Thursday, August 18, 2022
59 F
Oxnard
More

    Latest Posts

    Two Visions of America by Don Jans

    Do We Have A Constitution?

    Sponsored - Job Posting

    We are a small but mighty business in Ventura, CA specializing in Civil/Agricultural Engineering and Land Surveying. Going strong for over 35 years. Looking for motivated team players for immediate hire. Candidates must have at least 3 years of experience in Civil Engineering, Land Surveying, and AutoCAD Civil 3D. Must want to grow with the company. For the right person, management potential. Wages will depend on experience. Benefits include paid holidays, matching retirement plan & much more. Send resumes to: [email protected]

    YCE, Inc. is an Equal Opportunity Employer. Tel: 805-650-6995www.YCEinc.com

    Editorial

    By Dan Reynolds

    The Supreme Court needs to revisit their judgement on the word “privilege” and “immunity” and strike them from the Constitution. Because what they just did was throw the Constitution and all binding agreements between People Of The United States out the window and removed the purpose of the Constitution that was written to ensure equality and prevent a monarchy, or a Communist Regime.

    Everything that has been written above and below is in question because of how I’m interpreting. Everything needs to be 100% researched and validated by Legal Constitutional Scholars of which I am not !  The purpose of this writing is to bring awareness of a real problem of how our elected leaders are being allowed to govern and mark themselves as “privilege” against the wishes and requirements of We The People Of The United States Of America.

    If what I have pointed out is all true then we no longer have a Constitution but a Communist Regime. The very problem our Founders Warned us about over 200 years ago !  So lets get started!

    Section 6 under the Articles of the Constitution: “The Senators and Representatives shall receive a Compensation for their Services, to be ascertained by Law, and paid out of the Treasury of the United States. They shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.”

    Question:  Does this offer the legal confines or construct to be exiled or banished from the House of Representatives or Senate who commit or committed “Breach of the Peace”?

    Question: What is the definition of Breach of the Peace? What qualifies as Beach of the Peace? Does refusing Federal aid by Congress or certain members of Congress when aid was offered by other Federal agencies or National Guard to provide security and to ensure a peaceful protest during a protest or for the upcoming protest for January 6, 2021, outside the State Capitol — does this refusal meet the violations of Breach of the Peace? And, therefore, is this a justified question that meets all the requirements for them to be put on trial for violating Section 6 of the Articles of the Constitution of the United States?

    Does this mean that they simply are no longer paid for the rest of the year? What is the punishment for violations of Section 6 of the Articles of the Constitution of the United States?

    And, does providing donations or bail-out money to known arsonists or violent rioters that took place in the year 2020 in the United States qualify as violations of Section 6 of the Articles of the Constitution of the United States?

    If so, what is the punishment? Does this meet the requirements to mark members of Congress as no longer allowed or able to work in any Government capacity or liaison to any Government facility or to any person, who works in a Government position should they be found guilty?

    Conclusion: There is no justification by any measure that is or could be supported by Congress to turn down aid knowing there was going to be a protest outside the Capitol. And in so doing of turning down the aid, there are citizens who are still in jail who have been denied hearings under the guise of political prisoners, a citizen who was shot dead, and others got injured during the riot and breach of the Capitol. This, in my definition, is meeting all requirements of Breach of the Peace against the people of the United States of America who Congress has sworn an oath to protect, to serve, and to listen to at all times — in their duties while in office.

    Legal Constitutional Scholars now here is a request for you to research all above and below and take appropriate actions upon your findings.

    A disturbing conundrum: In researching Article I, Section 6, of the Annotated Constitution: “The Constitution Annotated online is now updated to reflect cases with constitutional implications from the October 2019 Supreme Court term. The changes are detailed in the Constitution Annotated Supplement 2020. Read more about the Supplement 2020.” Constitution Annotated | Congress.gov | Library of Congress, https://constitution.congress.gov

    First of all, look at the dates of Annotation. October 2019, Supreme Court, Supplement 2020. Doesn’t that mean Team Biden/Deep State was already at work?

    This Clause, below, was referenced. Does that mean Congresspersons can never be arrested and tried for violation of the Constitution?

    Article I, Section 6, Clause 1: ArtI.S6.C1.1.2 Privilege From Arrest:
    “This clause is practically obsolete. It applies only to arrests in civil suits, which were still common in this country at the time the Constitution was adopted (1). It does not apply to service of process in either civil (2) or criminal cases (3). Nor does it apply to arrest in any criminal case. The phrase treason, felony or breach of the peace is interpreted to withdraw all criminal offenses from the operation of the privilege (4).”
    Technically the Constitution is written FOR the People of the United States of America. The Supreme Court of the United States does NOT have the authority to make judgements or annotations to the Constitution without full public involvement when it specifically is being judged to promote full immunity to those in office — by listing them as “privilege”.

    And yet the Supreme Court has been making decisions without ample coverage by the news medial to ALL PEOPLE of the United States.

    The purpose of the Constitution of the United States is to ensure everyone follows and is accountable to the Rule of Law, as the binding agreement between ALL PEOPLE of The United States for human interactions. By marking people as “privileged” by the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court has effectively removed the Constitution of the United State as a binding agreement between people as the Rule of Law. In other words do we now have a Constitution at all?  The way this Rule was put into place, anyone can now commit a crime and claim “privilege” and cannot be charged with a crime or held accountable. Therefore, the Capitol Police have no authority to hold anyone prisoner or investigate anyone. This is something for the record books of the Legal Scholars to contemplate, research and argue and truly fight for equality if they see what agreements between people this Supreme Court has violated.

    The people we elect into office are people who are bound to the Constitution of the United States. Under this ruling by the Supreme Court they have been classified as “privilege” and immune from the Rule of Law. Under this classification of being “privilege” they are no longer a human being and therefore, no longer a person. Therefore, they no longer have the authority, nor, have permission or the ability to perform their duty of office to the people of the United States as a person and as a human being. Because, they do not have to follow or obey the Rule of Law! This alone is Breach of Section 6 of Article I.

    When we cannot have leaders obeying the law than how can we have the Police Department and the Department of Justice and the Military and the Citizens of the United States obeying the Rule of Law when we can all claim “Privilege” at any given time? Granted the ruling makes a case saying that any civil matters do not qualify for “privilege”. However, the way this ruling was put together it makes it clear that it is in violation of human agreements that no one is above the law. So when no one is above the law except for “privilege” then this in definition makes us all “privilege” and everyone is above the law by the mere fact our Constitution mandates that we are all “equal”.

    NOTE: The numbers (1) through (4) above were actual footnotes and my email would not accept them as such.

    Article 6, Section 6, C-2, 3: This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding. (Important –“… the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby…”.)

    The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States. (Important — “…shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution…”.)

    [http:]https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/article-6/#article-6-clauses-2,3

    Article 1, Section 10, C-3: …”No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any Duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.” (Important — This means TX and AK are eligible for troops, because of invasion!)

    [http:]https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/article-1/#article-1-section-10-clause-3

     

    The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official position of Citizens Journal.

    Dan Reynolds resides in Ventura County


    Get Citizensjournal.us Headlines free  SUBSCRIPTION. Keep us publishing – DONATE

    - Advertisement -
    0 0 votes
    Article Rating
    Subscribe
    Notify of
    guest

    0 Comments
    Inline Feedbacks
    View all comments

    Latest Posts

    advertisement

    Don't Miss

    Subscribe

    To receive the news in your inbox

    0
    Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
    ()
    x