Executive Summary – This article is inspired by and in part taken from a Restore America Plan website entitled: http://
Let say be encouraged to go there and sign up as a member or even to be a member of a De Jeure Grand Jury. Sign up page is here:http://
This is taken from this web site:
Power and Duties of the De Jeure Grand Jury - As mentioned, re-inhabitation is self-actualizing. If needed, the De jeur Grand Juries, as the one lawful authority on the land, operating IN the republics, protected by the Constitution for the United States of America, c. 1787, will commandeer those de facto institutions which fail to obey our lawful orders, remove corporate imposters, and lawfully appoint marshals to serve the district court of the United States and the De jeur Grand Juries. Interestingly, Section 27 of the Judiciary Act of 1789 (http://www.constitution.org/
Members of the Guardians of the Free Republics may also be called upon from time to time to appear in sufficient numbers professionally to emphasize our authority as the supreme lawful de jeur institutions on the land. It is inherent upon the sovereign People to finally accept responsibility to ensure the posterity. End of website quote. What continues is form us and taken from some internet sites.
It is time many of you got to understand what this all means and how is is structured, the roots etc.
What is a De Jeur Grand Jury – The words de jeur mean lawful. Today we see Grand Juries in operation but they have been tainted procedurally to protect the elite. They no longer deal with presentments, just indictments. Lets see what is meant by this by going to the 5th amendment of the US Constitution. The 5th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution says in part as follows: “No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury”. So we clearly see there are presentments and indictments, not just indictments. Here is a quote from Creighton Law Review "In addition to its traditional role of screening criminal cases for prosecution, common law grand juries had the power to exclude prosecutors from their presence at any time and to investigate public officials without governmental influence. These fundamental powers allowed grand juries to serve a vital function of oversight upon the government. The function of a grand jury to ferret out government corruption was the primary purpose of the grand jury system in ages past." Today a grand jury functioning under the constitution to protect the rights of the people and the states is repugnant to the de facto judges and prosecutors.
What is an Grand Jury Indictment – This is a formal case brought before a grand jury by a government employed prosecutor. See the conflict of interest in operation? The judges and the prosecutors both get paychecks from the government. What chance does “we the people have” for justice?
What is a Presentment – This is when the Grand Jury goes off on its own to hear cases without the involvement of the prosecuting government employed attorneys. They can hear witnesses, see evidence and conduct their own investigations. This is how the framers of the Constitution set a check and balance in place to stop a runaway government. This is not taught in any schools for many decades. This is a way the people can throw corrupt judges, and government officials out of office. Of course the idea is to keep the people from doing that so they are little more than slaves. I said this many times – it is the internet that is going to bring down the government repugnant to the constitution but only if the people take lawful action along with education. Education is not enough.
The 1946 Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure – This is how they got us into more bondage. A Federal Rule is nothing that can alter the constitution or even come close to it. It is a sham and a con job entirely and can constitutionally be ignored completely. The constitution completely trumps any Federal Rule or Case Law. Things like Federal Court rules are to specify things like this must be filed in triplicate, double spaced with pages sized 11” X 17”. Things like that are what the rules are for, not to alter the constitution."In 1946, the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure were adopted, codifying what had previously been a vastly divergent set of common law procedural rules and regional customs. In general, an effort was made to conform the rules to the contemporary state of federal criminal practice. In the area of federal grand jury practice, however, a remarkable exception was allowed. The drafters of Rules 6 and 7, which loosely govern federal grand juries, denied future generations of what had been the well-recognized powers of common law grand juries: powers of unrestrained investigation and of independent declaration of findings. The committee that drafted the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure provided no outlet for any document other than a prosecutor-signed indictment. In so doing, the drafters at least tacitly, if not affirmatively, opted to ignore explicit constitutional language.
Let's look at Rule 7 of their fiction and see it is opposed to the constitution: "An offense which may be punished by death shall be prosecuted by indictment. An offense which may be punished by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year or at hard labor shall be prosecuted by indictment." Now let us go back to the 5th amendment:
“No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury.” See they eliminated presentments to protect themselves from this well planned assault on the people and their liberties.
Now let's go to Rule 4 of their fiction: “Presentment is not included as an additional type of formal accusation, since presentments as a method of instituting prosecutions are obsolete, at least as concerns the Federal courts." It was further said that the retention of presentments might have the following effect: “Retention might encourage the use of the run- away grand jury as the grand jury could act from their own knowledge or observation and not only from charges made by the United States attorney. It has become the practice for the United States Attorney to attend grand jury hearings, hence the use of presentments have been abandoned. "
The American Juror Publication goes on - "Of course, no statute or rule can alter the provisions of the Constitution, since it is the supreme law of the land. But that didn't prevent the federal courts from publishing a body of case law affirming the fallacy that presentments were abolished. A particularly egregious example:
'A rule that would permit anyone to communicate with a grand jury without the supervision or screening of the prosecutor or the court would compromise, if not utterly subvert, both of the historic functions of the grand jury, for it would facilitate the pursuit of vendettas and the gratification of private malice. A rule that would open the grand jury to the public without judicial or prosecutorial intervention is an invitation to anyone interested in trying to persuade a majority of the grand jury, by hook or by crook, to conduct investigations that a prosecutor has determined to be inappropriate or unavailing.'"
The net effect of all this is that the grand jury can be stopped by the prosecutor from investigating government corruption or large corporations. The judge can also now dismiss the grand jury members individually or as a group to thwart any investigation they deem inappropriate. This allows corruption, usurping of rights etc to flourish. All one needs to do is control the judges and the prosecutors. Think about if presentments were allowed. What would happen when the grand jury investigates the IRS, the Federal Reserve, Judges acting unconstitutionally violating their oath of office and let's not forget pseudo presidents without birth certificates. See why presentments had to go.
Do Members of the BAR Know These Things – Yes they do, all of them. As officers of the court their allegiance lies with the court and of course they do not want the bar association throwing them out and ending their career and means of earning a living. See when you retain an American attorney there is always a serious conflict of interest. The attorney never fully represents the client under their system of perverted justice.
Rule 4: Smoke and Mirrors – Let us look at rule 4 again. "4. Presentment is not included as an additional type of formal accusation, since presentments as a method of instituting prosecutions are obsolete, at least as concerns the Federal court”. This is not a law or an act of Congress. It is nothing binding let alone with weight to alter provisions for presentments in the constitution. What they have done is made it so the grand jury cannot return charges without the cooperation of the judge and prosecutor. This means they rigged the system to allow for their illegal activities repugnant to the constitution to go unchecked contrary to the constitution. They removed the grand jury controls the founders incorporated into the system to prevent what has happened from occurring. The people got dumbed down and trusted the government blindly. The inevitable happened.
Now if the de jeuregrand juries are operating again with force, the best the elite can hope for is to be removed from power. The worst is many will lose their ill gotten wealth and go to jail for a variety of crimes. Those in power are never going to say: Ok we get it, we've been exposed, it's over. We will give in and do it your way so don't prosecute us. They are used to making false lying promises to people and will never trust anyone telling them this because they know how they have been operating their whole life. They are accomplished liars and it is foreign to them to believe others do not lie. It is even more foreign to them to believe those holding any sort of power actually tell the truth. It is really incomprehensible to them. These people are not like the regular people. They believe in extreme secrecy. To them it is a way to gain and grant power. Any psychiatrist will tell you such secrecy is an indicator of mental illness.
We are not talking about military troop movements here folks. They love their secrets. They know about suppressed inventions, future economic fluctuations, wars etc. They get a big head over having such secret information and begin to confuse secrets with being intelligent. They are not the same. Secret orders, secret oaths, secret everything. They love symbolism which again ties into the secrecy because only they know the real meaning (idiotic). Just study all the pagan imagery on all the Washington DC government buildings. Study old US printed currency and see more of this symbolism and pagan imagery. Study the elite group that meets once a year in Sonoma California on the Russian River. They hold ceremonies worshipping a statue of a big owl called Baal. They worship sticks and stones. Many say they profess to Christianity but this is just lip service for their public image. Many of the politicians get caught in sex crimes with minors. http://www.
They frequently get caught up in other crimes:
These are one bunch of weird people is all I can say. I would not be too fearful of people worshipping statues, go back and read the bible.
Ok back to grand juries.
What the Supreme Court Said - Justice Powell, in United States v. Calandra, 414 U.S. 338, 343 (1974), stated: "The institution of the grand jury is deeply rooted in Anglo-American history. [n3] In England, the grand jury [p343] served for centuries both as a body of accusers sworn to discover and present for trial persons suspected of criminal wrongdoing and as a protector of citizens against arbitrary and oppressive governmental action. In this country, the Founders thought the grand jury so essential to basic liberties that they provided in the Fifth Amendment that federal prosecution for serious crimes can only be instituted by 'a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury.' Cf. Costello v. United States, 350 U.S. 359, 361-362 (1956). The grand jury's historic functions survive to this day. Its responsibilities continue to include both the determination whether there is probable cause to believe a crime has been committed and the protection of citizens against unfounded criminal prosecutions. Branzburg v. Hayes, 408 U.S. 665, 686-687 (1972)."
The Note 4 lie is smashed on the altar of the U.S. Supreme Court, "The grand jury's historic functions survive to this day." Take that Note 4!
The Supreme Court, in United States v. Williams, 504 U.S. 36 at 48 (1992), Justice Scalia, delivering the opinion of the court, laid down the law of the land:
" '[R]ooted in long centuries of Anglo-American history, Hannah v. Larche, 363 U.S. 420, 490 (1960) (Frankfurter, J., concurring in result), the grand jury is mentioned in the Bill of Rights, but not in the body of the Constitution. It has not been textually assigned, therefore, to any of the branches described in the first three Articles. It "'is a constitutional fixture in its own right.'" United States v. Chanen, 549 F.2d 1306, 1312 (CA9 1977) (quoting Nixon v. Sirica, 159 U.S. App. D.C. 58, 70, n. 54, 487 F.2d 700, 712, n. 54 (1973)), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 825 (1977). Supreme Court Justice Scalia further said: "In fact, the whole theory of its function is that it belongs to no branch of the institutional Government, serving as a kind of buffer or referee between the Government and the people. See Stirone v. United States, 361 U.S. 212, 218 (1960); Hale v. Henkel, 201 U.S. 43, 61 (1906); G. Edwards, The Grand Jury 28-32 (1906). Although the grand jury normally operates, of course, in the courthouse and under judicial auspices, its institutional relationship with the Judicial Branch has traditionally been, so to speak, at arm's length. Judges' direct involvement in the functioning of the grand jury has generally been confined to the constitutive one of calling the grand jurors together and administering their oaths of office. See United States v. Calandra, 414 U.S. 338, 343 (1974); Fed.Rule Crim.Proc. 6(a). [504 U.S. 36, 48] "
Summary of de jeur Grand Juries – It is clearly seen beyond any shadow of a doubt that the judge and prosecutor do not have the right to control grand juries nor can they restrict them to prosecutor filed indictments eliminating the presentment process. Now it is common practice that the county summons people to grand jury duty as they do regular jurors for jury duty. I can find nothing that restricts the right for the calling or seating of a grand jury to the de facto courts. Since this is a fourth branch it can be done independent of the judge and prosecutor or else how could it possible investigate them. To let them have all the controls would be to say they are exempt from investigation or prosecution. The reference is the Judiciary Act of 1789 which can be found here:http://www.constitution.
It is a good read.
Enforcement of de jeur Grand Jury Presentments – This is a good question isn't it. So we all get together in different counties and form a de jeur grand jury and issue presentments and the de facto courts and prosecutor just ignore them, which is what they will do. Well at this point we can all go home and let them continue their practices or get more lawfully proactive. Do not think they have the last word in what is lawful and what is not lawful. This is a brainwashing trick they use. They have a lot of force and are prone to violence but them and their actions are not lawful.
The Marshall – The enforcement person for the grand juries is the Marshall. Let us see what the Judiciary Act of 1789 (see link above) has to say about the Marshall.
In Sec 6 we read : “directed to the marshal of the district”. So there were marshals for each district.
There are district courts as we read in SEC 7: SEC. 7. “And be it [further]enacted, That the Supreme Court, and the district courts.”
The term of the Marshall is for four years as found in SEC 27: That a marshal shall be appointed in and for each district for the term of four years, but shall be removable from office at pleasure, whose duty it shall be to attend the district and circuit courts when sitting therein, and also the Supreme Court in the District in which that court shall sit. And to execute throughout the district, all lawful precepts directed to him, and issued under the authority of the United States, and he shall have power to command all necessary assistance in the execution of his duty, and to appoint as there shall be occasion, one or more deputies, who shall be removable from office by the judge of the district court, or the circuit court sitting within the district, at the pleasure of either; and before he enters on the duties of his office, he shall become bound for the faithful performance of the same, by himself and by his deputies before the judge of the district court to the United States, jointly and severally, with two good and sufficient sureties, inhabitants and freeholders of such district, to be approved by the district judge, in the sum of twenty thousand dollars, and shall take before said judge, as shall also his deputies, before they enter on the duties of their appointment, the following oath of office: "I, A. B., do solemnly swear or affirm, that I will faithfully execute all lawful precepts directed to the marshal of the district of ____________ under the authority of the United States, and true returns make, and in all things well and truly, and without malice or partiality, perform the duties of the office of marshal (or marshal’s deputy, as the case may be) of the district of, during my continuance in said office, and take only my lawful fees. So help me God."
The Marshall can have prisoners as found in SEC 28: “the marshal shall be held answerable for the delivery to his successor of all prisoners which may be in his custody at the time of his removal.”
Appointing Marshals - From this we glean that at least the Deputy Marshals are accountable to the district court judges or the circuit court judges who can remove them. It does not say they can remove the actual Marshall. It says the Marshall is appointed but does not say by who. Now we need to use logic and not listen to the de facto courts and members of the bar. The de jeur grand juries are a fourth branch of government to control a run away government branch or official. So for this to work the de jeur grand juries have to be out of the control of the de facto courts and the same applies to the office holder designated as Marshall, who does the actual enforcement regarding orders from the de jeur Grand Juries. So when it comes to de jeur grand juries it seems that each state and county can and should have one. The people just have to decide this is going to happen and form de jeur grand juries.
I suppose the de jeur grand jury can appoint a Marshall to carry out its orders. This seems logical and makes more sense. As to who swears the Marshall in is a good question. SEC 27 calls for the oath to be administered before district court judge. I guess one can run into the de facto court with some witnesses and have the Marshall rattle off the oath before the judge figures out what they did and then just leave. A video camera is also a good idea. It does not say the judge must administer the oath, just that it is done before the district court judge. This is a problem unless a cooperative judge can be found which is most unlikely. Perhaps the de jeur grand jury can hear the oath as well?
Another workaround can be figured out but getting in front of a judge outside the court in a restaurant, or public place with witnesses and rattling off the oath would be lawful except for the fact that the judge and his court is not? It does not say the court must be in session. Remember after Kennedy died Johnson was given the oath on an airplane, not in a courtroom. Now the law does not say the judge administers the oath as the judge did with Johnson, but just that the new Marshall recites it in front of the judge. Of course the de jeur grand jury and the new Marshall can then move quickly to remove the judge who he recited the oath in front of before he gets a chance to file some sort of oath fraud actions trying to negate the oath for some trumped up reason. The judge or any judge I am aware of, can be removed for violating the constitution and solve subsequent problems for that district anyway.
If it is a state grand jury they can clear out the state of bad judges with just one Marshall. It does say in SEC 3 that these district court judges are appointed and must live in the district. It does not say who does the appointing. So there is room to say the de facto judge has vacated his office by not fulfilling the oath of office, behaving repugnant to the constitution, etc and appoint a new district court judge and then comes the marshall. The Marshal we are talking about is not like the US Marshall service.
This is a de facto government twisting of the law. They have made this a presidential appointment. This is so the President can in effect exempt himself from any actions of the US Marshall Service. They have given the US Marshall and the Deputy US Marshall the power of the sheriff in any county they happen to be situated in at any point in time. This is of course not constitutional since it gives the fed all sorts of police and enforcement powers not specifically designated to the fed and thus reserved for the states. The US Marshall service is repugnant to the constitution accordingly.
Actually the federal law enforcement agencies operate contrary to the constitution usurping the rights reserved to the states except in Guam, Washington, D.C. and Puerto Rico. There they can reign strong, but nowhere else. The Federal Law Enforcement agencies used to not use the title police. They used special investigator, inspector, special agent or agent instead. The FBI originally was not a real law enforcement agency and they did not carry guns or have arrest powers. The same applies to the FCC, FDA and numerous other Federal Agencies. As time rolled on and they realized they could get away with this violation of the constitutional powers assigned to the Fed, they got into it big time. People watch that show about the Navy Criminal Investigators running around like police inside the USA and have no idea the whole concept is constitutionally incorrect. This violates posse comitatus. These navy investigators are supposed to only have jurisdiction over military personnel on military bases and vessels.
Marshall Power – The Marshall can command for assistance in the execution of his duties all necessary assistance. Well this means he can deputize many deputies. They can bear arms and use necessary force to execute their duties. One Marshall can deputize thousands of deputies. I believe they should reside in the district of the Marshall, perhaps in the state in some cases. This is your lawful militia in a sense, well sort of for now. There is no restriction on the amount or type of weapons they could use. Could the Marshall enlist the military to effect his orders handed down from the de jeur grand juries? This is a real good question. It seems that he can summon all necessary assistance.
Where Does This Go - Well Rap has already formed de jeur grand juries in each state. They are being trained. It is not clear to this writer if they are at this time seated and functioning. It is believed that they are not yet seated and functioning but it seems it is just around the corner. They will begin investigations and handing down presentments. It is thought that the military will handle the enforcement of these presentments perhaps under the Marshals. This makes it easy and lawful.
Marshals, De Jeure Grand Jury and the US Military - Let's examine this more thoroughly in the light of Posse Comitatus. Here is the relevant citation:
Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.
-Title 18, U.S. Code, Section 1385
Neither the Act nor its legislative history resolves the question of whether the Act prohibits the military from performing its military duties in a manner which affords incidental benefits to civilian law enforcement officers and this could be the Marshall operating under orders of a de jeur Grand Jury. The courts and commentators believe that the military is not so prohibited. As long as the primary purpose of an activity is to address a military purpose, the activity need not be abandoned simply because it also assists civilian law enforcement efforts. A military purpose could certainly be to protect the country from enemies within attacking the constitution.
The posse comitatus is designed to prevent the use of the military in place of ordinary law enforcement performed by the sheriff. Say routine patrols, road blocks, responding to burglary calls, family disturbances etc. This is a misuse. Using the military as police to place the people in general under military control is a misuse. Assisting the Marshall in executing an order of a de jeur grand jury to restore the upholding of the constitution in government is not an abuse. It would be directed only at government employees and appointees not the civilian population in general. The duration of such action would be extremely brief. They would be acting under the Marshall as well, not independently.
State Militia – There are some states that have a State Militia. They have uniforms, receive pay, cannot be placed under the control of the US military and they have military type weapons, naval vessels and aircraft. They are a military but serve at the discretion of the Governor. The biggest state militia that is active has about 1300 members, I believe. What state of readiness they are in I have no knowledge of. I would guess minimal at best. When things become more restored under RAP the geographically relevant state militias would normally be called out by the Marshall to assist if there was a need.
RAP and the Military – RAP says it has the military and we see no reason to counter this. Let us look at it the other way for the purpose of discussion. If the military is not going to help RAP, then it would become a little more of a confrontational situation when it comes to enforcement of orders from the de jeur grand jury. The de facto government will claim the de jeur grand juries and the Marshall are guilty of treason, sedition, violent overthrow of the government etc. They will argue that only they can call and control grand juries and only prosecutor inspired indictments are allowed. They will summon their police forces to bear down on the grand juries and Marshal.
In any event I doubt they would take a chance and try to use the military as an enforcement tool. They would probably never turn on the USA population with a Muslim kenyan unqualified to hold the office in the white house especially after the oil spill. Once the people realize the military are not going to help Washington it is over, fast and decisively. So this is a card they will be unlikely to play since they do not know how it will end. Now it is still felt that the Military is behind RAP as they have continued to so state and we have no reason to believe this to not be true. So this should give you an idea of the lawful processes that should be starting soon and the lawful reasoning behind it. Once again this is us talking not an official RAP announcement. We are trying to explain the processes RAP is facing as we see it and probably as the military sees it but again we are speculating. We do think we are at least close if not right on point with our reasoning.
Summation of RAP Progression– The de jeur grand juries get formed, trained and seated. They need facilities to conduct their proceedings in like a courtroom. They need to paid because they may sit for a year and need to pay for the support of themselves and their families. They need bailiffs or court officers, transcriptionists, secretarial support and probably personal security. This is either done or just about done according to what we hear. Next they need to put Marshals into place who are appointed and trained correctly in the constitution and common law. They too need offices, perhaps simple detention cells, staff, vehicles, communication and other equipment, and deputies who in turn need training. Everyone needs to be paid. Not an overnight thing to put together in 50 states, is it?
Then the de jeur grand juries render presentments after investigations and consideration of testimony and evidence. How long does it take to consider evidence, hear witnesses, debate decisions etc? Let's not forget they are not just deciding on one matter but many. The grand juries eventually return decisions and issue orders. The Marshals receive such orders for execution. The Marshals go to the military for assistance in the execution of these orders. We think this is the path that will be followed. The Governors upon being served decided to not comply. This means it is going to go down other way. This is going to take time. Kennedy broke and pulled with him many grand jurors and this caused delay due to their being replaced and trained. Then comes the Marshals. Then comes the seating and consideration of presentments. Not an overnight thing, is it?
Through all this the military must be happy that all is being done lawfully to cover themselves as well. One cannot blame them for this, it is actually their duty to assure lawfulness. This could mean changes mid stream, regrouping, reorganizations (like Kennedy leaving), etc. Again time consuming. It looks like RAP is moving down the track and is going to get there. To play this out on the bad side lets see what could happen if the military decides to not support RAP. We have no information or evidence to believe this is the case but since so many posters on the net are going negative on RAP due to delay we thought we should discuss this with an eye towards debunking rumors that RAP is a decoy move form the de facto government.
What if Rap Does Not Have Military Support – Ok we know there is a RAP. We know they have de jeur grand juries. It is an easy matter for the de jeur grand juries to render presentments against some factions in the de facto government that are providing prima facia evidence of their behavior repugnant to the constitution. One does not need more than public records to prove this to a grand jury. Ok so there comes decisions, orders etc. There are appointed Marshals who would receive these orders and execute them. Ok so no military support is what we are going to consider.
At this point stop and get a hold of yourself. The chances of the military being called in to suppress the people of the USA acting to restore the constitution and common law is slim or none. They are first of all tied up with wars conquering assets for the elite. They cannot just cease and desist their wars. It would take many months to pull out. Second the troops might act if say Los Angeles was full of rioters in the streets and they were burning the city. In other words some gross act of civil disobedience where the property damage and mayhem were off the charts with no logic behind it.
The military does not like Obama. The people that like Obama are those living off of the government by working for it or from entitlements. These are the opposite of brave people who will fight for Obama. These people want a paycheck or a handout. Forget them, they will bend in the breeze. The military has family who suffered and will suffer from this oil spill. It is fairly common knowledge that 9/11 was a false flag. Obama is failing miserably. People are homeless, out of work, going without necessities. These people are the friends and family of the military.
Obama mistreats the military. He insults them by not correctly acknowledging the pledge of allegiance, he does not observe the military holidays and traditions expected of the president. It is no secret he is not qualified to hold office. Numerous officers have chosen to take court martial rather than obey his orders. He is not qualified to be president by birth. He is the worst president ever. The military is not going to do anything to the civilian population of the USA behaving lawfully.
So why am I saying this. Because RAP has taken you so close, you can really finish it without the military if it came to it. Am I crazy? Nope. The Marshall gets appointed and gets a large force of duly authorized deputies lawfully. Forget what the de facto government says. Now you have lawful Marshals enforcing the orders of the lawful de jeuregrand jury.
Am I talking violent overthrow of the government. No way. I am talking about the lawful and orderly restoration of the republic under the constitution. This is a restoration of lawful order in government only. Remember Obama was the perfect storm. A jerk like this doesn't happen very often and they are at their weakest right now. So RAP has opened pandoras box for the de facto government. Forget RAP being a part of the de facto government or some sort of decoy plot. RAP has shown the people the way to restore order and the constitution. With or without the military this can go through.
If RAP does not have the military the plan has already been cast into motion and can be picked up and carried to fruition without the military, using just the marshals and deputy marshals. How many deputy marshals are best used is a good question open to debate. The constitution calls for this, not just allows it. We the people see the light. The de jeur grand juries are in place. Next comes the Marshals which they are already talking about and possibly have now and then the deputies and you are there. So very close. The de facto government would never arrange anything so very threatening to them. They will absolutely deny the lawful existence of grand juries. They will absolutely say only they have the right to call, seat and control grand juries. They will absolutely deny the lawfulness of anything that causes them to follow the constitution.
Supporting RAP - It is suggested that you give RAP your support and sign up. For this to work and work well and fast there will need to be at least several hundred thousand people involved on different levels. Strength in numbers.
I think many countries around the world are so sick of this de facto government they would send delegations in droves bearing gifts to the new government. If the people start expecting the de facto government and their house of cards to crumble it will only accelerate the end of their lawless reign of terror. So don't say RAP will never succeed etc. Say Obama and his gang have run out of time and they are about to go down memory lane. Use the oil spill to keep the people reminded of the evils that these lawless people are capable of.
No comments:
Post a Comment