Violating Oath of Office is a Federal Crime

Originally posted by AlchemistSwami
reply to post by Phoenix

 

Although your point in this post is well taken and understood, name one US Elected Official convicted of treason in the countries history. It has yet to happen, no one has ever even been accused and prosecuted for treason. I don't believe any one of them ever will be, the board game is rigged, and unfortunately we citizens are mere spectators.

I never asked for treason charges, I did ask for compliance with laws regarding oath of office which primarily should result in impeachment.

Originally posted by CosmicCitizen
reply to post by Phoenix

 

If my suggestion was the law of the land four years ago then anyone who was a co-sponsor (maybe it should be written as "VOTED FOR") the double-speak named "Patriot Act(s)", NDAA (S. 1867) and the forthcoming FIREARMS CONTROL ACT would be subjected to charges of TREASON.

edit on 28-12-2012 by CosmicCitizen because: (no reason given)

Yup agreed, I'd settle for impeachment, removal and loss of pension.

The treason charge is to hard to get and never has stuck except for Benedict Arnold if I'm correct.

reply to post by Phoenix

As far as elected officials I think that you may be correct...I cant think of any.

Originally posted by Phoenix
reply to post by Bildo

 

Bildo, Appreciate what the Sovereign citizen movement is working on. Right now the focus is on simply getting our critters to stop promoting, presenting and passing knowingly unconstitutional legislation by holding them to their first official act when taking office, namely their oath.

Simple, straight forward and easy for people to do - its a start.

The sovereign issues can be addressed after we the people potty train them once again

I'm not a part of any "group" or "movement". US citizens are UNDER the jurisdiction of Corp US. You are under voluntary contract. You need to find out what a "US citizen" actually is.
That aside---Look into Title 42 action. They are terrified of it. As soon as they breach their oath, they lose their immunity. They can also never hold public office again, when they lose, as they won't be able to get anyone to cover their bond. No bond, no job.

The sovereign issues can be addressed after we the people potty train them once again is a moot point. UNITED STATES INC is a foreign-owned ,bankrupt corporation masquerading as your government. Why bother wasting your time retraining them? They are doing the job they were hired to do. Title 42 'em and get rid of them. How can a corporation operate if it runs out of corporate officers? Have you seen their oath of office? They probably don't have the oath of office as required by law. It will be slightly different.

reply to post by Bildo


Next you're going to tell everyone to file a UCC-1 transmitting utility on themselves and claim to be a "soverign citizen"

Originally posted by Phoenix

Originally posted by CosmicCitizen
reply to post by Phoenix

 

If my suggestion was the law of the land four years ago then anyone who was a co-sponsor (maybe it should be written as "VOTED FOR") the double-speak named "Patriot Act(s)", NDAA (S. 1867) and the forthcoming FIREARMS CONTROL ACT would be subjected to charges of TREASON.

edit on 28-12-2012 by CosmicCitizen because: (no reason given)

Yup agreed, I'd settle for impeachment, removal and loss of pension.

The treason charge is to hard to get and never has stuck except for Benedict Arnold if I'm correct.

Benedict Arnold was awhile before the Republic was vacated and US INC took over as your "government". Different circumstances. Different constitutions, too.

reply to post by Phoenix


Great post... If everyone elected to office kept to their oath their would be no reason to have a two party system. If everyone acted within the limits of the Constitution there would be no argument of issues at the federal level. This is why there will never be a bi-partisan movement to hold those who take an oath accountable. Progressives believe that the Constitution is old and outdated, and wish to "progress" past the Constitution. Having said all of that, there is one way our founders gave us to put oath breakers in check... the 2nd amendment.

Let me repeat it again.....the POTUS IS keeping his oath......to the CON-STI-TU-TION. Which part don't people get? He's not making an oath to the "Bill of Rights". Completely different animal. Learn the game before you scream "foul". The President is making an oath to Bigger Government or shall we say...Corporatism. We don't want "CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS"...we want our "Bill of Rights" protected! Unless, of course, you want big government in your business. And we've seen what happens there.

Originally posted by MystikMushroom
reply to post by Bildo

 

Next you're going to tell everyone to file a UCC-1 transmitting utility on themselves and claim to be a "soverign citizen"

I'd agree, but you have your wording all mixed up. You don't understand what it's all about. The UCC-1 is a lien on the DEBTOR. The collateral is listed in the collateral section. The DEBTOR is the transmitting utility. You gain control over the DEBTOR instead of THEM being the administrator of the estate. Do you know the definition of sovereign? If it applies, so be it. "Sovereign citizen" is an oxymoron. You can't be sovereign if you are a "citizen/subject". You got something against being free? Your question sounds a bit negative.

reply to post by OmegaLogos


You should read this. It is a paper called "assassination politics" by Jim bell
link

Originally posted by BlowinSmoke
Let me repeat it again.....the POTUS IS keeping his oath......to the CON-STI-TU-TION. Which part don't people get? He's not making an oath to the "Bill of Rights". Completely different animal. Learn the game before you scream "foul". The President is making an oath to Bigger Government or shall we say...Corporatism. We don't want "CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS"...we want our "Bill of Rights" protected! Unless, of course, you want big government in your business. And we've seen what happens there.

They take an oath to support and uphold the constitution. But which constitution? The constitution of the US, or the constitution for the US. Remember, we've been deceived in more areas than we realize. Look at all the statutes. Those are not law. They weren't there when we had a Republic. The seats in the Republic were VACATED. Statutes are corporation policy for corporate members/subjects/citizens/employees.

Prior to bankruptcy of 1933
"Public Law"

Now the so-called courts administer "Public Policy" through the
"Uniform Commercial Code"
(instituted in 1967)
usavsus.info...

reply to post by Bildo


I know all about revised article 9 and the UCC.

Look, they aren't legal documents (no matter how fancy the filer prepares them with finger prints and notary stamps). They are for public record. It's up to a judge in a courtroom to decide the legal sufficiency of a UCC document.

Good luck trying to convince a judge, that's assuming your state doesn't have statutes in place against "bogus filings" (which these UCC's are considered) that carry fines and jail time.

One might as well list Darth Vader as the debtor, Emperor Palpatine as the secured party, and the death star as the collateral (along with all chattell and general intangibles).

reply to post by newcovenant

The tax pledge is a joke.

We need to abolish income taxes altogether and dismantle the IRS.

Instead of bleeding the citizen for our wages, how about the maniacs in DC cut spending?

Politicians need to be stripped of their personal fortunes and criminally prosecuted for destroying our nation's economy and creating a debt burden which is guaranteed to bankrupt the US.

What if g-men were being held accountable? If there is anything to this,link, It would appear that they are being held accountable! If you haven't already, check it out.

Originally posted by BlowinSmoke
Let me repeat it again.....the POTUS IS keeping his oath......to the CON-STI-TU-TION. Which part don't people get? He's not making an oath to the "Bill of Rights". Completely different animal. Learn the game before you scream "foul". The President is making an oath to Bigger Government or shall we say...Corporatism. We don't want "CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS"...we want our "Bill of Rights" protected! Unless, of course, you want big government in your business. And we've seen what happens there.

The 1st, 2nd, and rest are all in the CON-STI-TU-TION, not the bill of rights. The bill of rights by the way was ruled legal documentation when considering constitutional matters the most important part is the "unalienable rights" that proclaim man holds these rights above and beyond any government or manmade laws.

Originally posted by Phoenix
reply to post by newcovenant

 

Maybe so.................

But its not just republicans who violate oath and the question asked was why do we as a people let members of each party play a shell game with our rights at stake and do nothing about it.

The question isn't why do we as people..

The question should be

WHY ARE YOU AS AN INDIVIDUAL LETTING THIS HAPPEN?

Get active.
Organize.
Make change.

Anyone who thinks this is hopeless doesn't know about the 60s and the huge heaps of civil unrest their were until changes were made.

Don't like the changes made? Do something about it.

People have the power in our government.

Vote and write to your representatives.

You know why Congress is in the pocket of big business? Because Big Business has bought you as well as Congress. Why don't you contact your congressman? Because it's complicated! Its hard! Im only one person! That's crap that has been fed to you. You are strong. Demand change. Stop posting tired crap on the internet and go stand in front of a building for 15 days with a sign telling the people that you are mad at why you are mad at them.

Ranting about the government on ATS isn't going to change it. Go rant AT THEM.

I would like to add that any official, or public person such as a journalist, who knowingly lies to the people listening or depending on them for their welfare is also guilty of treason; this includes all the government projects and intelligence that We the People have paid for that are summarily declared Classified or Secret...

We can't go ahead as a civilization when we are basing our decisions and our public discourse on misinformation or worse, outright falsehoods.

What kind of world would we have had by now if the UFO issue was a known quantity, if Tesla's free energy discoveries were well known, if truth were taught in schools and also churches, if every issue where honest people could disagree were openly discussed and debated? If every appropriation of money by the government was done with the full consent of an informed populace?

Our society is so full of lies, fantasies and untruths that sorting it all out now is a nightmare. Grown men profess a 'belief' in 2000 year old fables and a rational human can't get elected to office because he's seen as 'not moral enough'. We're insane; we live in a flag-waving asylum.

Originally posted by MystikMushroom
reply to post by Bildo

 

I know all about revised article 9 and the UCC.

Look, they aren't legal documents (no matter how fancy the filer prepares them with finger prints and notary stamps). They are for public record. It's up to a judge in a courtroom to decide the legal sufficiency of a UCC document.

Good luck trying to convince a judge, that's assuming your state doesn't have statutes in place against "bogus filings" (which these UCC's are considered) that carry fines and jail time.

One might as well list Darth Vader as the debtor, Emperor Palpatine as the secured party, and the death star as the collateral (along with all chattell and general intangibles).

edit on 28-12-2012 by MystikMushroom because: (no reason given)

Finger prints and notary stamps on a UCC-1? I thought you said you knew all about the UCC. They are for public record. In that you are right. You used the word "judge". They are actually "Public Trustees". If you can find an Article lll, Section ll constitutional court, you'll have your judge. Otherwise, NOT. Fines and jail time? Only if you consent. Or if you get a lawyer.

It's up to a judge in a courtroom to decide the legal sufficiency of a UCC document. Not true. Lawyers and "judges" going up against a properly filled out and recorded UCC-1 lose. It is above them. And they're pissed off. They know all about this kind of stuff. Time for you to do some research. You still can't comprehend the difference between statutes and law and which one applies to what entity. I didn't write the laws, I just use them. I'm not here to argue. We're looking for solutions. I've already proved the UCC-1 to be legit. I took a copy in to my employer and was declared tax exempt, by them. I didn't say a word. THEY told ME. So that proved to me that they know about this document.The IRS is also aware of this. And treasury.

The IRS contacted me about a "frivolous filing". (nothing involving my UCC-1) I asked for copies of whatever they had that was involved in this frivolous filing and the proof of (laws supporting) their claim. That was 2 years ago. I'm still waiting.

Originally posted by Phoenix

Originally posted by BlowinSmoke
Let me repeat it again.....the POTUS IS keeping his oath......to the CON-STI-TU-TION. Which part don't people get? He's not making an oath to the "Bill of Rights". Completely different animal. Learn the game before you scream "foul". The President is making an oath to Bigger Government or shall we say...Corporatism. We don't want "CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS"...we want our "Bill of Rights" protected! Unless, of course, you want big government in your business. And we've seen what happens there.

The 1st, 2nd, and rest are all in the CON-STI-TU-TION, not the bill of rights. The bill of rights by the way was ruled legal documentation when considering constitutional matters the most important part is the "unalienable rights" that proclaim man holds these rights above and beyond any government or manmade laws.

I seriously doubt....the "Bill of Rights" is part of that oath....considering it was amended after both the oath to oval office and the constitution were written.

The Constitution was written in 1787
The Oath to Office in 1789 - George Washington
The Bill of Rights Amended 1791

I'm gonna also assume that the oath, today's president swears or affirms by, is that of the George Washington era. Follow the cunningness of it all. These foxes are slick. Timing is EVERYTHING!

reply to post by BlowinSmoke

The BILL OF RIGHTS, which guarantees Individual Rights, are the First Ten Amendments to the U.S. CONSTITUTION; therefore, even though they are physically a second document, they are legally attached to the original document as a de facto Constitutional Addendum.