State & County Conference Phone Calls
Click on the Icon Above
I would like to suggest that each state and county have conference phone calls from time to time. The website coordinator for each county is encouraged to set up an account with FREE Conference Calls by click on the link provided above. There is no cost to sign up and no monthly charges.
In addition to a website administrator for each county we will need someone to schedule and host the conference calls. We will also need an individual to be the editor of a county email newsletter and several contributing bloggers.
The FREE Conference Call phone number assigned to me is
(712) 775-7300 and the Guest ID Number is 378152#.
Honesty, Integrity and Courage
The men or women that serve as your county sheriff should be individuals of impeccable character. They should be the epitome of honesty, integrity and courage. They should be willing to lay down their lives rather than betray the sacred trust of their constituents.
The sheriff should only enforce laws that he or she feels are just and should refuse to comply with unconstitutional rules, regulations, codes, ordinances and statutes. The sheriff should be the guardian of liberty and the defender of the Constitution.
The sheriff's top priority should be to protect the people's rights against the abuse of power by the state and federal government. There job is not to protect the people, it is to protect the rights of the people by arresting individuals that violate the rights of the people whether they be burglars, petty thieves or elected officials.
The sheriff is to enforce the supreme law of the land which is the Constitution. The Constitution was written to govern the government and the Sheriff should honor the Constitution by enforcing it.
When the bankers and the financial elite hire dishonest politicians to write unjust laws they need county sheriffs to enforce those laws. When a law is unjust it leads to tyranny and it is the responsibility to the sheriff to determine which laws are just and which ones are not.
If the sheriff enforces unjust laws it is the duty of the people to replace that sheriff with one that is committed to honoring their oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution. The sheriff should be a man or woman that makes decisions based upon principles and not politics.
In the 1930's the law enforcement officers in Nazi Germany did exactly what they were told. They were obedient to the state and enforced all of the laws that they were given.
They were taught that it was wrong to question authority and that it was their duty to be obedient to every command issued by the Fueher.
The German people complied with the laws not because they were just but because they feared the potential consequences if they they didn't. Today in the United States the law enforcement officers have become agents of the government and are complying with unjust laws in their communities just as their counterparts did in Nazi Germany.
Which Laws Should be Obeyed?
"All laws repugnant to the Constitution are null and void."
Chief Justice John Marshall - Marbury vs Madison 1903
The primary responsibility of a county sheriff s to honor his oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution and to be the guardian of the rights of his constituents. He needs to identify common thieves, street thugs and politicians that seek to violate the rights of the people living in his county.
When a sheriff enforces laws that are unjust, the sheriff is forced to choice between doing what is right or doing what or doing what he is told. He should be listening the voice of the Constitution and the people and not the bureaucrats and Federal agents.
A sheriff is elected to serve the people and not the government. His job is due determine which laws are just and which ones are not. A man of integrity doesn't need a lawyer to tell him what is right and what is wrong. A truly Constitutional sheriff is an oath keeper that understands that when he enforces laws that violate the rights of his constituents, he becomes an enemy of the people he was elected to serve.
Members of the law enforcement community are not taught to question the law, they are taught to enforce it. Just laws promote liberty, equality and justice while unjust laws promote crime, corruption and human bondage. All laws that are just need to be sustained and laws that are not must be ignored by the county sheriff that wishes to honor his oath.
Congress has the responsibility to pass legislation that limit the power of the government to violate the rights of the people. The Constitution did not grant Congress the right to pass laws that would limit the rights of the people to their lives, liberty and property. The Constitution was written to control the government not to control the people.
The three branches of government are like departments that are supposed to provide checks and balances to prevent the abuse of power by the employees of legislative, executive and judicial branches of government. As the employer of the employees of all three branches it is our responsibility to determine which laws are just and which ones are not. To turn over that responsibility to the courts would be akin to a business owner allowing his employees to run the show.
A county sheriff that does what he is told by government is nothing more that an administrative lap dog for the state. A sheriff with integrity has the courage to answer to the Creator and his constituents. The sheriffs and the public have been brainwashed into thinking that it is their duty to obey all laws. This is a false doctrine; it is the duty of a righteous man to obey just laws and to refuse to comply with laws that deprive men and women of their God given rights.
The financial elite that control the wealth and power in our country hire corrupt politicians to write laws that enable them to steal more and more of our wealth while we give our consent by obedience to their unjust laws. When we obey, we give our consent to the theft of lives, liberty and property.
Preserve, Protect and Defend
Martin Luther King once said "One has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws."
Every County Sheriff takes an oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution, but without an understanding of the Constitution and the principles upon which is was written, it is impossible for a Sheriff to honor their oath.
When a county sheriff enforces an unjust law they must first violate the oath that they have taken to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution.
The reason elected officials are required to take an oath of allegiance to the Constitution is because it is the Supreme Law of the Land. Any time that a rule, regulation, code, ordinance or statute violates the Constitution, it is the responsibility of the Sheriff to support the Constitution and to refuse to comply with laws that unconstitutional. The purpose of this website is to help educate members of the law enforcement community on Constitution and the principles of liberty.
Is Your Sheriff an Enemy Agent ?
When a Sheriff that takes the oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution, he enters in to a binding contract with his constituents. When a Sheriff breaches the contract by enforcing unconstitutional federal directives he becomes an agent of the government and becomes an enemy of the people.
Every Sheriff has taken an oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States as well as the Constitution of the state where he lives. This oath is a promise that the Sheriffs have to defend the lives, liberty and property of the people against all enemies both foreign and domestic. The Sheriff is supposed to protect the people from criminals that reside in his county as well as those that are sent from Washington to harass the people.
A Sheriff is not willing to stand up against the unconstitutional abuse of power by the Federal government becomes a part of the problem. Instead of defending our rights he defends the unconstitutional usurpation of power by the government. When the sheriff allows the Federal government to violate the supreme law of the land the sheriff breaks the promise that he has made with his constituents. Violating the sacred oath is a very serious matter. When the Constitution is violated a crime has been committed and it is the job of the county sheriff to hold those responsible accountable.
When a Congressman that voted for NDAA comes in to your county, your Sheriff should arrest the Congressman for violating his oath of office. He should then provide the Congressman with room and board while he is awaiting trial by a jury of his constituents. If you are caught for not wearing a seat belt, you will be prosecuted, but when your Congressman violates the Constitution he is not held accountable for violating what is supposed to be the supreme law of the land.
Replies
State laws supercede federal laws...
Arresting a person for "violation of oath" is not a simple matter. I didn't say "impossible" -- but much more goes into such an allegation (much less proving it in court) than the missive implies. First, there is the consideration of under "what" law is a charge of such a crime properly brought? Every crime carries elements that must be shown.
Then there is the jurisdictional matter. When a Congressman, who is by definition sitting in a sovereign Assembly capacity in Washington D.C., does such thing as "violation of oath" not in the county where such sheriff has jurisdiction, how is that to be LEGALLY approached?
Has anyone thought through these items before making such blanket statements? Why have no "violation of oath" charges been brought? Could some of these "technicalities" be the cause? Is there even a "violation of oath" law on the book under which a charge can be brought? If so, where? We have 50 states in this union. Has anyone researched the specific state laws, and located them? If they existed at one time, what later laws may have repealed them? It requires extensive digging through 50 states' worth of Statutes at Large to even dig them out. Once located, in a given state, you may have something to work with.
Then you will run up against the very Constitutional language that enables a rather solid defense against the charge (Art. 1 Sect. 6, Cl. 1) among others.
So my question remains, under what law, in what state, is the proposition made for a sheriff (or anyone else for that matter) to bring the charge? Specifics are required. Else, I suggest we not make such a statement until such concrete plan is evinced.
If a law needs to be drafted, then let's get to that stage FIRST. Draft it, get it introduced, through the requisite committees, approved by 51% of the Assembly, signed by the governor, and placed in the Statutes at Large and proper state Annotated Code.
There is no point of drafting a bill for a given state if some state law already provides the means toward this end. However, there be some serious legal research required to even ascertain THAT aspect of this proposal.
Aaron
Title 42 has been in place to hold accountable those who have taken the oath of office. Problem is, the ones we bring the charges before are BAR card holding participants and they function in administrative positions instead of constitutional judicial positions. Even so, they claim for their minions absolute judicial immunity and as far as the lawmen, they have circumstantial immunity for doing their job.
Title 42 brings into light the Civil Rights Act of 1871 so there is much documented history within these titles yet there are no constitutional mandates holding these people accountable because they approach these matters as you say "LEGALLY" instead of Lawfully. You tell me where there is a Article III Court in your state, unless you are in Pennsylvania.
The last Sheriff that I addressed concerning the constitutionality of his actions against me stated, "I will let the courts determine weather it is I that has to change or you."
Until we as a people bind together and re-establish the courts of common law and remove ourselves from the legal system that has raped our nation, states and counties, and return a lawful system, we are going to continue to live in their police state and tyranny.
The research has been done and the documented proof can be found in the library of congress as well each of the states libraries. Standing together and showing the nonjudicial powers that be that we as a people are here in numbers and object and do not consent to their lack of recognition of their oaths of office to the organic constitution for the united states of America, will no longer be tolerated, is the only way we are going to turn this thing around. As of now it just seems there are just too few of us that are willing to commit all....... gotta take care of me and mine.... don't have the time,,,,, can't get away from the job (for those who have one), and on and on.
If people continue to look to the Legal aspect instead of the Lawful one...... we will continue to be contracted to the fraud that is well established and enslaving this nation and states and all its people.
The time is at hand and having to do the research now shows how we have indeed let the ball drop on our watch.
Actually, I am in Pennsylvania. But your suggestion of using Title 42 (Federal) law brings another quandary. If you ask a Sheriff to file a federal charge against anyone, he is going to either refuse outright (saying "I don't charge under any but state law or county ordinance"), and/or will refer you to the regional office of the FBI or other Justice Department federal agent.
I'm not disagreeing with the notion of these congress-critters violating their oath. It just MUST be clear under what law, in what state, the charge is going to be filed. Civil rights statutes, legislatively intended to be connected to "race" discrimination, is a rough road. I understand the language thereof, but jurists (judges and lawyers) are going to assert that a politician violating their oath does not fall under the scope of this particular breed of Jim Crowe era legislation.
The research I have done in this area does show one particular type of law that might work. Thus far I have not heard anyone in the patriot community even mention it, so I'm not convinced people are really thinking this through as they ought.
Aaron
You do not ask the sheriff to file anything, you file it yourself Brother. The question posed was, do you know of any Article Three courts? Are there any constitutional courts operating and at the peoples disposal.
I wonder what game it is you play stating:
The research I have done in this area does show one particular type of law that might work. Thus far I have not heard anyone in the patriot community even mention it, so I'm not convinced people are really thinking this through as they ought.
Are you going to educate us or keep exclusive useful information on a carrot stick and simply utter void statements of your knowledge and our ignorance and misdirection?
I don't think it appropriate to make accusations in one paragraph, and "brother" me in another. Nor should you accuse me of "misdirection." Though I could have done so myself, it violates decency in public dialog. My point was to encourage others to actually THINK from beginning to end what transpires in a criminal legal case. It is all too simple when it is one of we peons is in a traffic court. A whole new level of interesting occurs when one thinks of such things (as you suggest) as a "private prosecution" of a member of Congress.
Isn't that the purpose of such person as a Sheriff, who is the chief law enforcement executive of his respective County? I can count the dollars under my control, and I can also count the resources of anyone prosperous enough to have made it to Washington by way of ballot. I should rather be silent, in a case such as this, and thought of as all that you apparently think of me, than to open my mouth and be driven into the ground by a RICO protected politician who is scarcely even seen in the state that sent him Washington-ward.
There is an old southernism that admonishes us not to back something in a corner that is bigger an' meaner than we are. There is also a biblical parable along the same line -- Luke 14:28-31.
The LAST thing I am going to do (despite your accusation of me carrying about an alleged "carrot") is to put an untested theory in such a forum, have people running with it like it be the proverbial "silver bullet," and then hearing that a savvy District Attorney in search of a cheap thrill threw a person in jail for "practicing law without a license" and having them blame ME for it. Nope. Not happening.
So as for your Title 42 idea -- how many arrests/convictions do you have applying this "file it yourself" strategy under such Federal code?
I've been in this movement since the early 1980's, and have heard wind of Title 18, Sect. 241/242 strategies, and all sorts of other great sounding ideas.
Any convictions? Plenty -- but only if you count noses of the people who made such attempts. The last thing we ought do is give them any further precedents against us. As they say, it's a free country. Do as thou wish. I'm not going to be made to feel responsible for any of our own sitting in the new position of "inmate." No good can come of it until there is a much larger movement in place.
Aaron
Aaron, specifics are required! You are so right. I found that the injunction (aka, restraining order) which is an equity remedy, not one at law, in your home state or in federal court, depending on the agency that the violating agent is a member of, would make the proper forum.
I also believe that each individual must protect their own rights, in person, and that when we group up, that is when the power of the congress will prevail.
I've filed a 42 action myself and helped another person and we both settled for 2,000 and 2500 each. Along with an injunction, these moves can prove to be quite powerful.
You can check out the "equitable remedy" on my website, powerpolitics.com