reply to post by OnTheDeck
The Federalist papers discussed many of these possibilities over 200 years ago. These were the legal papers, founding the legal understanding which
led to the ratification of the Constitution for the Several States.
The Federalist 26 answers a great many questions on the powers of the congress over the military, and the problems of an expanding military.
Likewise, the Federalist 44 discusses problems with paper money, and limitations on the powers of those states. The federalist 26 also discusses what
the duties, and the recourse is if that military grows so large as to pose a threat to the public.
The federalist 57 discusses the alleged tendency of the new plan (the constitution) to elevate the few at the expense of the many, and how to
recognize it, and how it might be brought into being.
The federalist 84 discusses, and reiterates the limitations on the proposed Federal Government, and the reasons behind them.
prohibition of Acts of attainder, and ex post facto laws, and establishment of the right to the writ of habeas corpus along with the trial by jury
were the greatest safety net of this country.. and they're being eroded daily.
Only between 4-10% of all felons now ever go to jury trial. Attainder is ignored as being archaic, punishments written in law, without recourse to a
court, restrictions written by act or decree, limitations on the rights of any people (or all people) without recourse to court of law and juyry.
Juristic nullification, as well, has been under assault to the point of disappearance. The Military Commissions act has actually created a situation
where habeas corpus no longer applies, and ex post facto legislation is rapidly becoming a 'corrective' norm, in spite of the broad prohibition.
At this time, one can be taken from their home, the property seized, on suspicion, and one can be held, indefinitely, tortured, and disappear, without
ever knowing what one's charges are, or any right to attorney, or even to a writ of habeas corpus.
The broad mingling of the Legislative powers with the executive has further implications, however. The legislative powers are nondelegable, but have
been delegated anyway, outside of constitutional bounds.
Further, the Supreme Court no longer decides on constitutional or common law grounds, but what is politically expedient at the time. There is,
further, a distinct movement in the Federal government attempting to disarm the people. This, as well, was addressed in the past.
We are not a democracy, and were never intended to be so, we were a representative republic, but are we still represented? WHen 94% of the bills pass
the senate with no vote, no discussion, and often not really even reading the bill, are we still represented?
We've a problem in this country, and a storm is rising. Echoes of that storm come out of time from the blood of patriots.
And who are we, should we continue to remain ignorant of the facts?