Thank you for writing this article. You had some great pictures that I had not seen before. I cannot tell you how big the smiles on our faces are this morning seeing Trump reaching out to shake my son Nik's hand.
Thank you for this information that we all are in need of. Without God, Family And Country where would we all be. Do you really think we have been free from the British rule?
Regarding your comment, though (with my emphasis): "Tyranny HAS ARRIVED on these shores with a vengeance, at a scale not seen since the days of King George III."
Readers undoubtedly don’t know just how accurate is your pointing back to the tyranny of the British king.
My comments have to do with you inferring that tyranny has (just) arrived on these shores, largely gone since the days of the king.
Tyranny first arrived “on these shores” back in 1766, even as it was thrown off 1776-1788. But, would-be kingmaker Alexander Hamilton brought it back in 1791, after it had been replanted (for the District Seat) in 1789. It has grown steadily ever since, growing more rampant with each successive year.
The source of (absolute) tyranny (and absolute despotism) of King George III, as told by our Declaration of Independence, may be found in its words, of the king "giving his Assent to their Acts of PRETENDED LEGISLATION."
These words point in large part to the 1766 British Declaratory Act, which was enacted by Parliament on the same day they repealed the British Stamp Act. Despite the British repeal of the American Stamp Act, the Declaratory Act outlined the fundamental British mindset of the American colonies and colonists.
It said, in its pertinent wording (with my emphasis):
“That the said colonies and plantations in America have been, are, and of right ought to be, subordinate unto, and dependent upon the imperial crown and parliament of Great Britain; and that the King's majesty, by and with the advice and consent of…parliament…had, hath, and of right ought to have, FULL POWER and AUTHORITY to make laws…of sufficient FORCE and VALIDITY to BIND the colonies and people of America, SUBJECTS of the crown of Great Britain, IN ALL CASES WHATSOEVER.”
Americans tried for a turbulent decade to get Britain to back off that claim of being able to "bind" the American colonists "in all cases whatsoever" (S. Carolina’s March 26, 1776 Constitution elaborated further: "Whereas the British Parliament, claiming of late years a right to bind the North American colonies by law in all cases whatsoever...without the consent and against the will of the colonists"]).
Americans faced one fundamental tyranny—the claimed British power to be able to “bind” the American colonists “in all cases whatsoever,” without their consent and against their will.
Out of that one fundamental claim to unlimited power grew all the individual complaints and usurpations listed in the Declaration of Independence. We then faced one issue that had a thousand symptoms.
After a turbulent decade, we declared our independence from such nonsense and fought a war to end it.
And, we were successful. We threw off that claimed power of any government to exercise inherent power to do as they please with us, over every square foot of American soil.
But, with tragic results, we invited that omnipotent power, back in the U.S. Constitution, although it was meant to be constrained to the District Seat and other “exclusive” legislation lands, used for “Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings.”
Every federal transgression since Alexander Hamilton’s 1791 bank can be traced back to the unlimited power allowed federal servants for the District Seat, as it broke down the geographic “fence” that was to contain it to exclusive legislation parcels of land.
Hamilton, especially with the later help of Chief Justice John Marshall, set the exclusive legislation power—of being able to act “in all Cases whatsoever”—free, by holding that even Art. I, Sect. 8, Cl. 17 for D.C. is *part* of “This Constitution” which Article VI, Cl. 2 says is “the supreme Law of the Land” that binds States through their judges.
So, since congressional laws enacted “in pursuance” of Clause 17 which is a part of “This Constitution”, have sufficient color of law to bind the States, at least when they do not object in proper accordance.
One cannot claim that x.y, or z federal actions are (facially) “unconstitutional” when one clause allows their actions. Instead, we must accurately narrow our assertion and detail that such actions are unconstitutional “as applied” beyond the District Seat and other exclusive legislation lands.
Yes, the express power to bind Americans “in all Cases whatsoever,” against their will and without their consent is a horrid political tyranny, that knows next to no bounds.
Thus explains why we must expunge that express power again over every square foot of American soil, even exclusive legislation parcels.
This J6 travesty is but another horrid example of an allowed power gone unchallenged.
Thank you for writing this article. You had some great pictures that I had not seen before. I cannot tell you how big the smiles on our faces are this morning seeing Trump reaching out to shake my son Nik's hand.
Thank you for this information that we all are in need of. Without God, Family And Country where would we all be. Do you really think we have been free from the British rule?
Excellent analysis of a horrid situation.
Regarding your comment, though (with my emphasis): "Tyranny HAS ARRIVED on these shores with a vengeance, at a scale not seen since the days of King George III."
Readers undoubtedly don’t know just how accurate is your pointing back to the tyranny of the British king.
My comments have to do with you inferring that tyranny has (just) arrived on these shores, largely gone since the days of the king.
Tyranny first arrived “on these shores” back in 1766, even as it was thrown off 1776-1788. But, would-be kingmaker Alexander Hamilton brought it back in 1791, after it had been replanted (for the District Seat) in 1789. It has grown steadily ever since, growing more rampant with each successive year.
The source of (absolute) tyranny (and absolute despotism) of King George III, as told by our Declaration of Independence, may be found in its words, of the king "giving his Assent to their Acts of PRETENDED LEGISLATION."
These words point in large part to the 1766 British Declaratory Act, which was enacted by Parliament on the same day they repealed the British Stamp Act. Despite the British repeal of the American Stamp Act, the Declaratory Act outlined the fundamental British mindset of the American colonies and colonists.
It said, in its pertinent wording (with my emphasis):
“That the said colonies and plantations in America have been, are, and of right ought to be, subordinate unto, and dependent upon the imperial crown and parliament of Great Britain; and that the King's majesty, by and with the advice and consent of…parliament…had, hath, and of right ought to have, FULL POWER and AUTHORITY to make laws…of sufficient FORCE and VALIDITY to BIND the colonies and people of America, SUBJECTS of the crown of Great Britain, IN ALL CASES WHATSOEVER.”
Americans tried for a turbulent decade to get Britain to back off that claim of being able to "bind" the American colonists "in all cases whatsoever" (S. Carolina’s March 26, 1776 Constitution elaborated further: "Whereas the British Parliament, claiming of late years a right to bind the North American colonies by law in all cases whatsoever...without the consent and against the will of the colonists"]).
Americans faced one fundamental tyranny—the claimed British power to be able to “bind” the American colonists “in all cases whatsoever,” without their consent and against their will.
Out of that one fundamental claim to unlimited power grew all the individual complaints and usurpations listed in the Declaration of Independence. We then faced one issue that had a thousand symptoms.
After a turbulent decade, we declared our independence from such nonsense and fought a war to end it.
And, we were successful. We threw off that claimed power of any government to exercise inherent power to do as they please with us, over every square foot of American soil.
But, with tragic results, we invited that omnipotent power, back in the U.S. Constitution, although it was meant to be constrained to the District Seat and other “exclusive” legislation lands, used for “Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings.”
Every federal transgression since Alexander Hamilton’s 1791 bank can be traced back to the unlimited power allowed federal servants for the District Seat, as it broke down the geographic “fence” that was to contain it to exclusive legislation parcels of land.
Hamilton, especially with the later help of Chief Justice John Marshall, set the exclusive legislation power—of being able to act “in all Cases whatsoever”—free, by holding that even Art. I, Sect. 8, Cl. 17 for D.C. is *part* of “This Constitution” which Article VI, Cl. 2 says is “the supreme Law of the Land” that binds States through their judges.
So, since congressional laws enacted “in pursuance” of Clause 17 which is a part of “This Constitution”, have sufficient color of law to bind the States, at least when they do not object in proper accordance.
One cannot claim that x.y, or z federal actions are (facially) “unconstitutional” when one clause allows their actions. Instead, we must accurately narrow our assertion and detail that such actions are unconstitutional “as applied” beyond the District Seat and other exclusive legislation lands.
Yes, the express power to bind Americans “in all Cases whatsoever,” against their will and without their consent is a horrid political tyranny, that knows next to no bounds.
Thus explains why we must expunge that express power again over every square foot of American soil, even exclusive legislation parcels.
This J6 travesty is but another horrid example of an allowed power gone unchallenged.
It was only cops that they were beating up -- what's the idea of putting anyone in jail.