REALLY DOES MEAN...
DISTRICT OF CRIMINALS
The following is a challenge to any and all
attorneys, any and all publicly elected officials federal/state/local, any and all
military men non-commissioned and commissioned officers or any and all law
enforcement officers. All of the people in
these categories take an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution as a required first
act in accepting that job or office. The oath taken to uphold, protect and defend the
Constitution applies to all enemies foreign and
Whether the Constitution is in force or if it even exists arises again in the October 22,
2007 Washington Post article titled Immunity for Telecoms May Set Bad Precedent,
Legal Scholars Say - Retroactive Protection Could Create Problems in the Future. It
can be read here.
The challenge or question
to all of the above-mentioned oath-takers and the esteemed legal scholars at
the Washington Post is
how is any bill passed by Congress and signed by the
President legal and enforceable if it includes conditions or clauses that are retroactive?
Any retroactive or ex post facto law irrefutably violates Article 1, Section 9, Clause 2 of the Constitution. Wherein
No bill of attainder or ex post facto Law shall be
With further emphasis by Chief Justice
John Marshall, Marbury v. Madison
"All laws repugnant to the Constitution are
void of law.
Any law, the Military
Commissions Act of 2006 for example, passed with retroactive features only has the color
of law and in fact is not law. Anything that can be retroactively changed from illegal to
legal will be changed by those in power. Being able to pass a law after the fact empties
the rule of law.
Take a moment and watch
Jack Cafferty of CNN explain how GWBush has attempted to retroactively pardon/immunize
himself from war crimes indictments with the passing of the Military Commission Act of
2006. Watch it here - WHAT HAVE WE BECOME? The
indictment of GWBush and his administration cabal for war crimes is not simply a
hypothetical risk. Donald Rumsfeld while in Paris, France has been charged with war crimes on October 27, 2007 and reportedly had to flee that country to avoid
being arrested. Read about it here and here.
considerations by Congress to meet the demands of GWBush and modify the FISA court, thus
attempting to make legal warrantless searches/wiretaps and provide retroactive immunity
for Telecom companies are not "Bad Legal Precedent". They are clear and publicly
admitted crimes. The numerous Bill
of Rights violations by the Military Commissions Act of 2006 and the proposed
changes to the FISA court (itself constitutionally dubious since it is a secret court and
not a public one) are wholly detached from the rule of law. LEX REX is the rule and not REX LEX.
.in America THE LAW IS KING. For as in absolute governments the
King is Law, so in free Countries the law ought to be king; and there ought to be no
other. Thomas Paine, Common
Sense 57 (Philadelphia 1776)
This proposed FISA bill
and the MCA of 2006 are in effect direct assaults on the value and utility of language.
Does no mean no? Is there any single word more important than no?
A brief Constitutional
review on the value of the word no is instructive. Please read the first ten
amendments to the Constitution, aka the Bill of Rights, found here. Every one of the ten, except the Sixth, which
acknowledges universal and undeniable trial rights, uses crucial words of negation
(no-nor-not-never) to define the character, function and prohibition against the rights of
the people being violated. The First Amendment famously starts off, Congress shall
make no law ... These rights enumerated in the first ten amendments are not licenses or privileges granted by
government but are held inherently by the people.
Some of the specific
criminal violations by members of Congress and the President in passing the Military
Commissions Act of 2006 and with the proposed FISA changes can be found in the US Code as
§ 242. Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law
§ 241. Conspiracy Against Rights
§ 2383. Rebellion or Insurrection (A form of Treason)
§ 2384. Seditious Conspiracy
§ 371. Conspiracy to Commit Offense or to Defraud United States
All of the above
violations are serious felonies. All of the people involved are subject to prosecution.
The government, all its officers and agents are subject to the law and not above it.
Especially the President, since he is the nations chief law enforcement officer with
the Department of Justice and Attorney General being part of the Executive Branch.
§ 2. Principals
(a) Whoever commits an offense against the United States or aids, abets, counsels, commands, induces or
procures its commission, is punishable as a principal.
(b) Whoever willfully causes an act to be done which
if directly performed by him or another would be an offense against the United States, is punishable as a principal.
"Nothing can destroy a government more
quickly than its failure to observe its own laws . . . ." Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643, 659 (1961). Justice Tom Clarke
"(N)o man is above the law; that every man,
irrespective of station in life, or position presently occupied, is subject along with all
others to the same laws and the same considerations to our courts." Grobholz v.
Merdel Mortgage Inv. Co., 170 A. R. 815, 817 ( Ct. App. N.J. 1934).
"It violates the cardinal precept...that this
shall be a government of laws--because to the precise extent that the mere will of an
official or an official body is permitted to take the place of allowable official
discretion or to supplant the standing law as a rule of human conduct, the government
ceases to be one of laws and becomes an autocracy." Jones v. Securities and Exch.
Com., 298 U.S. 1, 23-24 (1936). Justice Sutherland
Under our system the people, who are there (in England) called subjects, are the sovereign. Their rights,
whether collective or individual, are not bound to give way to a sentiment of loyalty to
the person of the monarch. The citizen here knows no person, however near to those in
power, or however powerful himself, to whom he need yield the rights which the law secures
to him when it is well administered.
No man in this country is so high that he is above
the law. No officer of the law may set that law at defiance with impunity. All the
officers of the government, from the highest to the lowest, are creatures of the law and
are bound to obey it. It is the only supreme power in our system of government, and every
man who by accepting office participates in its functions is only the more strongly bound
to submit to that supremacy, and to observe the limitations which it imposes upon the
exercise of the authority which it gives. US
v. Lee, 106 U.S. 196 (1882)
Rightly applying the
historic words of Chief Justice John Marshall, the Military Commission Act of 2006 for
many reasons is void of law, regardless of the Congress
passing it and the President signing it.
One might ask
what if a Congressional Act is passed unanimously by the House and Senate and signed by
the President, would that be a legal modification of the Constitution? No. In order for
any ex post facto law to be legal the Constitution must first be modified with a
successful Article V procedure that removes the ex post facto
prohibition before any retroactive bill or act could be passed lawfully by Congress.
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses
shall deem it necessary, shall propose
amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two
thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in
either case, shall be valid to all intents and
purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths
of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or
the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress; provided that no amendment
which may be made prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any
manner affect the first and fourth clauses in the ninth section of the first article; and
that no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate.
At the national level
only the House and the Senate by a two-thirds majority with no input from the
President - can propose an amendment to the Constitution. Two-thirds of the state
legislatures or conventions can also propose amendments to the Constitution. In order for
a proposed amendment to validly pass, it requires three-fourths of the state legislatures
or conventions to pass the unaltered and originally proposed amendment. Any and all
branches of the Federal Government have no Constitutional authority to make any changes to
the Constitution, neither by Executive Order or signing statement from the President nor a
bill passed unanimously by Congress nor judicial legislation via case rulings from the
authority for changing the Constitution rests solely with the state legislatures or
conventions, the reality of preeminent states rights is unassailable. The federal
government is a subordinate agent of the people through the several, separate and
sovereign states and is likewise bound to the terms and conditions described in the
Constitution. To use an analogy
If the FedGov was the preexistent parent, it would
not need permission from its children, the states, to change its rules of behavior. The
FedGov however is the offspring of preexistent parents, the several states, and bound to
the conditions agreed to by its parents. It must first properly ask and then wait for a
sufficient number of its parents to grant its request before any change in behavior is
The dire nature of the
present Constitutional crisis necessitates extraordinary action. Men and women must be
willing to step up, declare the real and present threat to the nation and stop the willful
destruction of the peoples rights and the Constitution by a renegade Congress and
The Pelosian Democrats,
save a few like Dennis Kucinich of Ohio, have spinelessly abdicated their majority
obligation to impeach or indict the president for his countless high crimes and
Only a few Congressional
Republicans, like Ron Paul of Texas and Walter Jones of North Carolina, have not joined the leashed lapdogs in residence
at the White House.
The command structure of
the military continues to snap salutes and blindly follow unlawful orders sending more men
into the maw of undeclared and baseless wars around the world.
And the attorney class of
professors, judges, prosecutors, defense attorneys, et al is as silent as death. They
should be massed in the streets clamoring for the restoration of the rule of law and the
foundation of their supposed profession, the Constitution. As the BBC reports on November
Do the judges and attorneys in Pakistan better understand the core value
of their constitution (aka the rule of law) and are actually willing to fight for it,
while Americas legal profession sits on their moribund asses?!
have used tear gas and baton charges to break up demonstrations by Pakistani lawyers
against the country's state of emergency.
Lawyers' associations across the country said they
were calling three days of protests and boycotts of courts.
Media reports, citing police and interior ministry
sources, said around 1,500 people had been arrested in the last 48 hours, while many top
judges were effectively under house arrest.
The sacked chief justice, Iftikhar Muhammad
Chaudhry, said Gen Musharraf's manoeuvre was "illegal, unconstitutional and against
the orders of the Supreme Court."
There is no special
prosecutor law and if there was, the Democrats surely do not have the backbone to appoint
attorneys that understand the criminal nature of the GWBush presidency do not have the
courage to impanel
a real grand jury and present evidence to the people.
Who is left that could
immediately freeze the criminal actions of the Congress and the President by speaking a
simple NO about proposed changes to the
FISA court and the passage of the MCA of 2006? What group of people has the power and
reputation to halt our descent into totalitarianism being lead by both political parties?
The Supreme Court has that raw political power.
As the Nation's ultimate judicial tribunal,
this Court, beyond any other organ of society, is the trustee of law and charged with the
duty of securing obedience to it." United States v. Mine Workers, 330 U.S. 258, 312 (1947). Justice Frankfurter
Members of Congress and
the President have committed criminal acts against the rights of the people and more. No
one with the responsibility and the power to effect change is acting. Extraordinary times
dictate that people perform unprecedented feats.
The Supreme Court members
effectively take the same oath of office as the President and the members of Congress.
Without a doubt they fully comprehend that the rights of the people and fabric of the
nation are being dismembered. They are no less obligated to report a crime than anyone
§ 4. Misprision of Felony
Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission
of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as
possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority
under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three
years, or both.
Here is a recommended
course of action.
Have two Supreme Court
Justices, for example Antonin Scalia and Ruth Bader Ginsburg, recuse themselves
temporarily from the Court. Then in their personal capacity file Federal Criminal
Complaints in a court of competent jurisdiction describing the violations by the Executive
and the Congress in passing the MCA of 2006 and the proposed modifications of the FISA
court. That documentation would include a motion to impanel an open federal grand jury to
consider all these facts and more. It is further suggested that the two justices be joined
in filing these documents with a team of federal prosecutors and constitutional lawyers,
people such as Elisabeth de la Vega, Bruce Fein, Andrew Napolitano, Jonathan Turley and
constitutionalist Ron Paul to become President-elect in 2008 is more than 12 months away.
The slide into the political abyss may be too deep by then.
Luke 11 NASB
45 One of the
lawyers said to Him in reply, "Teacher, when You say this, You insult us too."
46 But He said,
"Woe to you lawyers as well! For you weigh men down with burdens hard to bear, while
you yourselves will not even touch the burdens with one of your fingers.
James 4 NASB
17 Therefore, to one who knows the right thing to do
and does not do it, to him it is sin.
Nathanael is a self-employed engineer
and lives in metropolitan area of Dallas, Texas. He had only ever been a life long
registered Republican but changed to the Constitution Party in May of 2004. He is a
regular columnist for Ether Zone.
"Published originally at
EtherZone.com : republication allowed with this notice and hyperlink intact."
Nathanael can be reached at email@example.com
Published in the November 5, 2007 issue of Ether Zone.
Copyright © 1997 - 2007 Ether
We invite your
comments on this article in our forum!