PRESIDENTIAL EXECUTIVE ORDERS THAT ENDANGER OUR CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC AND FREEDOMS

[J.R.]

Tea Party Patriots:

Below is the content of an e-mail newsletter I received this morning that includes information that every American needs to read, in order to understand the nature of what we are facing under a federal administration that ignores and refuses to enforce the rule of law and The Constitution of the United States. It helps to explain why this president refuses to enforce our border and immigration laws, has changed the rules of engagement for the U.S. Border Patrol to prevent their fully enforcing the law, sued the state of Arizona and ordered that state not to enforce their border with Mexico, and set aside a swath of land from the Mexican border up into Arizona where they warn Americans not to go because it is a dangerous drugs and human trafficking area.  Our country's northern and southern borders are not being protected and are as porous as a sieve. And, Arizona seems to have been made the gateway for the Mexican drug cartels that now operate in many large cities all over this country... and who knows what and who else.

So, is our president and his administration importing the wherewithall to stir up the crisis that his preacher's good friend Louis Farakhan, leader of the Nation of Islam (Muslim Brotherhood), warned us of when he stated a few months ago that fighting, like that in the streets Egypt, would "be coming to the streets of America soon?" That fighting in Egypt's streets was incited in order to enable a Muslim Brotherhood generated overthrow of the Egyptian government by ousting it's leader of 40 years, who had signed a peace treaty with Israel.

These dangerous executive orders are accompanied by laws that have been enacted, during the first eighteen months of the current administration, through Democrats' total control in both the Executive and Legislative branches of government. During that time, they shut Republican U.S. Representatives and Senators out of the process of representing the voices of the American people who elected them.  In other words, they disenfranchised us to steamroll their progressive agenda through. They have clearly violated the Constitution, the sovereignty of the States, and the constitutional rights of the American people.

What you will be reading is a real eye-opener, with information that, if looked at piecemeal, might irritate or confound you, but when brought together makes the last two and a half years under this administration's created crises, damaging foreign policy, shutting off American-produced oil sources and making us dependent on oil from countries who could collectively shut off a huge portion of it, closing and/or taking over American banks and businesses, giving free reign to the Federal Reserve and International Monetary Fund, spreading taxpayers' money in the U.S. Treasury to bail out governments of foreign countries, manipulating markets, promoting subsidizing to distort the market and transfer costs from businesses to taxpayers, and so on..., it invokes an entirely new picture... or perhaps an omen.

Here is the article, the link to the website is below it, and that website also offers online news radio that is very informative. 

************ 

"You'd want to think that your government has your best interests at heart, wouldn't you? However, time and again they just keep proving that we're engaging in wishful thinking when it comes to the "why" of what they do and the legislation that they pass. In fact ...Take these executive orders, for instance:

... we are subject to a government that seeks at every turn to undermine our constitutional rights ...

Executive Order 10995: Seizure of all communications media - radio, television, newspapers, CB and Ham radio, telephones and the internet (in effect, suspension of the first amendment)

Executive Order 10997: Seizure of all electrical power and fossil fuels

Executive Order 10998: Seizure of all food sources, farms and farm equipment. Food will be rationed. Today some states have anti-hoarding laws on the books, stating that anything over a one week's supply of food is considered hoarding and against the law.

Executive Order 10999: Seizure of all transportation and control of all highways, interstates and seaports. Any vehicle, public or private, can be taken.

Executive Order 11000: Seizure of all civilians for work under Federal supervision.

Executive Order 11003: Seizure of all airports and aircraft, public or private.

Executive Order 11004: Housing and Finance given authority for population relocation.

Executive Order 12919: Directs various Cabinet officials to be ready to take over virtually all aspects of the United States economy during a "state of national emergency" at the direction of the president.

Executive Order 13010: Directs FEMA to take control over all government agencies in times of emergency. FEMA is under the direct control of the executive (presidential) branch of government.

Executive Order 11490: Establishes presidential control over all United States citizens, businesses, and churches in times of "emergency"

These are executive orders passed by presidents--Republican and Democrat alike--elected to preserve our freedoms and the Constitution. Their very duplicities show that they have no intention of honoring the ideals of the constitutional republic handed down to us, that they are the very men that the Founders warned us about.

In fact, our Founders understood that this constitutional model could be overturned and made ineffective should the restraining power of the people against the federal government be made moot through judicial or legislative process.

Men like John Adams, James Madison, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and Alexander Hamilton all viewed the separation of powers to be indispensable to the continuation and preservation of liberty and the United States.

So what does the passage of these Executive Orders tell us? It tells us this ...

The dominoes are in place to subject the American people to a state of martial law nationwide."

http://www.offthegridnews.com/

[J.R.]

Good sources, Amanda. I'll check them out more in depth when I can free up some time. Search engines are great, aren't they? You can just key in the right search words and phrases and have results in seconds. When I find a good source, I copy and paste it into one of my sources files, type a short caption beside it, and save it. Thank goodness we have computers for research and don't have to search through endless books and journals for countless hours like I had to in college.
Rob Natelson, whom I mentioned earlier, taught both Constitutional Law and Advanced Constitutional Law for 24 years. You might enjoy reading some of his in-depth, scholarly writings. He has a very clear and straightforward writing style and I've learned a lot from his analyses, particularly his reasoning and opinions related to the Libya War.
I keep a dictionary within reach any time I'm doing research or any significant amount of writing. The one I use is my old Webster's Collegiate Dictionary and it's become like a dependable old friend with all the well-defined antonyms and synonyms needed for both scholarly and creative writing. It's more user friendly than my big thick Thorndyke-Barnhardt Thesaurus that seldom gets touched except to dust it.

[amanda choate]

So when I wanted to know more about this subject I did this. First I Googled "Top Constitutional Law Schools". The same three showed up every top five list, Harvard, Yale, and Columbia. Then I went to read research published on each of their schools reviews, Harvard Law Review, Yale Law Journal, Columbia Law Review. Wow the writing there is dense, but you can basically understand it, it just takes a while and a dictionary.

[JL Gawlik]

Amanda, always question everything. Our founding fathers meant for WE THE PEOPLE to enforce the Constitution not necessarily elected representatives, WE THE PEOPLE are supposed to keep them in check. Of course they relied on the FREE PRESS to help out but, we can see that backing from Billionaires have made their moral compass fail WE THE PEOPLE. 

 

I have just realized the past two years how incredible the founding fathers' charters of Freedom really are, and they were written over 200 years ago, absolutely incredible and proof our nation was founded under GOD. 

[J.R.]

Amanda, I don't think you were wrong to do that, either. I admire people who are willing to do research in order to fully understand and be able to document their knowledge on a subject. Given the time, it would be interesting to discover just how that unconstitutional practice developed over time.

I find constitutional scholar Rob Natelson to be the best source for a complete analysis of the Constitution. His website is a powerful and authoritative resource that I use often The link to it was posted in one of the earlier comments on this blog. He addresses many questions and arguments about the Constitution.

The Constitution was designed to be simple and clear as to what the enumerated and granted powers are for the three branches of government. It also makes clear that all powers not enumerated or granted by the Constitution to the federal union are reserved to the sovereign states. That says it all. An amendment would have to be added to the Constitution to change what is actually in it or add anything new to it.

By all means, do keep up your research and share it here on this website.

[amanda choate]

Well then there you go, i was wrong. But I don't think I was wrongheaded in looking to those who wrote it to see how they implemented it in order to ascertain how they felt about it.

There are a lot of generalities in the constitution that allow for interpretation, again just as the founders wanted. Certitude isn't a natural byproduct of this document, there is wiggle built in.

[J.R.]

Presidents having used a practice that was not granted as a power to them by the Constitution establishes no argument whatsoever for the legality of it. Even just a law to that effect would not have been constitutional or legal, for the Constitution would have been required to be amended to include such a new power. It doesn't matter what anyone thought was "necessary," or whether it makes "sense" to anyone. The proof is in the Constitution of the United States... and only there.

[amanda choate]

One of the first EO's was to declare our neutrality in relation to France and England.

Though we can today conject the founders intent, the very fact that they used EO's is the most convincing argument for their legality. I find it hard to argue against the use of EO's when these four presidents used them. Maybe they didn't bother to change it or thought it otherewise unncessary, I don't know. But to say they are unconstitutional doesn't make any sense to me. Though  I am no scholar. Iam sure their are blogs about that but to me the proof is in the pudding.

 

[JL Gawlik]

Just received this through national director of Patriot Action Network:

 

THE RIGHTS OF MAN:

 

[J.R.]

Karen M: That Executive Order by Pres. George H.W. Bush was simply about the transfer or privatization of federal government held or maintained infrastructure to the private sector. It could be something like building or maintaining roads, bridges, utilities, and so on. Another example would be like their contracting out services that are provided for the military by private businesses. China holds a huge amount of U.S. debt, but they also owe the U.S. billions they have owed for many years and won't pay.

[JL Gawlik]

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=23625#axzz1O4HQ6SYz