Emergency Elections

What Would The Government Do?

(WWTGD)

The question arises; When a government seat is considered to be "empty" for whatever reason, how does our system of governance "fill" that empty seat?

I believe the Constitutions, state and federal, are there to give us the answer. There are procedures in each state, designed to make these determinations and there are rules set in place to make sure that ANY seat that is not "occupied" shall be filled by proper procedures. It doesn't really matter what the procedures are, as long as they follow the LAW set about in Article I,2,3,3.

More questions arise, however;

What if the people find, in their search for some truth or another, that there exists one or more "empty" seats in one or more states of our representative based government?
How do WE make sure these seats are filled, using the same solution as prescribed for any other empty seat?
How do we force the state governments to properly fill them?
Is it time to require militias in each state to provide enforcement?
How can we prove beyond a doubt, that there ARE empty seats?
Where in the Constitution does it indicate that these seats even exist?
Can this be extended to state Representation? AND;
Who is left to stop this kind of egregious violation from continuing?

The collective answer here is clear. We must do it ourselves, if the government "employees" we have hired, will not. That is the bottom line.

When Texas needed protection from "invasion" on their southern border and the federal government would not act, they threatened to do it themselves, whereupon the federal government returned the favor by filing criminal charges against them and threatening loss of federal funding as a strong-arm tactic. Just like the Mob uses. HMMMMM.

I think beyond ANY shadow of a doubt that this is;

THE NUMBER ONE ISSUE

in America if we want our representative form of government back; because I can tell you that there is no longer a doubt that it IS GONE!

And here is the reason.

Article I, Section 2, Clause 3, to whit;

"Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty thousand.."

There's the issue,
There's the problem,
There is your path to repairing ALL of the other problems in the country today.

Let's all try to get on the same page and fix this issue. If we succeed, we will have over 10,000 voices of the people in Congress. Every other issue that comes to the floor after that, will have approximately 10,200 voices to debate it, instead of only 435 people. We are allowing these 435 to control the fate of a Nation of 300 MILLION people. When we reach 435 Million, each of our Representatives will be speaking for ONE MILLION PEOPLE!

This is UNACCEPTABLE!

I'll be taking this issue to the state A.G. and my local County Sheriff and DEMAND that the "redistricting" Committees already in place, follow the LAW and not only keep districts even, but draw the lines around every thirty thousand people.

When Will the Americans Believe They Are the Government?

Good Morning! I am pleased to be the first to be able to voice my opinion of the question that was asked about “When a government seat is considered to be “Empty,” and to attempt to relay intelligence concerning “Our System of Governance.” How to exactly fill that empty seat in all seriousness was one of the greatest questions I have found in the 2017 moving into 2018 for the upcoming “Senate Seats” and where we will get into today, not only “Legislative Seats,” but absolutely any seats in any representation of the people of the United States. When we speak of United States we immediately should think “Federal Government,” but the same process for filling empty seats within our systems works all the up to a county level… In regards to your viewpoint that the Constitution is there to provide the answer, I would further like to elaborate the procedure and speak about the rules regarding seats are not only occupied, but this being the single most important reason, making sure the seats are proper according to the a. rules b. regulations c. legislation d. guidelines e. statutes f. amendments g. codes h. pleadings and other things regarding the seriousness of anyone found “Out of Line” and “Out of Order.” In your opinion, respectfully you had mentioned that it doesn’t matter, but in fact the system depends on unified operational focus.

Your questions arise and I will do my best to provide this service:

1. What if the people find, in their search for some truth or another, that there exist one or more "empty" seats in our representative based government?

I. Legal Standards

A. 18 U.S.C. § 1963(a)(1), (2), (3) The specific goal of RICO is to prohibit the use of an enterprise to engage in certain criminal activities. A person who uses an enterprise to engage in a pattern of racketeering may be convicted under the RICO criminal statute (18 U.S.C. §1963). An enterprise is defined as "any individual, partnership, corporation, association, or other legal entity, and any union or group of individuals associated in fact although not a legal entity." A pattern is defined as "at least two acts of racketeering activity, one of which occurred after the effective date of [RICO's passage] and the last of which occurred within 10 years after commission of a prior act of racketeering activity." "It is also clear that section 1963(a) not only provides criminal penalties for “Whoever” is found in violation of any provision section of §1962 but also further points to section §1961 which makes any “Racketeering Activity” a crime. Actor(s) also further alleged to be in violation to the Hobbs Act, 18 U.S.C §1951(a), which is a RICO Predicate offense because Section 1951(a) expressly makes conspiracy a crime. Because of the effect of 18 U.S.C. § 2, however, one who aids and abets the commission of a federal crime is treated as if “They” had committed the crime as a principal and can be charged under RICO if the crime is one set forth in Section 1961(1)(B)( G). 35 ("aiding and abetting one of the activities listed in Section 1961(1) as racketeering activities makes one punishable as a principal and amounts to engaging in that racketeering activity.) R.I.C.O.

2. How do WE make sure these seats are filled, using the same solution as prescribed for any other empty seat?

B. 18 U.S.C. § 371—Conspiracy to Defraud the United States… The general conspiracy statute, 18 U.S.C. § 371, creates an offense "If two or more persons conspire either to commit any offense against the United States, or to defraud the United States, or any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose. (emphasis added). See Project, Tenth Annual Survey of White Collar Crime, 32 Am. Crim. L. Rev. 137, 379406 (1995) (generally discussing § 371). The operative language is the so called "defraud clause," that prohibits conspiracies to defraud the United States. This clause creates a separate offense from the "offense clause" in Section 371. Both offenses require the traditional elements of Section 371 conspiracy: 1. Including an illegal agreement such as “The installation of a “Fraudulent Operative” for an “Alleged Seat” of the United States; further to a believing national and international citizen base within “This United States” and by knowing full well they are owed the truth, but however denying them this right is enforceable.” The answer is make sure they remain empty when fraudulent operatives and actors attempt to fill them by prosecution. In time the seats will eventually fill with lawful candidates who have seen a working system and have learned through the derelicts mistakes.

3. How do we force the government to fill them?

C. Criminal intent such as_ “The intent to commit a federal crime constitutes their malice where siding outside of the agencies rule of law constitutes their intent to deprive and defraud the true owners of their rights protected by the Constitution and “In criminal law, an overt act, or an open act of one that can be clearly proved by evidence, and from which stated above can be deduced or concluded from by the evidence,” the reasoning rather than from explicit statements, or inactions and whereby may show these elements as fulfilled." So, in other words, the best way would be to obtain an “Injunction” through “Federal Court” with a “Judicial Signature Authority” and “Seal” whereby providing “Service” to the “Derelicts.”

4. Is it time to form some serious militias for enforcement?

In my opinion yes and because “Federal Law” had remained without enforcement while overt criminals were able to maintain their threat of continuances. The “Unorganized Militia” consists of all able bodied persons of the nation and of the states between the ages of 17 and 44; which is exclusive of all members of the organized militia i.e., The Armed Forces of your Federal Government of the United States & of the National Guards of the various states of the Union. Enforcement serious forces are necessary to the security of your “Free State.”

Title 10 U.S.C. 311. Militia: composition and classes:

(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.

(b) The classes of the militia are -

(1) The organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia

(2) The unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

5. How can we prove beyond a doubt, that there ARE empty seats?

Now it is well known as the reliance is heavily on the definition of "defraud" provided by the Supreme Court in two early cases, Hass v. Henkel, 216 U.S. 462 (1910), and Hammerschmidt v. United States, 265 U.S. 182 (1924). In Hass the Court stated: “The statute is broad enough in its terms to include any conspiracy for the purpose of impairing, obstructing or defeating the lawful function of any department of government.” Any conspiracy which is calculated to obstruct or impair its efficiency and destroy the value of its operation and reports as fair, impartial and reasonably accurate, would be to defraud the United States by depriving it of its lawful right and duty of promulgating or diffusing the information so officially acquired in the way and at the time required by law or departmental regulation. Hass, 216 U.S. at 479480, and to answer your question it is not your job to “Prove Beyond a Reasonable Doubt” that is the “Federal Prosecutors Job” however the first step is to report the crime to the FBI, but these days you need to have “Judicial Oversight” to force compliance it has gotten so bad within our agencies. There must be record so that enforcement is practice and for the purposes of your rights, it’s best to become a witness and recognize when you are a victim of a federal crime in accordance with 18 U.S.C. §3771, §1512, and §1513; by knowing your rights you can force compliance through the courts all the way up to the Attorney General. The answer is to look to the root power found in the grounds of the constitution. Find the disconnect, in other words if there is something that does not line up in accordance to the law of the land, hence the fraud and finally the most important comparison; the statutes light compared to the mortal derelict(s).

6. Where in the Constitution does it indicate that these seats even exist?

This is what I like to term “Systemic Gnosis” in other words this is only my personal experience that can attempt to provide the answer of where it indicates these seats even exist. The short-sweat answer is my opinion always was the Judge seated in an elevated place above society to remind citizens of their place in understanding the peoples law. A double-edged blade in fact, above the Judicial Seat is a seal and in court rooms flags with other reminders, however the most important reminder is their seated place provided by the people, which is or was especially these days “Grace.” It was a place to exercise this “Guardianship” when we had courts and not cults. The fact is when a judge or anyone “Seated” in their place by the people is when you may understand the well-known terminology “Fallen from Grace” and this happens when someone without excuse breaks the law of the land, or the peoples rules etc. placing their own heads under the law fallen from the bench, or the “Seat” or however it is for terminology it is most important to have the “Knowledge” of 1. When exactly this happened, or happens & 2. How to enforce compliance or force the law to be upheld in a CIVIL MANNER.

7. Can this be extended to representational seats in the states?

In Hammerschmidt, Chief Justice Taft, defined "defraud" as follows: To conspire to defraud the United States means primarily to cheat the Government out of property or money, but it also means to interfere with or obstruct one of its lawful governmental functions by deceit, craft or trickery, or at least by means that are dishonest. It is notnecessary that the Government shall be subjected to property or pecuniary loss by the fraud, but only that its legitimate official action and purpose shall be defeated by misrepresentation, chicane or the overreaching of all of those charged with carrying out their governmental intentions “Representational Seats” in the states and which includes “Everyone” alleged “Acting” within our agencies. The defendant(s) may be found in violation of the Hobbs Act, 18 U.S.C §1951(a), which again is a RICOPredicate offense because Section 1951(a) expressly makes conspiracy a crime. Because of the effect of 18 U.S.C. § 2, however, one who aids and abets the commission of a federal crime is treated as if “They” had committed the crime as a principal and can be charged under Rico if the crime is one set forth in Section 1961(1)(B)(G). 35 ("aiding and abetting one of the activities listed in Section 1961(1) as racketeering activities makes one punishable as a principal and amounts to engaging in that racketeering activity.) your working Justice System.

8. Whom do we seek out for an answer to these questions?

Simply understand your rights, comprehend “Your True Power” v. “United States Fraud,” as you may decide to coordinate with other “Witnesses” or “Victims” by doing so… Finding yourselves possibly encouraging your “Secretary of Defense” or “The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff” respectfully demanding “Federal Law Enforcement.” This starts the clock where “Military Jurisdiction” will eventually graft and therefore it is without discretion R.I.C.O shall be ENFORCED.

Thank you for your invaluable questions today Monday September, 25^th 2017 and may you find yourselves getting to the bottom of all derelict employees who are found without a doubt with your witness out of line and out of order. All states including Texas citizens who operate within their wonderful union are directed to always without fear to do the same in the spirit of true government accountability. Border protection starts within your state and county level, getting your agents in line is getting your national protection which includes immigrant invasion defense. If you find “Retaliatory” erroneous filings simply assert your rights in their attempts, especially under their attempts as a 1. Victim or 2. Witness of a “Federal Crime.” If they attempt to kidnap you simply say these four lovely words for your personal protection “I do not consent.” Threatening witnesses or victims is a punishable offense, but kidnapping them in the fraudulent light of prosecution is more than serious, which includes without looking up the law off my memory THIRTY YEARS IN A FEDERAL PRISON.

Show Ten II. Tell Ten,

EXECUTIVE
JUDICIAL I.

Replies

3khqqcmlnxxtq September 25, 2017 4:49

When Will the Americans Believe They Are the Government?

Good Morning! I am pleased to be the first to be able to voice my opinion of the question that was asked about “When a government seat is considered to be “Empty,” and to attempt to relay intelligence concerning “Our System of Governance.” How to exactly fill that empty seat in all seriousness was one of the greatest questions I have found in the 2017 moving into 2018 for the upcoming “Senate Seats” and where we will get into today, not only “Legislative Seats,” but absolutely any seats in any representation of the people of the United States. When we speak of United States we immediately should think “Federal Government,” but the same process for filling empty seats within our systems works all the up to a county level… In regards to your viewpoint that the Constitution is there to provide the answer, I would further like to elaborate the procedure and speak about the rules regarding seats are not only occupied, but this being the single most important reason, making sure the seats are proper according to the a. rules b. regulations c. legislation d. guidelines e. statutes f. amendments g. codes h. pleadings and other things regarding the seriousness of anyone found “Out of Line” and “Out of Order.” In your opinion, respectfully you had mentioned that it doesn’t matter, but in fact the system depends on unified operational focus.

Your questions arise and I will do my best to provide this service:

1.     What if the people find, in their search for some truth or another, that there exist one or more "empty" seats in our representative based government?

I. Legal Standards

A. 18 U.S.C. § 1963(a)(1), (2), (3) The specific goal of RICO is to prohibit the use of an enterprise to engage in certain criminal activities. A person who uses an enterprise to engage in a pattern of racketeering may be convicted under the RICO criminal statute (18 U.S.C. §1963). An enterprise is defined as "any individual, partnership, corporation, association, or other legal entity, and any union or group of individuals associated in fact although not a legal entity." A pattern is defined as "at least two acts of racketeering activity, one of which occurred after the effective date of [RICO's passage] and the last of which occurred within 10 years after commission of a prior act of racketeering activity." "It is also clear that section 1963(a) not only provides criminal penalties for “Whoever” is found in violation of any provision section of §1962 but also further points to section §1961 which makes any “Racketeering Activity” a crime. Actor(s) also further alleged to be in violation to the Hobbs Act, 18 U.S.C §1951(a), which is a RICO Predicate offense because Section 1951(a) expressly makes conspiracy a crime. Because of the effect of 18 U.S.C. § 2, however, one who aids and abets the commission of a federal crime is treated as if “They” had committed the crime as a principal and can be charged under RICO if the crime is one set forth in Section 1961(1)(B)( G). 35 ("aiding and abetting one of the activities listed in Section 1961(1) as racketeering activities makes one punishable as a principal and amounts to engaging in that racketeering activity.) R.I.C.O.

2.     How do WE make sure these seats are filled, using the same solution as prescribed for any other empty seat?

B. 18 U.S.C. § 371—Conspiracy to Defraud the United States… The general conspiracy statute, 18 U.S.C. § 371, creates an offense "If two or more persons conspire either to commit any offense against the United States, or to defraud the United States, or any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose. (emphasis added). See Project, Tenth Annual Survey of White Collar Crime, 32 Am. Crim. L. Rev. 137, 379406 (1995) (generally discussing § 371). The operative language is the so called "defraud clause," that prohibits conspiracies to defraud the United States. This clause creates a separate offense from the "offense clause" in Section 371. Both offenses require the traditional elements of Section 371 conspiracy: 1. Including an illegal agreement such as “The installation of a “Fraudulent Operative” for an “Alleged Seat” of the United States; further to a believing national and international citizen base within “This United States” and by knowing full well they are owed the truth, but however denying them this right is enforceable.” The answer is make sure they remain empty when fraudulent operatives and actors attempt to fill them by prosecution. In time the seats will eventually fill with lawful candidates who have seen a working system and have learned through the derelicts mistakes.

3.     How do we force the government to fill them?

C. Criminal intent such as_ “The intent to commit a federal crime constitutes their malice where siding outside of the agencies rule of law constitutes their intent to deprive and defraud the true owners of their rights protected by the Constitution and “In criminal law, an overt act, or an open act of one that can be clearly proved by evidence, and from which stated above can be deduced or concluded from by the evidence,” the reasoning rather than from explicit statements, or inactions and whereby may show these elements as fulfilled." So, in other words, the best way would be to obtain an “Injunction” through “Federal Court” with a “Judicial Signature Authority” and “Seal” whereby providing “Service” to the “Derelicts.”

4.     Is it time to form some serious militias for enforcement?

In my opinion yes and because “Federal Law” had remained without enforcement while overt criminals were able to maintain their threat of continuances. The “Unorganized Militia” consists of all able bodied persons of the nation and of the states between the ages of 17 and 44; which is exclusive of all members of the organized militia i.e., The Armed Forces of your Federal Government of the United States & of the National Guards of the various states of the Union. Enforcement serious forces are necessary to the security of your “Free State.”

Title 10 U.S.C. 311. Militia: composition and classes:

(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.

(b) The classes of the militia are -

(1) The organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia

(2) The unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

5.     How can we prove beyond a doubt, that there ARE empty seats?

Now it is well known as the reliance is heavily on the definition of "defraud" provided by the Supreme Court in two early cases, Hass v. Henkel, 216 U.S. 462 (1910), and Hammerschmidt v. United States, 265 U.S. 182 (1924). In Hass the Court stated: “The statute is broad enough in its terms to include any conspiracy for the purpose of impairing, obstructing or defeating the lawful function of any department of government.” Any conspiracy which is calculated to obstruct or impair its efficiency and destroy the value of its operation and reports as fair, impartial and reasonably accurate, would be to defraud the United States by depriving it of its lawful right and duty of promulgating or diffusing the information so officially acquired in the way and at the time required by law or departmental regulation. Hass, 216 U.S. at 479480, and to answer your question it is not your job to “Prove Beyond a Reasonable Doubt” that is the “Federal Prosecutors Job” however the first step is to report the crime to the FBI, but these days you need to have “Judicial Oversight” to force compliance it has gotten so bad within our agencies. There must be record so that enforcement is practice and for the purposes of your rights, it’s best to become a witness and recognize when you are a victim of a federal crime in accordance with 18 U.S.C. §3771, §1512, and §1513; by knowing your rights you can force compliance through the courts all the way up to the Attorney General. The answer is to look to the root power found in the grounds of the constitution. Find the disconnect, in other words if there is something that does not line up in accordance to the law of the land, hence the fraud and finally the most important comparison; the statutes light compared to the mortal derelict(s).

6.     Where in the Constitution does it indicate that these seats even exist?

This is what I like to term “Systemic Gnosis” in other words this is only my personal experience that can attempt to provide the answer of where it indicates these seats even exist. The short-sweat answer is my opinion always was the Judge seated in an elevated place above society to remind citizens of their place in understanding the peoples law. A double-edged blade in fact, above the Judicial Seat is a seal and in court rooms flags with other reminders, however the most important reminder is their seated place provided by the people, which is or was especially these days “Grace.” It was a place to exercise this “Guardianship” when we had courts and not cults. The fact is when a judge or anyone “Seated” in their place by the people is when you may understand the well-known terminology “Fallen from Grace” and this happens when someone without excuse breaks the law of the land, or the peoples rules etc. placing their own heads under the law fallen from the bench, or the “Seat” or however it is for terminology it is most important to have the “Knowledge” of 1. When exactly this happened, or happens & 2. How to enforce compliance or force the law to be upheld in a CIVIL MANNER.

7.     Can this be extended to representational seats in the states?

In Hammerschmidt, Chief Justice Taft, defined "defraud" as follows: To conspire to defraud the United States means primarily to cheat the Government out of property or money, but it also means to interfere with or obstruct one of its lawful governmental functions by deceit, craft or trickery, or at least by means that are dishonest. It is notnecessary that the Government shall be subjected to property or pecuniary loss by the fraud, but only that its legitimate official action and purpose shall be defeated by misrepresentation, chicane or the overreaching of all of those charged with carrying out their governmental intentions “Representational Seats” in the states and which includes “Everyone” alleged “Acting” within our agencies. The defendant(s) may be found in violation of the Hobbs Act, 18 U.S.C §1951(a), which again is a RICOPredicate offense because Section 1951(a) expressly makes conspiracy a crime. Because of the effect of 18 U.S.C. § 2, however, one who aids and abets the commission of a federal crime is treated as if “They” had committed the crime as a principal and can be charged under Rico if the crime is one set forth in Section 1961(1)(B)(G). 35 ("aiding and abetting one of the activities listed in Section 1961(1) as racketeering activities makes one punishable as a principal and amounts to engaging in that racketeering activity.) your working Justice System.

8.     Whom do we seek out for an answer to these questions?

Simply understand your rights, comprehend “Your True Power” v. “United States Fraud,” as you may decide to coordinate with other “Witnesses” or “Victims” by doing so… Finding yourselves possibly encouraging your “Secretary of Defense” or “The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff” respectfully demanding “Federal Law Enforcement.” This starts the clock where “Military Jurisdiction” will eventually graft and therefore it is without discretion R.I.C.O shall be ENFORCED.

Thank you for your invaluable questions today Monday September, 25^th 2017 and may you find yourselves getting to the bottom of all derelict employees who are found without a doubt with your witness out of line and out of order. All states including Texas citizens who operate within their wonderful union are directed to always without fear to do the same in the spirit of true government accountability. Border protection starts within your state and county level, getting your agents in line is getting your national protection which includes immigrant invasion defense. If you find “Retaliatory” erroneous filings simply assert your rights in their attempts, especially under their attempts as a 1. Victim or 2. Witness of a “Federal Crime.” If they attempt to kidnap you simply say these four lovely words for your personal protection “I do not consent.” Threatening witnesses or victims is a punishable offense, but kidnapping them in the fraudulent light of prosecution is more than serious, which includes without looking up the law off my memory THIRTY YEARS IN A FEDERAL PRISON.

Show Ten II. Tell Ten,

EXECUTIVE
JUDICIAL I.
0zmfq530vdm0m September 25, 2017 6:29

The argument is incorrect. The statement of "Shall not exceed one for every thirty thousand" does not mean they have to have 1 for every 30 thousand. It means they can not have more than 1 for every 30 thousand
- 22towhgimqi9g > 0zmfq530vdm0m September 25, 2017 6:38
  
  Not correct.
  
  If you look up the word "Exceed" in the dictionary, you will find it means
  
  "Shall not reach beyond the limit of"
  
  Exceed does not mean only "More Than", it means to go beyond ANY limit or number.
  
  So, since the number, (1/30,000) is a fraction, aka a ratio, in keeping with the definition of exceed, this means that neither the top number OR the bottom number shall "go beyond the limit of", (exceed), this ratio. UP, DOWN, or EVEN SIDEWAYS, if that was possible in this case.
  
  Bottom line - Exceed DOES NOT mean "more than", it means to go outside a limitation or boundary of a limit.
  - 0zmfq530vdm0m > 22towhgimqi9g September 25, 2017 6:47
    
    if you read it exactly as written it is no more than 1 for every 30 thousand. No where does it state you have to have 1 for every 30 thousand
    - 22towhgimqi9g > 0zmfq530vdm0m September 25, 2017 6:51
      
      Incorrect. Read the reply now that I have explained. Refresh your screen.
0zmfq530vdm0m September 25, 2017 6:34

Beside the fact that we live under maritime law and a dictatorship of sorts. The founding fathers forged this as a union of sovereign nations. It is why they specifically spelled out the limited powers of the US government. Then in the 10 amendment it clearly states, "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." so as the people we have the ultimate authority over anything and everything not spelled out specifically as given to the US government.
- 22towhgimqi9g > 0zmfq530vdm0m September 25, 2017 6:44
  
  I agree, so what? What has that got to do with my evaluation of the wording in 1, 2, 3?
  - 0zmfq530vdm0m > 22towhgimqi9g September 25, 2017 6:51
    
    Nothing on the evaluation. This is how to fix the situation. We need to change those at the state level to force the restoration of the Constitution. The State governments have the power to nullify any and all federal laws not written precisely giving said power to the US government.
  - 0zmfq530vdm0m > 22towhgimqi9g September 25, 2017 6:55
    
    You could also try reinstating your sovereign status as spelled out in the Constitution. Though some have tried and are currently still sitting in jail in direct violation of the Constitutionally guaranteed right to a speedy trial and against undue punishment. Which then shows that no matter what you do we will not succeed until enough people start learning and decide to fight against the tyranny
- 22towhgimqi9g > 0zmfq530vdm0m September 25, 2017 6:55
  
  And besides,
  
  By your logic it would be perfectly OK for every state in this Union to have only one representative. After all that fits in fine with your definition of the clause. "No more than" does not mean "no less than", right? So, by your logic, a state with a population of 10 million people would be fine with only one Representative, because that is not "more than" one rep for every thirty thousand people. The problem is; it's a whole lot LESS than what was intended.
  
  You know what they intended if you read further down the article. It clearly sets out preset minimums for every state in existence at the time of the signing, to try as best they could to guess the population of a state, in order to set up each state with as close a number as they could get to One representative for every thirty - fifty thousand people THEN existing in each respective state. Anywhere between thirty and fifty thousand people per Rep. was considered acceptable to start.
  
  Don't believe me? Look it up yourself. They gave Massachusetts 8 Representatives to start and the population of Mass. at the time?
  
  378,787
  
  Divide that by eight and you get just under fifty thousand people per Rep. So why would the founders set up a ratio somewhere between thirty thousand and fifty thousand to one, if your interpretation of "exceed" is correct? They wouldn't have. They would have stuck with the minimum, "at least one per state".

of 3

This reply was deleted.