Due to Google and YouTube censoring and deleting 
accounts nesaranews can be eliminated. 
www.nesara.news is the backup blog if this one gets removed.


Sunday, February 25, 2018

When Broward County Sheriff Scott Israel Was Accused of Corruption, He Responded: 'Lions Don't Care About the Opinions of Sheep'



Broward County Sheriff Scott Israel—the man whose agency failed to prevent the Parkland massacre despite having received a tip last November that Nikolas Cruz was plotting a mass shooting—has been accused of public corruption.

Two years ago, the Sun Sentinel reported that Israel was rewarding top political supporters by giving them and their family members cushy jobs doing public relations and community outreach for the Broward County Sheriff's Office. One such position, outreach manager, paid out a salary of $78,489. The person who got that job was the husband of Israel's campaign manager.

Israel had been a Republican but ran for office as a Democrat. He was first elected sheriff in 2012, then re-elected in 2016. According to the Sun Sentinel:
The outreach workers, who mainly attend community events, are in addition to political activists and others Israel hired into community affairs roles, writing and designing printed pieces about the agency, and sharing it on social media. The employee log shows six hired into community affairs roles, their salaries totaling $388,729.
Israel's opponents say he's built a publicly funded political machine, paying back supporters with jobs and using them to keep him in office. They say the money could be better spent, particularly after the sheriff complained about not having enough funding to secure the county courthouse, where a murder suspect recently escaped.

Asked about the allegations, Israel responded, "What have I done differently than Don Shula or Abraham Lincoln or Martin Luther King, Gandhi?"

He also said, "Lions don't care about the opinions of sheep." That's a paraphrase of a quote from the Game of Thrones character Tywin Lannister, a villainous public administrator known for promoting his family's interests ahead of the government's or the people's.

Were the employees hired to work at the Sheriff's Office competent? It certainly seems like a relevant question now that we know the authorities were forewarned about the dangers posed by Cruz. The office received at least 18 calls about Cruz's disturbing behavior and possession of weapons from 2008 to 2017. BuzzFeed has obtained records related to those calls. The most recent one, made on November 30, 2017, described Cruz as a "school shooter in the making." Broward County referred the matter to the Palm Beach Sheriff's Office but took no further action—even though a relative of Cruz had warned Broward County about Cruz's stash of weapons just three days before.

This news follows the resignation of Marjory Stoneman Douglas School Resource Officer Scot Peterson, who refused to engage the killer while the rampage was underway. Israel suspended Peterson after watching video footage of the SRO's behavior, saying that it made him "sick to my stomach."

Given the appalling failures that took place at Israel's office, the "sheep" might like to ask the "lion" some questions. Perhaps he could answer them in a less condescending and authoritarian fashion.

https://reason.com/blog/2018/02/23/broward-county-sheriff-scott-israel-accu

There are still some Constitutional Sheriffs ... emailed by a reader

 
 There are still some Constitutional Sheriffs ...


Wicomico County Sheriff Michael A. Lewis and other Maryland sheriffs speak

Maryland Sheriff Says It Will Be CIVIL WAR Before Gun Confiscation

Some sheriffs protest gun restrictions; others refuse to enforce the laws

By Marlena Chertock, Emilie Eaton, Jacy Marmaduke and Sydney Stavinoha
February 22, 2018


Sheriff Mike Lewis considers himself the last man standing for the people of Wicomico County.


“State police and highway patrol get their orders from the governor,” the Maryland sheriff said. “

I get my orders from the citizens in this county.”


With more states passing stronger gun control laws, rural sheriffs across the country are taking the meaning of their age-old role as defenders of the Constitution to a new level by protesting such restrictions, News21 found.


Some are refusing to enforce the laws altogether.


Sheriffs in states like New York, Colorado and Maryland argue that some gun control laws defy the Second Amendment and threaten rural culture, for which gun ownership is often an integral component.


They’re joined by groups like Oath Keepers and the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association, both of which encourage law enforcement officers to take a stand against gun control laws. 

“It’s not (the judge’s) job to tell me what I can and can’t enforce,” – Weld County, Colo. Sheriff John Cooke.
 
Lewis and some other sheriffs across the nation, most of them elected by residents of their counties, say their role puts them in the foremost position to stand up to gun laws they consider unconstitutional.


“The role of a sheriff is to be the interposer between the law and the citizen,” said Maryland Delegate Don Dwyer, an Anne Arundel County Republican. “

He should stand between the government and citizen in every issue pertaining to the law.”


While the position of sheriff is not found in the U.S. Constitution, it is listed in state constitutions: Article XIV of Colorado’s, Article XV of Delaware’s, Part VII of Maryland’s and Article XIII of New York’s.

Nearly all of America’s 3,080 sheriffs are elected to their positions, whereas most state and city police top commanders are appointed.

Upstate New York sheriffs don’t understand why the state passed the SAFE Act when, as they see it, the only place with a gun problem is New York City.

The governor signed the act last year in response to
the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting.


When Lewis was president of the Maryland Sheriffs’ Association, he testified with other sheriffs against the state’s Firearms Safety Act(FSA) before it was enacted in 2013.

One of the strictest gun laws in the nation, the act requires gun applicants to supply fingerprints and complete training to obtain a handgun license online.

It bans 45 types of firearms, limits magazines to 10 rounds and outlaws gun ownership for people who have been involuntarily committed to a mental health facility.


After Lewis opposed the FSA, he said he was inundated with emails, handwritten letters, phone calls and visits from people thanking him for standing up for gun rights.

He keeps a stuffed binder in his office with the laminated notes.


“I knew this was a local issue, but I also knew it had serious ramifications on the U.S. Constitution, specifically for our Second Amendment right,” said Lewis, one of 24 sheriffs in the state. “

It ignited fire among sheriffs throughout the state.

Those in the rural areas all felt the way I did.”


In New York, the state sheriff’s association has publicly decried portions of the SAFE Act, legislation that broadened the definition of a banned assault weapon, outlawed magazines holding more than 10 rounds and created harsher punishments for anyone who kills a first-responder in the line of duty.

The act was intended to establish background checks for ammunition sales, although that provision hasn’t taken effect.


A handful of the state’s 62 sheriffs have vowed not to enforce the high-capacity magazine and assault-weapon bans.

One of the most vocal is Sheriff Tony Desmond of Schoharie County, population 32,000.

He believes his refusal to enforce the SAFE Act won him re-election in 2013.


“If you have an (assault) weapon, which under the SAFE Act is considered illegal, I don’t look at it as being illegal just because someone said it was,” he said.


Desmond’s deputies haven’t made a single arrest related to the SAFE Act.

Neither has the office of Sheriff Paul Van Blarcum of Ulster County.

Van Blarcum said it’s not his job to interpret the Constitution, so he’ll enforce the law.

But he said police should use discretion when enforcing the SAFE Act and determining whether to make arrests, as they do when administering tickets.


In Otsego County, New York, population 62,000, Sheriff Richard Devlin takes a similar approach.

He enforces the SAFE Act but doesn’t make it a priority.

Wicomico County Sheriff Mike Lewis is taking a strong stance against potential limits to Maryland citizens’ Second Amendment rights.
 
“I feel as an elected official and a chief law enforcement officer of the county it would be irresponsible for me to say, ‘I’m not going to enforce a law I personally disagree with,’” he said. “

If someone uses a firearm in commission of a crime, I’m going to charge you with everything I have, including the SAFE Act.

I won’t do anything as far as confiscating weapons.
We’re not checking out registrations.

People that are lawfully using a firearm for target shooting, we’re not bothering those people.”


Colorado made national headlines when 55 of the state’s 62 sheriffs attempted to sign on as plaintiffs in a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of several 2013 gun control bills in the state.

The most-controversial measures banned magazines of more than 15 rounds and established background checks for private gun sales.


Weld County Sheriff John Cooke sits in his office in Greeley, Colo., on June 6, 2014. Cooke was the lead plaintiff in a lawsuit against the governor when the state legislature passed gun control laws in 2013. Cooke says the new laws are unenforceable and unconstitutional. (Photo by Morgan Spiehs/News 21)


A federal judge said the sheriffs couldn’t sue as elected officials, so Weld County Sheriff John Cooke and eight other sheriffs sued as private citizens.

Cooke was the lead plaintiff in the lawsuit, which a federal district judge threw out in June. He and the other plaintiffs are preparing an appeal.


“It’s not (the judge’s) job to tell me what I can and can’t enforce,” Cooke said. “

I’m still the one that has to say where do I put my priorities and resources?

And it’s not going to be there.”


Cooke has won fans with his opposition.

He, like Maryland’s Sheriff Lewis, keeps a novel-thick stack of praise and thank-you notes in his office.

He’ll run for a Colorado Senate seat in November and is endorsed by the state’s major gun lobby, Rocky Mountain Gun Owners.


Lewis, who is running for re-election this year, said sheriffs have a responsibility to push against what he sees as the federal government’s continual encroachment on citizens’ lives and rights.


“Where do we draw a line?” he asked. “

I made a vow and a commitment that as long as I’m the sheriff of this county I will not allow the federal government to come in here and strip my law-abiding citizens of the right to bear arms.

If they attempt to do that it will be an all-out civil war.

Because I will stand toe-to-toe with my people.”


But Brian Frosh, a Maryland state senator and an FSA sponsor and gun-control advocate of Montgomery County, said Lewis’ understanding of a sheriff’s role is flawed.


“If you are a sheriff in Maryland you must take an oath to uphold the law and the Constitution,” said Frosh, now the Democratic nominee for Maryland attorney general. “

You can’t be selective.

It’s not up to a sheriff to decide what’s constitutional and what isn’t.

That’s what our courts are for.”


Bronx County, New York, Sen. Jeffrey Klein, who co-sponsored the SAFE Act, agreed that sheriffs who refuse to enforce laws they disagree with are acting out of turn.

Constitutional sheriffs are not lawyers or judges, Frosh said, which means they are following their convictions instead of the Constitution.


“We had lots of people come in (to testify against the bill) and without any basis say, ‘This violates the Second Amendment,’” Frosh said. “

They can cite the Second Amendment, but they couldn’t explain why this violates it.

And the simple fact is it does not.

There is a provision of our Constitution that gives people rights with respect to firearms, but it’s not as expansive as many of these people think.”


But sheriffs have the power to nullify, or ignore, a law if it is unconstitutional, Maryland Delegate Dwyer said.

He said James Madison referred to nullification as the rightful remedy for the Constitution.


“The sheriffs coming to testify on the bill understood the issue enough and were brave enough to come to Annapolis and make the bold stand that on their watch, in their county, they would not enforce these laws even if they passed,” said Dwyer, who has recognized the sheriffs for their courage. “

That is the true role and responsibility of what the sheriff is.”

Rural versus Urban Divide


Some rural sheriffs argue that gun control laws are more than just unconstitutional — they’re unnecessary and irrelevant.

In towns and villages where passers-by stop to greet deputies and call local law enforcement to ask for help complying with gun laws, they say, firearms are less associated with crime than they are with a hunting and shooting culture that dates back to when the communities were founded.


Edward Amelio, a deputy in Lewis County, New York, shares that sentiment.

There’s no normal day for Amelio, who has patrolled the 27,000-person county for eight years.

But he usually responds to domestic disputes, burglaries and car accidents.

That’s why he considers the SAFE Act unnecessary.


“We issue orders of protection and some contain a clause the judge puts in there saying a person’s guns are to be confiscated,” Amelio said. “That’s mostly when we deal with guns.”


Zachary Reinhart, a deputy sheriff in Schoharie County, New York, said he responds to a wide variety of calls, too.


“Our calls range from accidental 911 dials to domestic disputes to bar fights,” he said. “

You can’t really typify a day at the Schoharie County Sheriff’s Office. It’s all pretty helter-skelter.”


Violent crime also isn’t common in Wicomico County, Maryland, where Lewis is sheriff.

He receives daily shooting reports from the Maryland Coordination and Analysis Center, which are not available for public disclosure.






“You always see ‘nothing to report’ in the eastern region, in the southern region, in the northern region, in the western region,” Lewis said. “

But the Baltimore central region? Homicide after homicide after homicide.” 


Even though there are few gun crimes in rural areas, Sheriff Michael Carpinelli in Lewis County argues that people need guns for self-defense.






“People rely on the police in an urban environment to come and protect you all the time,” he said. “

People who live in a rural area also rely upon the police, but they realize that they live further out from those resources and that they may have to take action themselves.”


Duke law professor Joseph Blocher said gun culture has varied in urban and rural areas for centuries.


“It has long been the case that gun use and ownership and gun culture are concentrated in rural areas, whereas support for gun control and efforts to curb gun violence are concentrated in urban areas,” he said.

“In the last couple decades we’ve moved away from that towards a more-centralized gun control.”


“When I was five years old, my grandmother was raped, and I was with her when it happened. I remember getting on the telephone and dialing the operator and saying, ‘I need the police.’ And I couldn’t tell her where, and I couldn’t tell her for who, and I was told to hang up and don’t play pranks. At five years old, what do you do? You don’t know. A neighbor had heard my grandmother screaming and took up his shotgun and ran to the woods and held the person at bay that was raping my grandmother. I think that’s probably what made me want to become a police officer. I didn’t want to see that happen to anybody else.” —Sheriff Michael Carpinelli, Lewis County, N.Y.  (Photo by Emilie Eaton/News21)


Lewis bemoaned lawmakers who craft gun-control legislation but are ignorant about guns.

“They have no idea between a long gun and a handgun,” he said. “

Many of them admittedly have never fired a weapon in their lives.”


But Klein, the Bronx County senator, said he does understand the gun and hunting culture in upstate New York.


“Growing up, my father was in the military,” Klein said. “

When I was younger, I had a .22-caliber gun. In the past, I’ve gone pheasant hunting, quail hunting. I

t’s great,” he said. “I mean, there’s nothing that we do in Albany, especially with the SAFE Act, that in any way takes away someone’s right to own a gun for hunting purposes.”

Oath Keepers and CSPOA


If former Arizona sheriff Richard Mack had it his way, there wouldn’t be a single gun control law in the U.S.


“I studied what the Founding Fathers meant about the Second Amendment, the right to keep and bear arms, and the conclusion is inescapable,” said Mack, the founder of the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association (CSPOA).

“There’s no way around it.

Gun control in America is against the law.”


“The people here they are like the original rebels that rebelled against England. They’re strong in their thoughts. They will protect themselves, protect their families and they cherish and respect their freedoms. One of the biggest freedoms that they have is the right to keep and bear arms.” —Sheriff Tony Desmond, Schoharie County, N.Y.  (Photo by Emilie Eaton/News21)


He knows his no-compromise stance has cost him and the CSPOA the support of some sheriffs and law enforcement organizations around the country.

And it’s resulted in civil rights agencies labeling CSPOA an anti-government “patriot group.”


But Mack, the former sheriff in eastern Arizona’s rural Graham County, is not letting up.

His conviction is central to the ideology of CSPOA, which he founded in 2011 to “unite all public servants and sheriffs, to keep their word to uphold, defend, protect, preserve and obey” the Constitution, according to his introduction letter on the association’s website.


CSPOA also has ties to Oath Keepers, an organization founded in 2009 with a similar goal to unite veterans, law enforcement officers and first-responders who pledge to keep their oath to “defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic.”

Mack serves on the Oath Keepers Board of Directors.


“I’m very proud that the people have put me into this office. As I said, I ran unopposed four years ago and I’m unopposed again this year. I guess I must be doing a good job. It’s an honor to serve the residents. There’s difficult things at times. The SAFE Act is one of those difficult things that you have to deal with and you do the best that you can and you try to be fair to everybody.” —Sheriff Richard Devlin, Ostego County, N.Y.  (Photo by Emilie Eaton/News21)


Oath Keepers is larger and farther-reaching than CSPOA, with active chapters in 48 states and the District of Columbia, and an estimated national membership of 40,000.

Its website features a declaration of “orders we will not obey,” including those to disarm Americans, impose martial law on a state and blockade cities.


CSPOA grabbed media attention in February with a growing list of sheriffs — 484 as of late July — professing opposition to federal gun control.

Detailed with links beside each name, the sheriffs’ stances run the gamut from refusals to impose a litany of federal and state gun-control laws, to vague vows to protect their constituents’ Second Amendment rights, to law critiques that stop short of promising noncompliance.


“Why are we being penalized? Why are we being crucified because we’re standing up for our Second Amendment right? Why does everybody look at us like we’re right-wing nuts because we’re standing up for our constitutional rights?” —Sheriff Mike Lewis, Wicomico County, Md.  (Photo by Sydney Stavinoha/News21) 


Only 16 of those 484 are listed as CSPOA members.


Some sheriffs perceive Oath Keepers and CSPOA as too radical to associate with.

Desmond, of Schoharie County, New York, is known around his state for openly not enforcing provisions of the SAFE Act that he considers unconstitutional.

Still, he’s not a member of either organization.


“I understand where they are, I guess, but I just have to worry right here myself,” Desmond said. “

I don’t want to get involved with somebody that may be a bit more proactive when it comes to the SAFE Act.

I want to have the image that I protect gun owners, but I’m not fanatical about it.”


Mack is familiar with that sentiment. He suspects it’s hindered the growth of CSPOA.


“This is such a new idea for so many sheriffs that it’s hard for them to swallow it,” Mack said. “

They’ve fallen into the brainwashing and the mainstream ideas that you just have to go after the drug dealers and the DUIs and serve court papers — and that the federal government is the supreme law of the land.”


The Southern Poverty Law Center, a civil rights nonprofit that classifies and combats hate and extremist groups, included both CSPOA and Oath Keepers on its list of 1,096 anti-government “patriot” groups active in 2013.

Both groups have faced criticism for their alleged connections to people accused of crimes that range from possessing a live napalm bomb to shooting and killing two Las Vegas police officers and a bystander in June.


Media representatives from the Southern Poverty Law Center did not return phone calls and emails requesting comment.


Franklin Shook, an Oath Keepers board member who goes by the pseudonym “Elias Alias,” said the organization doesn’t promote violence, but rather a message of peaceful noncompliance.


“What Oath Keepers is saying is … when you get an order to go to somebody’s house and collect one of these guns, just stand down,” Shook said. “

Say peacefully, ‘I refuse to carry out an unlawful order,’ and we, the organization, will do everything in our power to keep public pressure on your side to keep you from getting in trouble for standing down.

That makes Oath Keepers extremely dangerous to the system.”

The Future of Gun Control Laws


Self-proclaimed constitutional sheriffs hope that courts will oust gun control measures in their states — but they recognize that may not happen.

Lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of gun control legislation in Maryland, New York and Colorado have been, for the most part, unsuccessful.


In New York, five SAFE Act-related lawsuits have yielded few results: One lawsuit resulted in an expansion of the magazine limit from seven rounds to 10, but the rest of the measures were thrown out and are awaiting appeal; a similar lawsuit was stayed; a third was thrown out and denied appeal; and two additional lawsuits have been combined but are stagnating in court.


Plaintiffs in the Colorado sheriff lawsuit are preparing to appeal the decision of a federal district judge who in June upheld the constitutionality of the 2013 gun control laws.


A lawsuit seeking to overturn Maryland’s assault weapons and high-capacity magazine bans went to trial in July, but the judge has yet to issue a ruling.


“My hope is that the governor will look at it now that it’s been a year plus and say, ‘We’ve had some provisions that have failed.

Let’s sit down and look at this and have a meaningful conversation.’” New York’s Devlin said. “

I personally don’t see that happening, but I’d like to see that happen.”

Saturday, February 24, 2018

HOW SHOULD WE JUDGE LIBERALS IN CONGRESS?

THE ISSUE DEFINED
ONCE AGAIN, we face a Constitutional crisis that dramatically threatens our most cherished governing institutions.  By their personal, partisan demands, liberal members of Congress are violating their Constitutional oaths to protect and defend America from all enemies, foreign and domestic.  By their flagrant actions, they are in fact blackmailing not only America but every one of its citizens as well. 

So, the question is this:  How should we judge liberal members of Congress who place their personal demands above the will of the American people, above desperately needed bipartisan legislation, yes, even above the operations of the greatest constitutional Republic in history?  Several key points below clearly explain why we must judge these members of Congress for perpetrating the ‘Schumer shutdown’ as the latest in a long line of unacceptable violations of their oaths.

LIBERALS ARE HIPPOCRITS, LIERS, AND TRAITORS WHO
  •  DO NOT ACT TO ENSURE AMERICA’S FIRST AND HIGHEST RESPONIBILITIES ARE TO PATRIOTIC CITIZENS WHO WORK AND PAY TAXES, TAKE CARE OF THEIR FAMILIES AND COMMUNITIES, VOTE AND SUPPORT OUR GOVERNMENT, OUR PEOPLE, AND OUR HISTORICAL, CONSTITUTIONAL VALUES AND TRADITIONS.
  •  DO NOT ACT TO ENSURE THAT OUR HIGHEST RESPONIBILITIES ARE TO THE PATRIOTIC MEN AND WOMEN IN THE MILITARY, POLICE FORCES, AND BORDER GUARDS WHO DESERVE OUR HONOR AND SUPPORT FOR RISKING THEIR LIVES AND THEIR FAMILIES’ WELFARE TO PROTECT AND DEFEND OUR COUNTRY AND OUR PEOPLE FROM ALL ENEMIES, FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC.
  •  DO NOT ACT TO ENSURE THAT THEIR SWORN CONSTITUTIONAL DUTY IS TO WORK WITH REPUBLICANS TO PASS BIPARTESAN, COMPROMISE LEGISLATION THAT BEST SERVES THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND ALL CITIZENS REGARDLESS OF THEIR PARTY AFFILIATION.
  •  DO NOT ACT TO ENSURE THAT THEIR PATRIOTIC DUTY IS TO RESPECT THE OFFICE OF PRESIDENT, REGARDLESS OF THE INDIVIDUALS SERVING THEREIN, REPUBLICAN MEMBERS OF CONGRESS, REPUBLICAN OFFICIALS SERVING THROUGHOUT THE CURRENT ADMINISTRATION AND REPUBLICAN STATE HOUSES AND LEGISLATORS, AND ALL THE AMERICAN CITIZENS WHO VOTED FOR AND SUPPORT THE CURRENT REPUBLICAN ADMINISTRATION.
INSTEAD, THESE SAME LIBERALS HAVE
  •  VIOLATED THEIR SWORN, CONSTITUTIONAL OATHS AS MEMBERS OF CONGRESS TO TELL THE TRUTH TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE AND NOT LIE ABOUT WHY THEY SUPPORT ALLOWING ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS TO REMAIN HERE AND RECEIVE FINANCIAL SUPPORT THAT IS LEGALLY DUE ONLY TO U.S. CITIZENS.
  •  VIOLATED THEIR SWORN, CONSTITUTIONAL OATHS AS MEMBERS OF CONGRESS TO TELL THE TRUTH TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE AND NOT LIE ABOUT WHY THEY SUPPORT ALLOWING UNLIMITED CHAIN IMMIGRANTION INTO OUR COUNTRY WITHOUT PROPER SECURITY INVESTIGATIONS WHICH JEAPORDIZES OUR NATIONAL SECURITY AND THE SAFETY OF U.S. CITIZENS.
  •  VIOLATED THEIR SWORN, CONSTITUTIONAL OATHS AS MEMBERS OF CONGRESS TO TELL THE TRUTH TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE AND INSTEAD HIDE THEIR REAL INTENTIONS THROUGH ALLEGED RACISM, BIGOTRY, AND MISREPRESENTED DIVERSITY OVER E PLURIBUS UNUM AS THE PRIMARY PURPOSE OF CREATING NEW, UNINFORMED, ILLEGAL VOTERS WHO WILL SAVE THE WANING DEMOCRATIC PARTY
  •  VIOLATED THEIR SWORN, CONSTITUTIONAL OATHS AS MEMBERS OF CONGRESS BY PUTTING THE STATUS OF ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS ABOVE OUR NATIONAL SECURITY, OUR MILITARY FAMILIES, INDEED EVERY AMERICAN CITIZEN BY THEIR BLACKMAIL TACTICS IN REFUSING TO NEGOTIATE REASONABLE COMPROMISES TO KEEP THE COUNTRY FROM SHUTTING DOWN.
  • VIOLATED THEIR SWORN, CONSTITUTIONAL OATHS AS MEMBERS OF CONGRESS AND COMMITING CRIMINAL FRAUD BY TRANSFERRING WELFARE BENEFITS, WHICH ARE PAID FOR AND LEGALLY DUE ONLY TO AMERICAN CITIZENS, TO ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS.
Welfare crime is so vast, expensive, and consequential that a brief summary of facts is warranted. Estimates of Social Security fraud alone exceeded $350 Million in 2016. Illegal immigrants cost the Federal and State Government approximately $135 Billion per year to cover basic services related to schools, , medical, etc. for 12.5 Million illegal aliens and 4.2 million children of illegal aliens.  The consequential impacts of such fraud include, at minimum: reductions in social security benefits and cost-of-living increases to American on fixed incomes; increased state and local taxes to cover local welfare requirements of citizens; increased school taxes to cover additional facilities and expansion of “English as a second language” requirements; and Increased costs to print ballots and legal documents in both Spanish and English to accommodate non-English speaking immigrants.

IN SUMMARY
In the U.S. we judge a person under the law by his/her statements, actions, and motives, taking into full account the consequences, direct and indirect, of those statements, actions, and motives on people, property, and institutions.  Our laws are to be applied equally to all Americans, regardless of position, power, or wealth.  We especially believe that no one is above the law. Sadly, these ideals are not always applied in practice, as our history clearly demonstrates. 

 I would argue that in one special situation, however, these ideals MUST be applied rigorously to the letter of the law. That situation applies to elected members of Congress, the White House, and States who take oaths to protect and defend our country against all enemies, foreign and domestic. These people hold power granted exclusively to them by the People, who in turn have an absolute right to demand that they uphold their Constitutional oaths to protect the public interest of America and its citizens in all situations and circumstances.  The positions and power that such officials hold in trust must never be used for their personal benefit.  Instead, what they hold in sacred trust must always be used on behalf of the People and their rights and privileges stated in our founding documents, especially the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. If any elected official and public servant violates such a sacred trust, and evidence is provided to support such violation, s/he must be censured, impeached, and sentenced accordingly—never again to hold such trust.

 For the reasons cited above, members of Congress--and anyone else in America—who have violated their sworn oaths to protect and defend the U.S. and its citizens against all enemies, foreign and domestic, must be judged guilty. They must be removed from office to receive sentences appropriate to what can only be described as criminal, if not treasonous, actions.  If we truly believe that no one is above the law, we MUST judge these individuals ... else there is no law, no Constitution, no hope for our American Republic.  

 ABOVE ALL ELSE, IN ALL CIRCUMSTANCES, AND IN ALL OUR ACTIONS … WE MUST PUT AMERICA AND ITS CITIZENS FIRST. ONLY THEN CAN WE RESTORE OUR REPUBLIC TO MAKE THE AMERICAN DREAM LIVE AGAIN—FIRST AND FOREMOST FOR ALL OUR CURRENT CITIZENS AND ONLY THEN FOR ANY INDIVIDUALS WHO BECOME FUTURE CITIZENS.  A TRUE, CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC MUST THEN BE RESTORED AND GOVERNED BY ELECTED AND APPOINTED OFFICIALS DEDICATED TO THE VISION OF REPRESENTATIVE GOVERNMENT OF THE PEOPLE, BY THE PEOPLE, AND FOR THE PEOPLE.

FROM ONE WHO BELIEVES

http://www.nesara.news/index.php/how-should-we-judge-liberals

Persistent Questions


By Anna Von Reitz

1. I have had people saying, "Oh, no!  You don't want to have anything to do with the STRAWMAN!"  --- but just like in the Wizard of Oz, the STRAWMAN is your friend.  I also have people running off and registering their NAMES with State of State organizations. Does it make sense to pay pirates for the use of your own name, however it is styled?  Hello?

There is a logic to everything and you must follow the logic of things to the end conclusion. 

When you claim and re-convey your Trade Name (also known as your Given Name) which is your Upper and Lower Case First Middle Last name just like you were taught in Grade School----that is, your name in this form:  "John Mark Doe" and re-convey it back to the "land and soil" of the state where you were born, you in the same breath claim "all styles, orderings, permutations, variations, spellings, and punctuation(s)" of that name and establish their "permanent domicile" on the "land and soil" of the state where you were born. You bring the STRAWMEN -- JOHN DOE, JOHN MARK DOE, and JOHN M. DOE -- right along with you and put them back on the land jurisdiction, too. 

But, but, but....I hear some people saying, you don't want the STRAWMAN! The STRAWMAN is a public slave and owes tons of debt!  Why would you ever want to claim the STRAWMAN?

To control the STRAWMAN, first and foremost.  Does it make sense that you would leave any version of your name under the control of faceless bureaucrats?   And as I secondarily explained, while the STRAWMAN is a debtor and a public trust when it is operating in the international jurisdiction of the sea, it is a creditor and a private trust when operating on the international jurisdiction of the land.  When you bring HIM/HER back ashore, a little magic happens--- the debtor becomes the creditor.

Think of it this way: so long as the STRAWMAN is defined as a sea-going British chattel, HE is a debtor, a criminal, a slave, and a public trust. The instant HE is redefined as an American land asset, HE is a free and honorable creditor and a private trust that the rats can't mess with.  So in which condition do you want your NAME to be in?

Yes, you do want to claim all the variations of your name at the same time you claim and re-convey your Trade Name, and you want to record their permanent domicile on the land and soil of the state where you were born. Not only do you re-convey the STRAWMEN to a permanent domicile on the land and soil jurisdiction, you issue Certificates of Assumed Name for them and record those, too.  You want to claim back the proper use and identity of absolutely everything associated with you and your estate, including whatever other new "names" they dream up for you. 

And please be aware that even now they are scrambling around trying to keep their old schtick going by dreaming up new variations of NAMES and Names for you.  If you watch your mail and your bank statements, you will see all sorts of peculiar things appearing: JOHN Mark DOE,  J. Mark Doe, JOHAN M. DOE, JOHN-MARK:DOE, Doe: John Mark, and so on. 

But your claim of all variations and permutations and spellings and punctuation and orderings will already be on the public record and they will all be predefined with a permanent domicile on the land and soil of the state where you were born, so no matter what, when the rats come to charge their newest "derivative" -- you will be ready to say, "Sorry, that's not a British prize.  That's an American vessel. And here is my Certified Copies of the Public Records proving that I am the controller and owner of that name and trademark."

The paperwork also shows the recorded permanent domicile of these "vessels" on the land and soil of a sovereign state.  End of story.

2. How to deal with THEIR courts? 

Once you have your own paperwork together and recorded, the only responsibility you have with respect to their courts in most situations is: (1) presentation of the Mandatory Notice required under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act; (2) proper rebuttal to any summons; (3) duty to inform.

The FSIA Notice is required so that they are given fair warning that you are claiming your status.  The reply to summons is to keep you out of trouble via any claim that you evaded them or showed them contempt.  You are not obligated to respond to any summons other than rebutting it in a timely manner, which basically means "returning service to the court" with a registered mail letter saying, "Sorry, I am not obligated to appear and decline to do so."  You will want to include a brief signed "Testimony in Fulfillment of Duty to Inform". This is just a brief statement of numbered facts in which you say whatever is true about the referenced issues you were summoned about.  If you know nothing about them, you just say--- By Special Limited Appearance I testify from without the United States on my honor that: (1) It is a fact that I know nothing about the people or issues referenced in the summons dated_________.  And if you do know anything that would be helpful to the court, you enumerate the facts in a similar manner.  You sign that Testimony using a by-line, meaning you claim authorship like in a newspaper article--- by:________ and thumbprint it in red ink, so that the thumbprint touches but does not obscure your name. And send it in with the Mandatory Notice and your Summons Rebuttal.

For 9/10th of the supposed infractions people are summoned to appear for, this all that is necessary to avoid any further contact from the court or any possible claim that you showed them contempt or evaded anything.  The key is to be polite and remember that these people are supposed to be working for you, so you do have a reasonable cause to assist them in the discharge of their duties and a duty under the Public Law to inform them regarding crimes that you may have witnessed.

For the other 1/10th, you have to recall that while they do not have any nexus of authority related to you most of the time, they do have a general law enforcement duty related to the delegated powers and their governing constitution.  If you stray into their jurisdiction, you become subject to their administration.  For example, the federales have delegated authority over sales of alcohol, tobacco and firearms across state lines.  If you are a gun shop owner engaged in selling guns across state lines, you come under federal jurisdiction for those activities and have to hop through their hoops and pay any applicable sales and manufacturing taxes related to those activities--- and if you fail to do so, their courts can legitimately call you to account for that. 

Similarly, if you are directly involved in any event on actual federal land, such as a fistfight on a Naval Base, you can be legitimately summoned as a Witness, even though you are a Foreign Sovereign with respect to them.  If you participated in the fight, you can be held for 72 hours and then released to the local Sheriff.

The rules are similar for the "federated" State of State and County corporate franchise organizations.  Their General Sessions laws may arguably apply to (and for) you via administration of the Public Trust established for the actual state in the wake of the Civil War, but none of their statutory laws do. 

The thing to remember is that nobody wants a bunch of violent criminals ramrodding around the country doing what they please.  We are all obligated in our own small sphere to keep the peace and avoid harming other people and their property.  Its a very simple and common sense standard when you get down to it and once you know who you are, who they are, and what is supposed to be happening.

The other thing I want everyone to remember is that the American Common Law is very straight-forward and often Draconian.  You rustle cattle, you get hung.  Period. You get drunk and drive and run over and kill a teenager walking home from school, you get tried for murder no ifs, ands, or buts. 

I say this to point out that while the American Common Law offers people a lot more freedom, it also requires a lot more social responsibility.  There is no moddle-coddling of criminals and no discretion for judges.  What the jury decides, the jury decides.  And that's that.  Any other mitigating circumstances, your bad childhood, your fear of dogs--- doesn't count.

So when you put your Trade Name back on the land and soil and place yourself under the American Common Law--- be aware that true freedom requires the responsible exercise of that freedom. 

3.  What about people born in the District of Columbia or to members of the military serving overseas?

If either one or both of your parents was born on the land and soil of an American state, you can claim your nationality through either one them.

If neither parent was born on the land and soil of an American state, you are stuck being a Federal Citizen, and have to claim Equal Civil Rights as your remedy, until you establish your own permanent domicile within an actual state of the Union.

A similar situation pertains to first generation immigrants.  They are naturalized as United States Citizens and retain that public status until and unless they meet the requirements (varies from state to state) to become state nationals-- what the Federales call "United States Nationals". 

Generally speaking you have to live in a state for a specified period of time, have to declare your intention, have to establish a permanent home, have to avoid any felony convictions, and demonstrate that you are self-supporting, of age, of sound mind, and generally good character.  Its a rigorous but reasonable standard established in the General Session Laws of each state, and if you meet the standard and follow the instructions established by the law, you can claim to be a Floridian, Vermonter, or Wisconsinite like everyone else there.

4. What about Social Security and other federal programs? Won't I lose all that I paid for if I do this?

See Item 1.   You don't lose anything.  You gain control of what is rightfully yours and cease to be treated as a mentally incompetent ward of the State of State. 

For people already getting payments from Social Security the key word is "retired".  The "federal government" is nothing more or less than corporations in the business of providing stipulated governmental services, just like GM is in the business of building and selling cars, and Dell is in the business of building and selling computers.  If you are like most Americans, you have never been employed by the federal government at all and have been misidentified as a federal worker and "taxpayer" most of your life.  You paid into their social welfare/retirement fund, called the Public Charitable Trust, by mistake, as the result of disinformation and coercion telling you that you were required to get a Social Security Number and required to pay federal income taxes and required to act as a federal citizen. 

It's still the same situation as if you had worked for GM or Dell and vested in their retirement program.  Once you are retired, you no longer have to wear a GM uniform or name tag or carry a Dell Employee ID.  Same thing with the federal government.  You are retired from any and all such obligations of their "citizenship" and are free to return to your birthright status without it impacting any iota of what you are owed.

But, but, but.... OMG! What happens if these federal corporations go bankrupt and I lose my pension? 

Not to worry.  You are actually their Priority Creditors.  The Veterans and the Pensioners get first dibs. Just claim up your Name/NAMES and remove their permanent domicile to the land and soil of your birth state.  We have already set up the Indemnity Bond for your State and an Equal Protection Claim for you, and since your whole problem has been caused by fraud and Breach of Trust in the first place, you are triply indemnified.

The Social Security program established by the Federales was a cheapskate program that was mismanaged---a bureaucratic nightmare, and on top of everything else, anything you got back from it was taxed.  This makes more sense when you realize that Social Security was twisted around and redefined as part of the Public Charitable Trust that was established in the wake of the Civil War as a welfare trust to take care of displaced plantation slaves--converting the pension payments you are owed into welfare benefits that are a non-obligatory debt of a bankrupt corporation.

There can be little to no doubt that the rats in Congress intended to bankrupt their governmental services corporations and stiff the American Veterans and Retirees.

However, this was observed and objected to twenty years ago, and doggedly pursued all this time, to prevent that from ever happening.  Instead of you all suddenly facing old age without a penny and no medical care and all the other nightmarish possibilities that present themselves to your imaginations, you will be in receipt of far better care, far better payments, and far less red-tape.

The new system will be far better than anything currently available and provide a much broader spectrum of care and higher retirement payments for both Veterans and Retirees in general, whether public or private sector.  It will also provide services that are currently unavailable-- counseling and physical therapy options that don't exist now, in-house treatment programs for alcoholism and drug addiction, nutritional and natural healing options that aren't currently covered, hospice and caretaker respite services and much, much more. 

So, instead of fear-mongering and spreading rumors and sitting around on your duffs feeling helpless and scared, get up on your hind legs and start walking with your heads up and your shoulders back.  You have worked hard all your lives and paid your dues in Good Faith. You have nothing to be ashamed of. Those who have defrauded you and abused your trust are the ones who need to re-think their values and blush.

 ----------------------------
See this article and over 800 others on Anna's website here: www.annavonreitz.com

False Flag? The Evidence Builds, Florida School Shooting Allowed To Happen

FBI Tipster Transcript Leaked: Cruz Will “Get Into A School And Shoot The Place Up”: Full Text

Source: Zero Hedge
Update: Amid public demands for transparency, the Broward Police have released the full list of 23 calls for service to the  home of attacker Nikolas Cruz, in a desperate bid to deflect criticism over handling the Parkland school shooting. The final call, however, just like the transcript from the January 5 call discussed below, shows that serious concerns were not acted on.

“In the interest of full transparency, we are making available the list of all 23 calls for service at the Cruz home,” the sheriff’s office said in a Friday tweet. “18 involved Nikolas Cruz. None appeared arrestable under Florida law. However, two of the calls remain under internal investigation.”

As color coded in the list, the most serious warning came on November 30, 2017, when a caller located in Massachusetts advised that Cruz was collecting knives and was likely to conduct a school shooting. The caller was concerned Cruz would kill himself and “be a school shooter in the making.” They believed that Cruz’s weapons were kept at a friend’s house.

The incident was categorized as ‘suspicious’ by Broward County Police but no report was initiated, according to the document. That call is now under Internal Affairs review and investigation, the document shows

In two incidents from 2012, Nikolas fought with his brother, Zachary, and hit his mother, Linda Cruz, with a plastic vacuum cleaner hose. In 2013, Linda told police Nikolas threw her against a wall because she confiscated his Xbox games console. The following year, he punched the wall after she took away the Xbox again. Later, in 2014, a neighbor reported Nikolas had shot at his chickens with an airsoft rifle, a replica of a real gun that shoots plastic pellets. In a “suspicious incident” recorded in 2016, an Instagram report said that Cruz was going to “shoot up a school.” The Instagram post involved a picture of guns.

A pdf of the full list of service calls can be found at the following link.

* * *
Earlier
A person close to Nikolas Cruz, the teenager accused of killing 17 people at a Florida high school on Valentines day, warned the FBI she was concerned Cruz would “get into a school and just shoot the place up,” according to a leaked transcript of her call to the bureau’s tip line one month before the massacre.

The transcript, seen by the Wall Street Journal, provides chilling detail about the woman’s efforts on January 5, just over a month before the February 14 tragedy, to warn authorities about Nikolas Cruz’s propensity for violence and his troubled past.

Tragically, the FBI was busier with other things.

“You know, it’s just so much,” said the caller. “I know he’s—he’s going to explode.” The woman said she was making the call because she wanted a “clear conscience if he takes off and, and just starts shooting places up,” according to the transcripts which were reviewed by the Wall Street Journal.

The caller also mentioned that Cruz dressed up as a ninja or an ISIS fighter, according to the WSJ.

While the FBI last week acknowledged receiving such a call, the transcript, and the stark nature of the caller’s precise warnings about Cruz’s disturbing actions and volatile temperament, previously hasn’t been made public.

“It’s alarming to see these pictures and to know what he’s capable of doing and what could happen,” the caller continued. “He’s [been] thrown out of all these schools because he would pick up a chair and just throw it at somebody, a teacher or a student, because he didn’t like the way they were talking to him.”

She also said that Cruz was due to inherit $25,000 a year, from a life insurance policy, and she was worried that he would spend it on guns.
Psychopath

The concerned Cruz acquaintance also told the FBI that he mutilated frogs, and at least on one occasion, a bird.
He brought the bird into the house,” she recounted. “He threw it on his mother’s kitchen counter and he started cutting it up. He has all kinds of hunting knives. I don’t know what knife he used, though. And he started cutting the bird up, and his mother…said, ‘What’re you doing?’ And he says, ‘I want to see what’s inside.’”
The caller then said, “That to me would be a red flag.
Apparently not so much to the FBI, which admitted last week that it failed to forward the call to the Miami field office for investigation.

The FBI also admitted that the Bureau had investigated a school shooting threat made on YouTube last year but could not identify person behind it – despite Nikolas Cruz using his real name to sign the threat which quite literally says “Im going to be a professional school shooter.”

The man who reported Cruz, Ben Bennight, spoke with the FBI last year for about 20 minutes, and there was no follow-up from the FBI after that initial conversation.

Then, Bennight told CBS that he again spoke with the FBI on Wednesday night for about 20 minutes. They wanted to know if he knew anything more after first reporting the YouTube video last year. He said the same agent/agents he spoke with last year came to his home Wednesday.

Furthermore, as we reported earlier today, CNN’s FOIA of Broward County 911 records has produced a steady stream of scoops about Parkland, Fla. school shooter Nikolas Cruz fleshing out much of what is publicly known about Cruz’s background and the various reports made warning the FBI and other authorities about his threatening behavior.

The police were warned about Cruz’s violent past – that he’d “used a gun against people before” and had “put the gun to others’ heads in the past” – but still they did nothing.

The FBI last week issued a statement disclosing that the call wasn’t passed on to its Miami field office for investigation.

“Under established protocols, the information provided by the caller should have been assessed as a potential threat to life,” the FBI said. “The information then should have been forwarded to the FBI Miami field office, where appropriate investigative steps would have been taken.”

The FBI and the Justice Department are investigating why the lead wasn’t followed up.

* * *
In addition to the FBI’s monumental failure and a steady stream of 911 calls about Cruz, video evidence revealed that an armed Broward County resource deputy stationed at Stoneman Douglas High School during the Valentine’s day massacre did “nothing” during the shooting – instead waiting outside as a gunman opened fire on students and teachers.

The officer, Scot Peterson, resigned shortly after being placed on leave.
“We’re not going to disclose the video at this time, and we may never disclose the video depending on the prosecution and the criminal case,”said Broward County Sheriff Scott Israel.

“These families lost their children, we lost coaches. I’ve been to the funerals. I’ve been to the homes where they’re sitting shiva. I’ve been to the vigils. It’s just, there are no words.”

When asked by a reporter what the deputy should have done, the Sheriff replied “Went in. Address the killer. Kill the killer.” 

Meanwhile, the anti-2nd Amendment crowd continues to peddle children around to try and strip law abiding Americans of their right to bear arms – ignoring the fact that had the FBI and Broward County authorities simply done their jobs, 17 people would still be with us.

* * *
The full leaked FBI transcript is below (pdf link):

https://deusnexus.wordpress.com/2018/02/24/florida-shooting-allowed/

The Internet’s Own Boy: The Story of Aaron Swartz

The-Internets-Own-Boy
‘Friends and family recall an idealist’: Aaron Swartz, the subject of The Internet’s Own Boy. Photograph: Noah Berger Noah Berger/PR

by Mark Kermode
This engagingly constructed (if somewhat hagiographic) documentary offers a very moving account of the life and death of “hacktivist” Aaron Swartz, who killed himself in January 2013 while facing jail time for downloading academic journals. Director Brian Knappenberger argues that the case against Swartz was overzealously pursued in order to make an example of him and on the evidence presented here it’s hard to disagree. High-profile advocates such as Tim Berners-Lee talk passionately about Swartz’s extraordinary abilities (as a sparky teenager, he helped develop RSS), while news footage documents his key role in derailing congressional support for the notorious Stop Online Piracy Act (Sopa). Meanwhile, friends and family recall an idealist with little interest in money who saw open access to information as a human right.

[H/T The Guardian]

Quatloos the CIA owned and controlled forum has been posting nesaranews content and I thanked them.

I am not surprised at all with those troll breeding cabal owned forums. I have discovered their copied content from nesaranews is actually promoting nesaranews with the search engines.

I decided to thank them for it with a post for 2 pages of publicity:
I wanted to thank this CIA controlled troll breeding platform for posting my content from nesaranews. I am honored for the publicity. Though you may do it for a negative way, it still further promotes exposure and causes more visitors for me. I check several search engines for many keywords and the results for quatlost point viewers to nesaranews. So thanks again for the publicity! :haha: ~Freewill

I will not ridicule or pester them as their reputation precedes them already. But decided to be a nice guy and thank them.


Emergency Broadcast – Health Ranger – Feb. 23, 2018



If YouTube censors the above video, the copy below is uploaded to this post and will not be effected.



This is an emergency broadcast from the Health Ranger, Feb. 23, 2018.
This broadcast covers the accelerating attempted communist takeover of America by radicalized left-wing forces that include CNN, Antifa and other George Soros-funded sabotage operations.
Their goal is to de-legitimize all conservative voices by demolishing their First Amendment rights, revoking their Second Amendment rights, and violating their Fourth Amendment rights until every last non-liberal person in America is either silenced, destroyed, imprisoned or dead.
This is not a joke. The war on America’s patriots is already under way, and Google, Facebook, YouTube and Twitter are complicit in this process. 

Found here:  

Trump Flip Flops on His Promise


Mainstream Media Now Praising Trump 
as Trump Flip Flops On His Promise 
 
The enemy within has been carrying out their false flags for years to bring about confiscation of the nations' guns, concentrating on the nation's children as the victims of GUNS.  Now, using PAID crisis actors professing to be 'survivors' with scripts, including those who also ACTED at the Sandy Hook false flag who have been CAUGHT several times since Sandy Hook - even a child sitting on Obama's lap,  it appears the leftists have succeeded in convincing Trump to respond to the scripted cries of children, parents and friends to 'protect the children via gun confiscation'.  
 
American's are falling prey to the enemy's contrived script to make ALL the people of these united States to be VICTIMS of the enemy's well carried out plan.  A full scale civil war is on the horizon.