it here?


Parkland teacher: ‘Shooter was in full metal garb, helmet, face mask, bulletproof armor, shooting a rifle I’ve never seen before’

According to an eyewitness, Cruz arrived at the school in a small, gold-colored vehicle. He was wearing a maroon shirt, black pants, and a black hat and carried a black duffel bag and backpack. The eyewitness watched as Cruz walked towards one of the school buildings. Moments later gunshots were heard, and the eyewitness called a “Code Red.” (Breitbart)
https://fellowshipoftheminds.com/2018/02/26/parkland-teacher-shooter-was-in-full-metal-garb-helmet-face-mask-bulletproof-armor-shooting-a-rifle-i-never-seen-before/
In the video below, Lippel told ABC’s Good Morning America what happened next (1:18):
Someone put the video on YouTube (don’t expect this to stay on YouTube for long):
“And then I suddenly saw the shooter… standing in the hallway, actively shooting down the hallway. Just a barrage of bullets. And I’m staring at him, thinking, ‘Why is the police here?’ This is strange ’cause he’s in full metal garb — helmet, face mask, bullet-proof armor, shooting this rifle that I’ve never seen before.
https://youtu.be/cPvYxTa1ph4

Recall also the testimony of Alexa Miednik, who said she was walking with Nikolas Cruz after she had heard shots being fired, and told Cruz she was glad “it wasn’t him” who was doing the shooting.

Second Shooter Eyewitness Testimony CENSORE
https://youtu.be/1JyAUrgsPxA
So we are to believe that in the space of 2 minutes 33 seconds, Nikolas Cruz managed to:
  • Walk from the curb where the Uber driver had dropped him off, to the east stairwell.
  • Put on a full metal garb of helmet, face mask, and bullet-proof armor, and began shooting.
If you believe that, then you must also believe in the Easter Bunny.

Sunday, February 25, 2018

SEDM and Family Guardian


By Anna Von Reitz

Beginning in 2001 a quiet endeavor began--- and I suppose that it can only be compared to compiling a virtual arsenal of paperwork and publishing it on the internet--that has grown into SEDM and Family Guardian and related websites:
 
All these websites are sponsored and maintained by the same Mom and Pop Christian Ministry, and they provide an almost unbelievable treasure trouve of forms, explanations, and processes. A first visit can be totally overwhelming and for that reason some people turn back, throw up their hands, and run screaming into the bushes. That would be a mistake.

This vast compendium of information is actually well-ordered once you learn their system, and there are abundant connections provided to related forms. You can also, for a modest fee, join their membership organization and get additional help and guidance.

I first became aware of SEDM/Family Guardian in the early 2000's when it was still a somewhat fledgling effort. When I checked back circa 2008 it has mushroomed into a mega Data Base. When I checked back in 2015 it had undergone additional mammoth expansions and improvements and it is today the single largest compendium of court-evidence-quality legal and administrative paperwork available for free (or for a very modest cost) on the internet.

The Founders, like most people, cut their teeth and got involved because of attacks that the "federal government" made on them. Out of their own bitter experience, they resolved to take action and to help others defend themselves. The SEDM and Family Guardian websites are the result.

Perhaps because of this beginning and the desire to help others who are enmeshed in struggles with the Territorial and Municipal Court Systems, the focus at SEDM and Family Guardian is on helping people who are already trapped in court battles fend off or break free from the clutches of these foreign courts--- in other words, on defensive actions one can take to forestall, nullify, challenge, and otherwise overcome the claims and predatory actions of these foreign courts on the court's own turf. 
 
Their secondary (and corollary to my own) focus is on helping people re-establish their birthright political status and deal with the Territorial and Municipal Government in the day to day exercise of their fundamental rights.

This is a somewhat different mission overall than the one I have engaged in, which is to rescue and remove the 90% of Americans who should never be in front of these foreign courts to begin with---and to restore the American Common Law Courts we are owed, but it is a complimentary effort.

Whether defending against these foreign courts or restoring the proper court venue and political status of the American People, both efforts dove-tail together and are vitally necessary.

I am being barraged daily with requests for individual help from people already engaged in court cases--- child custody, foreclosures, D.U.I.s, right to travel, immigration---you name it, and I have received requests for help, but the fact is that I and the other members of The Living Law Firm are already fully engaged in prosecuting the large scale international issues for everyone's sake; we can't possibly catch the Arsonists if we stop to fight the brush fires.
We wish we could help everyone, but we can't, so we try to get the word out and direct people to groups that already have a solid established record of providing the kind of help people need to hold their own once they are entrapped in a foreign court case. 
 
SEDM and Family Guardian are tried and true.

We also recommend Mark Emery's Lighthouse Law Club for those who already have a basic knowledge of what we are up against and want to take part in the quest for relief, and the Michigan General Jural Assembly for help getting your local county jural assembly up and running. 
 
I am often very humbled by the efforts that Americans have already made and the years of dedication they have sacrificed simply to help their countrymen. There is no better or more shining example of this determined and unselfish commitment than you will see for yourself upon visiting the SEDM and Family Guardian websites.

 ----------------------------
See this article and over 800 others on Anna's website here: www.annavonreitz.com

End of the Month Review - February 2018


By Anna Von Reitz

I am sitting here looking at my desk in what has been dubbed "The Toad Hole" and the piles of work in danger of sliding off into the Oblivion Beyond....what a month this has been.  I get tired just thinking about it.

Six major international court suits in process....

Over forty research groups reporting almost daily....

Three banks under development....

Fourteen diplomatic corps engaged....

About a tenth of all counties now up and in the process of assembling....

And only God knows how many Americans taking their own action to correct their political status records and reclaim their names and estates.....

In the midst of all this my almost-daily dispatches to my Reader's worldwide seem like The Calm Moment in the Day....breathe, breathe....

As a result of all this activity and an emergency appendectomy for one of the Living Law Firm members our always strained resources are at a breaking point.  All that has been accomplished so far has been done entirely by volunteers.  We don't have a single paid staff member.

Think about that. 

Nobody who is working on all this full time is getting a salary. And many of us are dipping into our retirement resources and other funds to carry on.  Apparently some people think I must be getting rich off my book sales or that major companies must be supporting this work and wanted me to publish my profits.  I laughed.

I have been at this over forty years and have yet to see a profit.  Every bit of profit is always whisked away into the thoroughly immense effort to restore our lawful government, and as the income streams increase, so does the scope of the effort expand.

We now have Asset Recovery Teams all over the world, Archivists preserving and organizing and scanning precious historical documents, Paralegals combing the General Session Laws of the State trust organizations, Historical Research Groups pouring through libraries all over this country, foreign governments recognizing that what we have said is true and reaching out to us to establish diplomatic relations, former Bar Attorneys undergoing the equivalent of de-programming, other non-Bar lawyers fighting the fight in courts from Rome to Philadelphia, three absolutely huge international trade banks under construction, nine planning and implementation committees--- and all this is being done without a payroll. 

A most, we are able to defray expenses for travel, supplies, court fees, light bills, and an occasional emergency "grant" when someone's car or water heater blows up, or sudden medical problem lays a worker low. 

People ask me--- The United States of America (unincorporated) is the richest business entity on the planet--- how come you are doing this all with volunteers and on Cookie Jar donations?  

I roll my eyes toward Heaven. 

Everyone knows or is finding out that The United States of America (unincorporated) is the Priority Creditor of all the Territorial and Municipal Governments and their franchise corporations worldwide.  Yes, it's true. All these bankrupt corporations were formed under our delegated powers, and because of the Great Fraud and Breaches of Trust involved, they are all forfeit.

We are in position to rule the entire planet, howbeit, a position we never sought and never planned for. Their debts are our credits and their debts are insurmountable. So here we are, the carpenters and housewives and Great-Grandmas scrabbling around dealing with a situation they could never expect in a hundred million years, and our disappointed Debtors are still holding the purse-strings to our assets and our credits.

You see, after 150 years of silence, they figured that the state republics and the people who once inhabited them were never coming back "from over the sea" where they shanghaied us.  They thought that they could simply charge all their debts against our undefended ACCOUNTS, and at the end of the day, make a claim of abandonment on our assets to pay their debts. That is, we became the Priority Creditors of the whole world precisely because they thought we would never figure it out and never show up and claim our assets.

But we did.

This situation will change and get resolved, as it has to; our credit will be freed up.  Facts will be faced and assets will be returned, debts discharged, debts forgiven, accounts cleared---but until they are, it's the chickens and a couple old sheepdogs and all of you manning the barricades in this "war" of paper.  We need every penny and peso we can gather together to support our guys in the field --- none of them are getting paid, but at least we can try to reimburse their out of pocket expenses.

I remain your faithful Paymaster for all this activity and ask only that you send whatever you can reasonably send in support.  As always, I can receive checks and money orders addressed to: Anna Maria Riezinger, c/o Box 520994, Big Lake, Alaska 99652, and donations made via PayPal at avannavon@gmail.com 

 ----------------------------
See this article and over 800 others on Anna's website here: www.annavonreitz.com

What Isn't There and Why It Is Important


By Anna Von Reitz

In seeking the historical truth it is necessary to not only look at what is present, but also what isn't there ---that should be.

I have pointed out that what we call "The American Civil War" was never actually a war, but was an illegal commercial mercenary action carried out on our shores by the Hired Help.

How can I prove this?  There is no formal Declaration of War and no Peace Treaty ending the so-called civil war. 

It was a "conflict" like the Vietnam "Conflict".

In the same way I can prove that the bulk of the Reconstruction Acts remain in effect for the Territorial United States Government, by the absence of any wholesale repeal of those acts.

And it is the same way with The Articles of Confederation formed in 1781.

We have all been fed this "explanation" that the Constitutions superseded the Articles of Confederation, but this is not so and is merely a convenient assumption, because again--- there is no action ending or repealing The Articles of Confederation recorded anywhere. 

If they weren't repealed, they were obviously not superseded.  

Instead, the "perpetual Union of States" these Articles of Confederation created survived the adoption of the constitutions just fine, and were in fact included as part of the process as parties to The Constitution for the united States of America. 

"States of America" was and is the doing-business-as-name of the Union of States created by The Articles of Confederation.  You can now see that they were the parties holding the National level Constitution in the federal government.  (Read my monograph, America: Some Assembly Required to see how the actual structure worked.)

Some break-away members of this Confederation attempted to dissolve the "perpetual Union" established by The Articles of Confederation  by forming The Confederate States of America, but they lacked the unanimous support required to do so. 

It would be tempting to assume that fighting broke out among the member states of the Confederation as a result of this schism, but because Abraham Lincoln was a Bar Member, we can be sure that that is not the case, either.

The Titles of Nobility Amendment made part of The Constitution for the united States of America in 1819 precluded Lincoln from holding any office related to the States of America.  He could only act as President of the foreign companies providing Territorial and Municipal government services-- that is, the British United States of America (Company) and the Holy Roman Empire's United States (Company).

Thus what you are really witnessing as "The American Civil War" was an internal federal government cat-fight among some members of the States of America who broke away and attempted to form a new union of southern states doing business as The Confederate States of America against the British Territorial franchise and its ally the Holy Roman Empire's Municipal franchise.

The end result is that these foreign governmental services providers "won" their contest against The Confederate States of America, but could never claim any victory over the States of America represented by all the people and states that remained loyal to the original Union of States formed under The Articles of Confederation.

This then gives rise to the peculiar claim made by the Territorial and Municipal United States Governments that our National Government has been in "abeyance" for 150 years, and which has been their excuse for secretively usurping and preying upon the American states and people. 

Why have you never heard that your government was thought to be in abeyance?   Why have you never known that Abraham Lincoln could not possibly function as the President of the united States of America?  Why were you always given the "impression" that The Articles of Confederation simply disappeared after the Constitutional Conventions? 

Well, now you know.  It's because of what isn't there in the public records, what has been deliberately obfuscated and hidden and destroyed and "explained away" by the foreign Hired Help, which has helped itself to our natural resources and controlled and misdirected our government, and eaten out the substance of our labor, and waged surreptitious "war" against their employers, and illegally conscripted our young people to fight in wars for profit, and generally speaking, has operated as a rogue and criminal entity for six generations---and has done so under conditions of fraud, deceit, breach of trust, and violation of commercial contract.

This secretive and self-interested commandeering of our lawfully established government by the British Monarchs and the Holy See and their misuse of our delegated authority has meant that America has been their store front, their puppet, and via this deceit we have been blamed for their misdeeds and saddled with their debts and oppressed by their tax collectors.

This is why James Clinton Belcher has issued the Declarations and Proclamations ending any presumed "abeyance" of our government, acting as the Hereditary Head of State for The United States of America (unincorporated)---which is our sovereign level government in international jurisdictions.

It remains for us all to take action to fully restore the local county jural assemblies owed to our actual states, to assemble our lawful state conventions, and to convene a Continental Congress to address these matters. The foxes have been guarding our hen house for six generations. Nobody has been minding the store, though it has appeared otherwise. The facts of the matter are now set before us and the international community has been fully informed.

 ----------------------------
See this article and over 800 others on Anna's website here: www.annavonreitz.com

Expert Asks Questions about Florida Shooting





If youtube deletes this video I have a copy on nesara.news they can't touch!

http://www.nesara.news/index.php/expert-asks-questions-about-florida






PUTIN JUST EXPOSED THE PLOT TO DESTROY AMERICA

When Broward County Sheriff Scott Israel Was Accused of Corruption, He Responded: 'Lions Don't Care About the Opinions of Sheep'



Broward County Sheriff Scott Israel—the man whose agency failed to prevent the Parkland massacre despite having received a tip last November that Nikolas Cruz was plotting a mass shooting—has been accused of public corruption.

Two years ago, the Sun Sentinel reported that Israel was rewarding top political supporters by giving them and their family members cushy jobs doing public relations and community outreach for the Broward County Sheriff's Office. One such position, outreach manager, paid out a salary of $78,489. The person who got that job was the husband of Israel's campaign manager.

Israel had been a Republican but ran for office as a Democrat. He was first elected sheriff in 2012, then re-elected in 2016. According to the Sun Sentinel:
The outreach workers, who mainly attend community events, are in addition to political activists and others Israel hired into community affairs roles, writing and designing printed pieces about the agency, and sharing it on social media. The employee log shows six hired into community affairs roles, their salaries totaling $388,729.
Israel's opponents say he's built a publicly funded political machine, paying back supporters with jobs and using them to keep him in office. They say the money could be better spent, particularly after the sheriff complained about not having enough funding to secure the county courthouse, where a murder suspect recently escaped.

Asked about the allegations, Israel responded, "What have I done differently than Don Shula or Abraham Lincoln or Martin Luther King, Gandhi?"

He also said, "Lions don't care about the opinions of sheep." That's a paraphrase of a quote from the Game of Thrones character Tywin Lannister, a villainous public administrator known for promoting his family's interests ahead of the government's or the people's.

Were the employees hired to work at the Sheriff's Office competent? It certainly seems like a relevant question now that we know the authorities were forewarned about the dangers posed by Cruz. The office received at least 18 calls about Cruz's disturbing behavior and possession of weapons from 2008 to 2017. BuzzFeed has obtained records related to those calls. The most recent one, made on November 30, 2017, described Cruz as a "school shooter in the making." Broward County referred the matter to the Palm Beach Sheriff's Office but took no further action—even though a relative of Cruz had warned Broward County about Cruz's stash of weapons just three days before.

This news follows the resignation of Marjory Stoneman Douglas School Resource Officer Scot Peterson, who refused to engage the killer while the rampage was underway. Israel suspended Peterson after watching video footage of the SRO's behavior, saying that it made him "sick to my stomach."

Given the appalling failures that took place at Israel's office, the "sheep" might like to ask the "lion" some questions. Perhaps he could answer them in a less condescending and authoritarian fashion.

https://reason.com/blog/2018/02/23/broward-county-sheriff-scott-israel-accu

There are still some Constitutional Sheriffs ... emailed by a reader

 
 There are still some Constitutional Sheriffs ...


Wicomico County Sheriff Michael A. Lewis and other Maryland sheriffs speak

Maryland Sheriff Says It Will Be CIVIL WAR Before Gun Confiscation

Some sheriffs protest gun restrictions; others refuse to enforce the laws

By Marlena Chertock, Emilie Eaton, Jacy Marmaduke and Sydney Stavinoha
February 22, 2018


Sheriff Mike Lewis considers himself the last man standing for the people of Wicomico County.


“State police and highway patrol get their orders from the governor,” the Maryland sheriff said. “

I get my orders from the citizens in this county.”


With more states passing stronger gun control laws, rural sheriffs across the country are taking the meaning of their age-old role as defenders of the Constitution to a new level by protesting such restrictions, News21 found.


Some are refusing to enforce the laws altogether.


Sheriffs in states like New York, Colorado and Maryland argue that some gun control laws defy the Second Amendment and threaten rural culture, for which gun ownership is often an integral component.


They’re joined by groups like Oath Keepers and the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association, both of which encourage law enforcement officers to take a stand against gun control laws. 

“It’s not (the judge’s) job to tell me what I can and can’t enforce,” – Weld County, Colo. Sheriff John Cooke.
 
Lewis and some other sheriffs across the nation, most of them elected by residents of their counties, say their role puts them in the foremost position to stand up to gun laws they consider unconstitutional.


“The role of a sheriff is to be the interposer between the law and the citizen,” said Maryland Delegate Don Dwyer, an Anne Arundel County Republican. “

He should stand between the government and citizen in every issue pertaining to the law.”


While the position of sheriff is not found in the U.S. Constitution, it is listed in state constitutions: Article XIV of Colorado’s, Article XV of Delaware’s, Part VII of Maryland’s and Article XIII of New York’s.

Nearly all of America’s 3,080 sheriffs are elected to their positions, whereas most state and city police top commanders are appointed.

Upstate New York sheriffs don’t understand why the state passed the SAFE Act when, as they see it, the only place with a gun problem is New York City.

The governor signed the act last year in response to
the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting.


When Lewis was president of the Maryland Sheriffs’ Association, he testified with other sheriffs against the state’s Firearms Safety Act(FSA) before it was enacted in 2013.

One of the strictest gun laws in the nation, the act requires gun applicants to supply fingerprints and complete training to obtain a handgun license online.

It bans 45 types of firearms, limits magazines to 10 rounds and outlaws gun ownership for people who have been involuntarily committed to a mental health facility.


After Lewis opposed the FSA, he said he was inundated with emails, handwritten letters, phone calls and visits from people thanking him for standing up for gun rights.

He keeps a stuffed binder in his office with the laminated notes.


“I knew this was a local issue, but I also knew it had serious ramifications on the U.S. Constitution, specifically for our Second Amendment right,” said Lewis, one of 24 sheriffs in the state. “

It ignited fire among sheriffs throughout the state.

Those in the rural areas all felt the way I did.”


In New York, the state sheriff’s association has publicly decried portions of the SAFE Act, legislation that broadened the definition of a banned assault weapon, outlawed magazines holding more than 10 rounds and created harsher punishments for anyone who kills a first-responder in the line of duty.

The act was intended to establish background checks for ammunition sales, although that provision hasn’t taken effect.


A handful of the state’s 62 sheriffs have vowed not to enforce the high-capacity magazine and assault-weapon bans.

One of the most vocal is Sheriff Tony Desmond of Schoharie County, population 32,000.

He believes his refusal to enforce the SAFE Act won him re-election in 2013.


“If you have an (assault) weapon, which under the SAFE Act is considered illegal, I don’t look at it as being illegal just because someone said it was,” he said.


Desmond’s deputies haven’t made a single arrest related to the SAFE Act.

Neither has the office of Sheriff Paul Van Blarcum of Ulster County.

Van Blarcum said it’s not his job to interpret the Constitution, so he’ll enforce the law.

But he said police should use discretion when enforcing the SAFE Act and determining whether to make arrests, as they do when administering tickets.


In Otsego County, New York, population 62,000, Sheriff Richard Devlin takes a similar approach.

He enforces the SAFE Act but doesn’t make it a priority.

Wicomico County Sheriff Mike Lewis is taking a strong stance against potential limits to Maryland citizens’ Second Amendment rights.
 
“I feel as an elected official and a chief law enforcement officer of the county it would be irresponsible for me to say, ‘I’m not going to enforce a law I personally disagree with,’” he said. “

If someone uses a firearm in commission of a crime, I’m going to charge you with everything I have, including the SAFE Act.

I won’t do anything as far as confiscating weapons.
We’re not checking out registrations.

People that are lawfully using a firearm for target shooting, we’re not bothering those people.”


Colorado made national headlines when 55 of the state’s 62 sheriffs attempted to sign on as plaintiffs in a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of several 2013 gun control bills in the state.

The most-controversial measures banned magazines of more than 15 rounds and established background checks for private gun sales.


Weld County Sheriff John Cooke sits in his office in Greeley, Colo., on June 6, 2014. Cooke was the lead plaintiff in a lawsuit against the governor when the state legislature passed gun control laws in 2013. Cooke says the new laws are unenforceable and unconstitutional. (Photo by Morgan Spiehs/News 21)


A federal judge said the sheriffs couldn’t sue as elected officials, so Weld County Sheriff John Cooke and eight other sheriffs sued as private citizens.

Cooke was the lead plaintiff in the lawsuit, which a federal district judge threw out in June. He and the other plaintiffs are preparing an appeal.


“It’s not (the judge’s) job to tell me what I can and can’t enforce,” Cooke said. “

I’m still the one that has to say where do I put my priorities and resources?

And it’s not going to be there.”


Cooke has won fans with his opposition.

He, like Maryland’s Sheriff Lewis, keeps a novel-thick stack of praise and thank-you notes in his office.

He’ll run for a Colorado Senate seat in November and is endorsed by the state’s major gun lobby, Rocky Mountain Gun Owners.


Lewis, who is running for re-election this year, said sheriffs have a responsibility to push against what he sees as the federal government’s continual encroachment on citizens’ lives and rights.


“Where do we draw a line?” he asked. “

I made a vow and a commitment that as long as I’m the sheriff of this county I will not allow the federal government to come in here and strip my law-abiding citizens of the right to bear arms.

If they attempt to do that it will be an all-out civil war.

Because I will stand toe-to-toe with my people.”


But Brian Frosh, a Maryland state senator and an FSA sponsor and gun-control advocate of Montgomery County, said Lewis’ understanding of a sheriff’s role is flawed.


“If you are a sheriff in Maryland you must take an oath to uphold the law and the Constitution,” said Frosh, now the Democratic nominee for Maryland attorney general. “

You can’t be selective.

It’s not up to a sheriff to decide what’s constitutional and what isn’t.

That’s what our courts are for.”


Bronx County, New York, Sen. Jeffrey Klein, who co-sponsored the SAFE Act, agreed that sheriffs who refuse to enforce laws they disagree with are acting out of turn.

Constitutional sheriffs are not lawyers or judges, Frosh said, which means they are following their convictions instead of the Constitution.


“We had lots of people come in (to testify against the bill) and without any basis say, ‘This violates the Second Amendment,’” Frosh said. “

They can cite the Second Amendment, but they couldn’t explain why this violates it.

And the simple fact is it does not.

There is a provision of our Constitution that gives people rights with respect to firearms, but it’s not as expansive as many of these people think.”


But sheriffs have the power to nullify, or ignore, a law if it is unconstitutional, Maryland Delegate Dwyer said.

He said James Madison referred to nullification as the rightful remedy for the Constitution.


“The sheriffs coming to testify on the bill understood the issue enough and were brave enough to come to Annapolis and make the bold stand that on their watch, in their county, they would not enforce these laws even if they passed,” said Dwyer, who has recognized the sheriffs for their courage. “

That is the true role and responsibility of what the sheriff is.”

Rural versus Urban Divide


Some rural sheriffs argue that gun control laws are more than just unconstitutional — they’re unnecessary and irrelevant.

In towns and villages where passers-by stop to greet deputies and call local law enforcement to ask for help complying with gun laws, they say, firearms are less associated with crime than they are with a hunting and shooting culture that dates back to when the communities were founded.


Edward Amelio, a deputy in Lewis County, New York, shares that sentiment.

There’s no normal day for Amelio, who has patrolled the 27,000-person county for eight years.

But he usually responds to domestic disputes, burglaries and car accidents.

That’s why he considers the SAFE Act unnecessary.


“We issue orders of protection and some contain a clause the judge puts in there saying a person’s guns are to be confiscated,” Amelio said. “That’s mostly when we deal with guns.”


Zachary Reinhart, a deputy sheriff in Schoharie County, New York, said he responds to a wide variety of calls, too.


“Our calls range from accidental 911 dials to domestic disputes to bar fights,” he said. “

You can’t really typify a day at the Schoharie County Sheriff’s Office. It’s all pretty helter-skelter.”


Violent crime also isn’t common in Wicomico County, Maryland, where Lewis is sheriff.

He receives daily shooting reports from the Maryland Coordination and Analysis Center, which are not available for public disclosure.






“You always see ‘nothing to report’ in the eastern region, in the southern region, in the northern region, in the western region,” Lewis said. “

But the Baltimore central region? Homicide after homicide after homicide.” 


Even though there are few gun crimes in rural areas, Sheriff Michael Carpinelli in Lewis County argues that people need guns for self-defense.






“People rely on the police in an urban environment to come and protect you all the time,” he said. “

People who live in a rural area also rely upon the police, but they realize that they live further out from those resources and that they may have to take action themselves.”


Duke law professor Joseph Blocher said gun culture has varied in urban and rural areas for centuries.


“It has long been the case that gun use and ownership and gun culture are concentrated in rural areas, whereas support for gun control and efforts to curb gun violence are concentrated in urban areas,” he said.

“In the last couple decades we’ve moved away from that towards a more-centralized gun control.”


“When I was five years old, my grandmother was raped, and I was with her when it happened. I remember getting on the telephone and dialing the operator and saying, ‘I need the police.’ And I couldn’t tell her where, and I couldn’t tell her for who, and I was told to hang up and don’t play pranks. At five years old, what do you do? You don’t know. A neighbor had heard my grandmother screaming and took up his shotgun and ran to the woods and held the person at bay that was raping my grandmother. I think that’s probably what made me want to become a police officer. I didn’t want to see that happen to anybody else.” —Sheriff Michael Carpinelli, Lewis County, N.Y.  (Photo by Emilie Eaton/News21)


Lewis bemoaned lawmakers who craft gun-control legislation but are ignorant about guns.

“They have no idea between a long gun and a handgun,” he said. “

Many of them admittedly have never fired a weapon in their lives.”


But Klein, the Bronx County senator, said he does understand the gun and hunting culture in upstate New York.


“Growing up, my father was in the military,” Klein said. “

When I was younger, I had a .22-caliber gun. In the past, I’ve gone pheasant hunting, quail hunting. I

t’s great,” he said. “I mean, there’s nothing that we do in Albany, especially with the SAFE Act, that in any way takes away someone’s right to own a gun for hunting purposes.”

Oath Keepers and CSPOA


If former Arizona sheriff Richard Mack had it his way, there wouldn’t be a single gun control law in the U.S.


“I studied what the Founding Fathers meant about the Second Amendment, the right to keep and bear arms, and the conclusion is inescapable,” said Mack, the founder of the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association (CSPOA).

“There’s no way around it.

Gun control in America is against the law.”


“The people here they are like the original rebels that rebelled against England. They’re strong in their thoughts. They will protect themselves, protect their families and they cherish and respect their freedoms. One of the biggest freedoms that they have is the right to keep and bear arms.” —Sheriff Tony Desmond, Schoharie County, N.Y.  (Photo by Emilie Eaton/News21)


He knows his no-compromise stance has cost him and the CSPOA the support of some sheriffs and law enforcement organizations around the country.

And it’s resulted in civil rights agencies labeling CSPOA an anti-government “patriot group.”


But Mack, the former sheriff in eastern Arizona’s rural Graham County, is not letting up.

His conviction is central to the ideology of CSPOA, which he founded in 2011 to “unite all public servants and sheriffs, to keep their word to uphold, defend, protect, preserve and obey” the Constitution, according to his introduction letter on the association’s website.


CSPOA also has ties to Oath Keepers, an organization founded in 2009 with a similar goal to unite veterans, law enforcement officers and first-responders who pledge to keep their oath to “defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic.”

Mack serves on the Oath Keepers Board of Directors.


“I’m very proud that the people have put me into this office. As I said, I ran unopposed four years ago and I’m unopposed again this year. I guess I must be doing a good job. It’s an honor to serve the residents. There’s difficult things at times. The SAFE Act is one of those difficult things that you have to deal with and you do the best that you can and you try to be fair to everybody.” —Sheriff Richard Devlin, Ostego County, N.Y.  (Photo by Emilie Eaton/News21)


Oath Keepers is larger and farther-reaching than CSPOA, with active chapters in 48 states and the District of Columbia, and an estimated national membership of 40,000.

Its website features a declaration of “orders we will not obey,” including those to disarm Americans, impose martial law on a state and blockade cities.


CSPOA grabbed media attention in February with a growing list of sheriffs — 484 as of late July — professing opposition to federal gun control.

Detailed with links beside each name, the sheriffs’ stances run the gamut from refusals to impose a litany of federal and state gun-control laws, to vague vows to protect their constituents’ Second Amendment rights, to law critiques that stop short of promising noncompliance.


“Why are we being penalized? Why are we being crucified because we’re standing up for our Second Amendment right? Why does everybody look at us like we’re right-wing nuts because we’re standing up for our constitutional rights?” —Sheriff Mike Lewis, Wicomico County, Md.  (Photo by Sydney Stavinoha/News21) 


Only 16 of those 484 are listed as CSPOA members.


Some sheriffs perceive Oath Keepers and CSPOA as too radical to associate with.

Desmond, of Schoharie County, New York, is known around his state for openly not enforcing provisions of the SAFE Act that he considers unconstitutional.

Still, he’s not a member of either organization.


“I understand where they are, I guess, but I just have to worry right here myself,” Desmond said. “

I don’t want to get involved with somebody that may be a bit more proactive when it comes to the SAFE Act.

I want to have the image that I protect gun owners, but I’m not fanatical about it.”


Mack is familiar with that sentiment. He suspects it’s hindered the growth of CSPOA.


“This is such a new idea for so many sheriffs that it’s hard for them to swallow it,” Mack said. “

They’ve fallen into the brainwashing and the mainstream ideas that you just have to go after the drug dealers and the DUIs and serve court papers — and that the federal government is the supreme law of the land.”


The Southern Poverty Law Center, a civil rights nonprofit that classifies and combats hate and extremist groups, included both CSPOA and Oath Keepers on its list of 1,096 anti-government “patriot” groups active in 2013.

Both groups have faced criticism for their alleged connections to people accused of crimes that range from possessing a live napalm bomb to shooting and killing two Las Vegas police officers and a bystander in June.


Media representatives from the Southern Poverty Law Center did not return phone calls and emails requesting comment.


Franklin Shook, an Oath Keepers board member who goes by the pseudonym “Elias Alias,” said the organization doesn’t promote violence, but rather a message of peaceful noncompliance.


“What Oath Keepers is saying is … when you get an order to go to somebody’s house and collect one of these guns, just stand down,” Shook said. “

Say peacefully, ‘I refuse to carry out an unlawful order,’ and we, the organization, will do everything in our power to keep public pressure on your side to keep you from getting in trouble for standing down.

That makes Oath Keepers extremely dangerous to the system.”

The Future of Gun Control Laws


Self-proclaimed constitutional sheriffs hope that courts will oust gun control measures in their states — but they recognize that may not happen.

Lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of gun control legislation in Maryland, New York and Colorado have been, for the most part, unsuccessful.


In New York, five SAFE Act-related lawsuits have yielded few results: One lawsuit resulted in an expansion of the magazine limit from seven rounds to 10, but the rest of the measures were thrown out and are awaiting appeal; a similar lawsuit was stayed; a third was thrown out and denied appeal; and two additional lawsuits have been combined but are stagnating in court.


Plaintiffs in the Colorado sheriff lawsuit are preparing to appeal the decision of a federal district judge who in June upheld the constitutionality of the 2013 gun control laws.


A lawsuit seeking to overturn Maryland’s assault weapons and high-capacity magazine bans went to trial in July, but the judge has yet to issue a ruling.


“My hope is that the governor will look at it now that it’s been a year plus and say, ‘We’ve had some provisions that have failed.

Let’s sit down and look at this and have a meaningful conversation.’” New York’s Devlin said. “

I personally don’t see that happening, but I’d like to see that happen.”

Saturday, February 24, 2018

HOW SHOULD WE JUDGE LIBERALS IN CONGRESS?

THE ISSUE DEFINED
ONCE AGAIN, we face a Constitutional crisis that dramatically threatens our most cherished governing institutions.  By their personal, partisan demands, liberal members of Congress are violating their Constitutional oaths to protect and defend America from all enemies, foreign and domestic.  By their flagrant actions, they are in fact blackmailing not only America but every one of its citizens as well. 

So, the question is this:  How should we judge liberal members of Congress who place their personal demands above the will of the American people, above desperately needed bipartisan legislation, yes, even above the operations of the greatest constitutional Republic in history?  Several key points below clearly explain why we must judge these members of Congress for perpetrating the ‘Schumer shutdown’ as the latest in a long line of unacceptable violations of their oaths.

LIBERALS ARE HIPPOCRITS, LIERS, AND TRAITORS WHO
  •  DO NOT ACT TO ENSURE AMERICA’S FIRST AND HIGHEST RESPONIBILITIES ARE TO PATRIOTIC CITIZENS WHO WORK AND PAY TAXES, TAKE CARE OF THEIR FAMILIES AND COMMUNITIES, VOTE AND SUPPORT OUR GOVERNMENT, OUR PEOPLE, AND OUR HISTORICAL, CONSTITUTIONAL VALUES AND TRADITIONS.
  •  DO NOT ACT TO ENSURE THAT OUR HIGHEST RESPONIBILITIES ARE TO THE PATRIOTIC MEN AND WOMEN IN THE MILITARY, POLICE FORCES, AND BORDER GUARDS WHO DESERVE OUR HONOR AND SUPPORT FOR RISKING THEIR LIVES AND THEIR FAMILIES’ WELFARE TO PROTECT AND DEFEND OUR COUNTRY AND OUR PEOPLE FROM ALL ENEMIES, FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC.
  •  DO NOT ACT TO ENSURE THAT THEIR SWORN CONSTITUTIONAL DUTY IS TO WORK WITH REPUBLICANS TO PASS BIPARTESAN, COMPROMISE LEGISLATION THAT BEST SERVES THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND ALL CITIZENS REGARDLESS OF THEIR PARTY AFFILIATION.
  •  DO NOT ACT TO ENSURE THAT THEIR PATRIOTIC DUTY IS TO RESPECT THE OFFICE OF PRESIDENT, REGARDLESS OF THE INDIVIDUALS SERVING THEREIN, REPUBLICAN MEMBERS OF CONGRESS, REPUBLICAN OFFICIALS SERVING THROUGHOUT THE CURRENT ADMINISTRATION AND REPUBLICAN STATE HOUSES AND LEGISLATORS, AND ALL THE AMERICAN CITIZENS WHO VOTED FOR AND SUPPORT THE CURRENT REPUBLICAN ADMINISTRATION.
INSTEAD, THESE SAME LIBERALS HAVE
  •  VIOLATED THEIR SWORN, CONSTITUTIONAL OATHS AS MEMBERS OF CONGRESS TO TELL THE TRUTH TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE AND NOT LIE ABOUT WHY THEY SUPPORT ALLOWING ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS TO REMAIN HERE AND RECEIVE FINANCIAL SUPPORT THAT IS LEGALLY DUE ONLY TO U.S. CITIZENS.
  •  VIOLATED THEIR SWORN, CONSTITUTIONAL OATHS AS MEMBERS OF CONGRESS TO TELL THE TRUTH TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE AND NOT LIE ABOUT WHY THEY SUPPORT ALLOWING UNLIMITED CHAIN IMMIGRANTION INTO OUR COUNTRY WITHOUT PROPER SECURITY INVESTIGATIONS WHICH JEAPORDIZES OUR NATIONAL SECURITY AND THE SAFETY OF U.S. CITIZENS.
  •  VIOLATED THEIR SWORN, CONSTITUTIONAL OATHS AS MEMBERS OF CONGRESS TO TELL THE TRUTH TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE AND INSTEAD HIDE THEIR REAL INTENTIONS THROUGH ALLEGED RACISM, BIGOTRY, AND MISREPRESENTED DIVERSITY OVER E PLURIBUS UNUM AS THE PRIMARY PURPOSE OF CREATING NEW, UNINFORMED, ILLEGAL VOTERS WHO WILL SAVE THE WANING DEMOCRATIC PARTY
  •  VIOLATED THEIR SWORN, CONSTITUTIONAL OATHS AS MEMBERS OF CONGRESS BY PUTTING THE STATUS OF ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS ABOVE OUR NATIONAL SECURITY, OUR MILITARY FAMILIES, INDEED EVERY AMERICAN CITIZEN BY THEIR BLACKMAIL TACTICS IN REFUSING TO NEGOTIATE REASONABLE COMPROMISES TO KEEP THE COUNTRY FROM SHUTTING DOWN.
  • VIOLATED THEIR SWORN, CONSTITUTIONAL OATHS AS MEMBERS OF CONGRESS AND COMMITING CRIMINAL FRAUD BY TRANSFERRING WELFARE BENEFITS, WHICH ARE PAID FOR AND LEGALLY DUE ONLY TO AMERICAN CITIZENS, TO ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS.
Welfare crime is so vast, expensive, and consequential that a brief summary of facts is warranted. Estimates of Social Security fraud alone exceeded $350 Million in 2016. Illegal immigrants cost the Federal and State Government approximately $135 Billion per year to cover basic services related to schools, , medical, etc. for 12.5 Million illegal aliens and 4.2 million children of illegal aliens.  The consequential impacts of such fraud include, at minimum: reductions in social security benefits and cost-of-living increases to American on fixed incomes; increased state and local taxes to cover local welfare requirements of citizens; increased school taxes to cover additional facilities and expansion of “English as a second language” requirements; and Increased costs to print ballots and legal documents in both Spanish and English to accommodate non-English speaking immigrants.

IN SUMMARY
In the U.S. we judge a person under the law by his/her statements, actions, and motives, taking into full account the consequences, direct and indirect, of those statements, actions, and motives on people, property, and institutions.  Our laws are to be applied equally to all Americans, regardless of position, power, or wealth.  We especially believe that no one is above the law. Sadly, these ideals are not always applied in practice, as our history clearly demonstrates. 

 I would argue that in one special situation, however, these ideals MUST be applied rigorously to the letter of the law. That situation applies to elected members of Congress, the White House, and States who take oaths to protect and defend our country against all enemies, foreign and domestic. These people hold power granted exclusively to them by the People, who in turn have an absolute right to demand that they uphold their Constitutional oaths to protect the public interest of America and its citizens in all situations and circumstances.  The positions and power that such officials hold in trust must never be used for their personal benefit.  Instead, what they hold in sacred trust must always be used on behalf of the People and their rights and privileges stated in our founding documents, especially the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. If any elected official and public servant violates such a sacred trust, and evidence is provided to support such violation, s/he must be censured, impeached, and sentenced accordingly—never again to hold such trust.

 For the reasons cited above, members of Congress--and anyone else in America—who have violated their sworn oaths to protect and defend the U.S. and its citizens against all enemies, foreign and domestic, must be judged guilty. They must be removed from office to receive sentences appropriate to what can only be described as criminal, if not treasonous, actions.  If we truly believe that no one is above the law, we MUST judge these individuals ... else there is no law, no Constitution, no hope for our American Republic.  

 ABOVE ALL ELSE, IN ALL CIRCUMSTANCES, AND IN ALL OUR ACTIONS … WE MUST PUT AMERICA AND ITS CITIZENS FIRST. ONLY THEN CAN WE RESTORE OUR REPUBLIC TO MAKE THE AMERICAN DREAM LIVE AGAIN—FIRST AND FOREMOST FOR ALL OUR CURRENT CITIZENS AND ONLY THEN FOR ANY INDIVIDUALS WHO BECOME FUTURE CITIZENS.  A TRUE, CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC MUST THEN BE RESTORED AND GOVERNED BY ELECTED AND APPOINTED OFFICIALS DEDICATED TO THE VISION OF REPRESENTATIVE GOVERNMENT OF THE PEOPLE, BY THE PEOPLE, AND FOR THE PEOPLE.

FROM ONE WHO BELIEVES

http://www.nesara.news/index.php/how-should-we-judge-liberals