Starting on May 1, 2017 Members of the Constitution Club will be
charged  $5 per month to cover website maintenance and administrative costs.

In the Gold Bar below,  you will see a number of tabs
that will take you to video presentations on various topics.

Attention Fellow  Patriots

In the center of the main page you will see articles and/or videos posted by Keith Broaders and Morton IX.  Also posted on the Main Page you will have access to recent blogs and forums. The membership roster is also posted on the Main Page.

In the column on the right you will have access to sources of alternative news with Gary Franchi, Lou Dobbs and Judge Andrew Napolitano.

You will also have access to "The Principles of Liberty", "The Philosophy of Liberty" and "The Law" by Frederic Bastiat  You can also go to Constitution Facts and see how much you know about the Constitution.

In the Gold Bar at the top of this page you will see a number of tabs that will take you to video presentations on various topics.

Peter John
Share

Peter John's Discussions

False Flag Ops

Started Mar 8 0 Replies

Painting by…Continue

No Lawful Money

Started this discussion. Last reply by Peter John Feb 15. 3 Replies

We have no Lawful Money;When There is No Money FLEEFor thus saith the Lord, Ye have sold yourselves for nothing, and ye shall be redeemed without money. Isaiah 52:3…Continue

Gifts Received

Gift

Peter John has not received any gifts yet

Give a Gift

 

Peter John's Page

Latest Activity

Peter John replied to Keith Broaders's discussion Jurisdictional Subjegation
"study caught.net n I add when the robes  use a rule to deny a right to a remedy s/he has violated their oath & committed treason & amounts to the 5th wrongful taking clause by claiming some rule Trumps ur 1st Amend Right of Petition My…"
Mar 22
Peter John replied to Keith Broaders's discussion Jurisdictional Subjegation
"I am a BEing, see DOI & FTG; How To Deal With A Bad Judge - Caught.net How To Deal With A Bad Judge ... No Jurisdiction Sham ... Delay If Judge Is About To Be Rotated Off Of Case or Re-Focus Judge's Bias/Anger Against Other Side ..."
Mar 22
Peter John's discussion was featured

What gov't

 The USG’s illegal, unConstitutional creation and use of Terrorism is now becoming fully exposed thanks to some very timely, crafty and wise geopolitical moves by Vladimir Putin in the Mideast.Sadly, in the World of secret Intelligence, governments often use covert operations to do their dirty work which is not only illegal and disgusting beyond words, but actually constitutes secret acts of war and crimes against humanity.Yes, these covert operations are usually abject crimes against humanity and often involve Gladio-style false-flag terror attacks, including mass-murder and acts of blatant destruction against innocents and their property.These covert operations, are usually called “black ops” by Intel insiders because they are done in secret and by using the evil assets of the criminal underworld, the truly dark side of humanity.The folks that create and deploy such evil, anti-human acts of false-flag and/or Gladio-style terror are…See More
Mar 6
Peter John replied to Keith Broaders's discussion Know the IRS Code and Save Thousands of Dollars
"civil Rights Act 1866 protects from foreign entiyes, the non federal bank of no reserves is privately owned by foreign owners Nor does any robe have Constitutional Authority to take anything claimed by the IRS-a private debt collecter for the Fed,…"
Feb 20
Peter John replied to Keith Broaders's discussion A Blueprint for a Just Society
"read US vs  Olmstead, the govt as the law breaker to how the Right toBE Left Alone has bean DENIED by the Agents of CHANGE, CFR, PNAC, AIPAC, Fed, IRS"
Feb 17
Peter John replied to Peter John's discussion No Lawful Money
"also I learned Fbot, the resident Kenyan's handlers was axelrod & rahm, CFR members & dual isrealis since 2004 to the ELEction fraud of 2008-so the 8 yrs of change was a did-info ops slathered thru the jewSA by the zionisssssts owning…"
Feb 15
Peter John replied to Peter John's discussion No Lawful Money
"in 1930 it took 1 penny to buy what takes over $1 fiat today"
Feb 15
Peter John posted a discussion

No Lawful Money

We have no Lawful Money;When There is No Money FLEEFor thus saith the Lord, Ye have sold yourselves for nothing, and ye shall be redeemed without money. Isaiah 52:3…See More
Feb 15
Peter John replied to Keith Broaders's discussion AmericaAgain! FREE Weekly Newsletter
"We have no Lawful Money;When There is No Money FLEE For thus saith the Lord, Ye have sold yourselves for nothing, and ye shall be redeemed without money. Isaiah 52:3 Full text of "The Negative Side of Positive Law" -…"
Feb 15
Peter John posted a status
Jan 17
Peter John posted a discussion

Free Julian

News about Is Assange Alivebing.com/newsWikileaks: Is Julian Assange interfering in US election?BBC · 38 minutes agoWhen Ecuador cut Julian Assange's internet at its London embassy ... of information triggered if someone did not regularly "check in" to prove they …Julian Assange is not Dead, but his Internet Connection is Cut by 'State Party'thehackernews.com · 1 day agoDon't worry — Julian Assange is alive and kicking! But his Internet connection is dead. Earlier today, Wikileaks tweeted that its co ……See More
Oct 25, 2016
Peter John replied to Peter John's discussion 11/22/63, FTG
""For all intents and purposes, the American people lost control of their government with the assassination of President John F. Kennedy in 1963. With the exception of Ronald Reagan, every President since Kennedy has been completely controlled…"
Oct 21, 2016
Peter John posted discussions
Oct 19, 2016
Peter John replied to Keith Broaders's discussion Clinton Body Count
"WikiLeaks’ 10 Most Damning Clinton Emails that Prove Mainstream Media is Scripted and Controlled TOPICS:Jay SyrmopoulosMediaPropagandaWikiLeaks. . October 18, 2016 clinton-msm-wikileaksBy Jay Syrmopoulos With information coming out of…"
Oct 19, 2016
Peter John replied to Keith Broaders's discussion Clinton Body Count
"DOJ, FBI Decided ‘No Matter What,’ Hillary Would Go Free in Email ProbeIn another set of emails from the Wikileaks dumps, top Clinton aides, including Huma Abedin and Robert Mook, are shown discussing how important it is to keep…"
Oct 19, 2016
Peter John replied to Keith Broaders's discussion Clinton Body Count
"Ol BJ, Blue Dress Bill; "It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is."-- Bill Clinton[William Jefferson Blythe III] (1946- ), 42nd US PresidentSource: Excerpt from Grand Jury testimony, Sep 21,…"
Oct 19, 2016

 
"Since the day the ink dried on the Bill of Rights, "[t]he right of an American citizen to criticize public officials and policies . . . is 'the central meaning of the First Amendment.'" Glasson v. City of Louisville, 518 F.2d 899, 904 (6th Cir. 1975) (quoting New York Times v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254, 273 (1964)). There can be no doubt that the freedom to express disagreement with state action, without fear of reprisal based on the _expression, is unequivocally among the protections provided by the First Amendment. See id.; Bloch, 156 F.3d at 682; see also Barrett v. Harrington, 130 F.3d 246, 264 (6th Cir. 1997) ("[T]he First Amendment right to criticize public officials is well-established and supported by ample case law. Furthermore, it is well-established that a public official's retaliation against an individual exercising his or her First Amendment rights is a violation of § 1983."); Duran v. City of Douglas, 904 F.2d 1372, 1378 (9th Cir. 1990) ("[G]overnment officials in general, and police officers in particular, may not exercise their authority for personal motives, particularly in response to real or perceived slights to their dignity. Surely, anyone who takes an oath of office knows - or should know - that much.")."by TruePatriot
McCurdy v Montgomery County, Ohio, 240 F3d 512 (6th Cir. 2001)      Pete Inc
“We first consider whether “the facts alleged show the [defendants’] conduct violated a constitutional right.” Saucier v. Katz, 533 U.S. 194, 201 (2001). Next, we determine whether that right was “clearly established” at the time of the alleged violation. Id. Applying this inquiry while viewing the facts in the light most favorable to Plaintiffs, the district court erred in granting summary judgment on this claim.
Plaintiffs’ Right Against Retaliation
“As a threshold matter, we must determine whether, when “[t]aken in the light most favorable to the party asserting the injury, . . . the facts alleged show the officer’s conduct violated a constitutional right.” Saucier, 533 U.S. at 201. We evaluate claims that state actors retaliated against a claimant in response to his exercise of free speech under the framework generally set forth in Mount Healthy City Sch. Dist. Bd. of Educ. v. Doyle, 429 U.S. 274 (1977). Under MountHealthy and its progeny, a plaintiff must show that (1) he was participating in a constitutionally protected activity; (2) defendant’s action injured plaintiff in a way “likely [to] chill a person of ordinary firmness from” further participation in that activity; and (3) in part, plaintiff’s constitutionally protected activity motivated defendant’s adverse action. Bloch v. Ribar, 156 F.3d 673, 678 (6th Cir. 1998) (internal citations omitted); see also Thaddeus-X v. Blatter, 175 F.3d 378, 394 (6th Cir. 1999) (en banc). Once a plaintiff raises an inference that the defendant’s conduct was motivated in part by plaintiff’s protected activity, the burden shifts and defendant “can demonstrate that it would have taken the same action in the absence of the protected activity.” Arnett v. Myers, 281 F.3d 552, 560- 61 (6th Cir. 2002) (citing Thaddeus-X, 175 F.3d at 399). The inquiry of “whether activity is ‘protected’ or an action is ‘adverse’” is context-specific. Thaddeus-X, 175 F.3d at 388.
“The First Amendment generally protects Plaintiffs’ right to display signs communicating their views on abortion, and “[t]he fact that the messages conveyed by those communications may be offensive to their recipients does not deprive them of constitutional protection.” Hill v. Colorado, 530 U.S. 703, 714-15 (2000); see also Terminiello v. City of Chicago, 337 U.S. 1, 4 (1949) (“Speech is often provocative and challenging. It may strike at prejudices and preconceptions and have profound unsettling effects . . . . That is why freedom of speech, though not absolute, . . . is nevertheless protected against censorship or punishment.”). The district court correctly found that Plaintiffs had “engaged in protected activity,” (J.A. at 116), and Defendants do not argue otherwise. We next consider whether the adverse action “would chill or silence a ‘person of ordinary firmness’ from future First Amendment activities.” Thaddeus-X, 175 F.3d at 397 (citation omitted) (noting the “standard is amenable to all retaliation claims”). Here, Plaintiffs need not show they were actually deterred from exercising their right to free speech, but rather must show the actions were “capable of deterring a person of ordinary firmness from exercising his or her right[s].” Id. At 398. A chilling effect sufficient under this prong is not born of de minimis threats or “inconsequential actions,” but neither does the requisite showing permit “solely egregious retaliatory acts . . . to proceed past summary judgment.” Id.
“Deprivation of one’s liberty of movement can hardly be classed “inconsequential;” indeed, the Founders endeavored scrupulously to protect this liberty in the Constitution. See U.S. const. amend. IV; U.S. const. amend. XIV. A two and one-half hour detention absent probable cause, accompanied by a search of both their vehicles and personal belongings, conducted in view of an ever-growing crowd of on-lookers, would undoubtedly deter an average law-abiding citizen from similarly expressing controversial views on the streets of the greater Dayton area. See McCurdy v. Montgomery County, 240 F.3d 512, 520 (6th Cir. 2001) (impliedly acknowledging an arrest without probable cause constitutes adverse action of sufficient consequence); cf. Lucas v. Monroe County, 203 F.3d 964, 974 (6th Cir. 2000) (loss of business after being removed from a police station’s rotating call list sufficient to “deter the average wrecker service operator” from similarly criticizing defendant sheriff).
1st Amend

Freedom of assembly

freedom of speech


Peter John's Blog

Another zio judge

Posted on April 29, 2016 at 8:28pm 0 Comments

The decision was written by ginsBERG…

Continue

Black Robe Terrorism-Treason

Posted on April 29, 2016 at 7:01pm 3 Comments





 Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. (2 Cranch) 137, 180 (1803)  "... the particular phraseology of the constitution of the United States confirms and strengthens the principle, supposed to be essential to all…
Continue

If Americans Knew

Posted on April 29, 2016 at 6:56pm 0 Comments

 
$40,000,000,000 divided by 10 yrs is $109,000,000  zionISISreal + $10.9 million per F'n day…
Continue

Input

Posted on September 18, 2015 at 10:13am 2 Comments

Subscribe here

The Mission of…

Continue

Comment Wall (6 comments)

You need to be a member of Constitution Club to add comments!

Join Constitution Club

At 7:54am on December 19, 2015, Peter John said…

these  r diff articles onb the same subject

At 7:38am on December 19, 2015, Keith Broaders said…

It appears that you have posted the same discussion 5 times. I suspect that your most recent post is an edited version of the  first. Please delete the first four versions and I will approve of your most recent discussion.

At 9:22am on July 11, 2015, Peter John said…

We post on everything-US, Health, news the MSM refuses to adress

At 12:00pm on June 4, 2015, Peter John said…

I talked with Her Sunday, there was a phone meet on Monday but there was no telephone # listed to call in. Ppl ask for court watchers but leave no contact info. I accepted ND Director

At 9:21am on June 4, 2015, Keith Broaders said…

Do you know Stephanie Strong?

At 9:20am on June 4, 2015, Keith Broaders said…

Peter please call Keith Broaders at 951-282-3271

 
 
 

© 2017   Created by Keith Broaders.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service