A lot of people are looking to this November’s Election
.
.
The Most Important Question To Ask Yourself, …. Is:
Will the REAL ‘Minute Men’ of modern America, Stand Up & Be At The Ready?
Click here >>> Applicants Wanted …. Apply Within <<< Click here
.
Op Ed By Brenda Donnellan on June 9, 2023
Do we expect our public servants to obey the Constitution? Can we REQUIRE our elected employees to follow the Constitution?
The answers ought to be that “Nobody is above the law” and “Yes, we must require them to obey the law” and, remember, the Constitution was written to limit the power and authority of the federal government.
But, over the centuries, Americans became apathetic and forgot to keep an eye on their government. You might say they were intentionally lulled to sleep by very sly, conniving, power-hungry people with ulterior motives who would exploit that apathy.
Then, in March 2021, an almost iconoclastic event occurred. An attempt to force congress to obey the Constitution and to protect America! The Brunson brothers of Utah filed a lawsuit against 385 members of Congress, former Vice President Pence, President Biden and Vice President Harris. The brothers’ claim is that, amidst the allegations of election fraud in the 2020 election, including possible foreign interference and the breaking of many state and federal laws, 100 members of congress proposed an investigation into those allegations, but a majority of members wrongfully voted against the investigation.
The Brunson brothers (Loy, Raland, Deron and Gaynor) realized that – whether or not election fraud had occurred – congress had a duty to investigate the allegations of threats to our country and our Constitution. In refusing to investigate, these members of congress broke their oath of office, and the lawsuit seeks to punish them by permanently removing them from office and not allowing them to hold public office again.
The Brunson lawsuit: https://ralandbrunson.com/ Background of the case, the 3 lawsuits, and individual timelines of Loy’s suit and Raland’s two suits. https://loybrunson.com/ Latest updates from Loy, including a sample letter for you to send to SCOTUS.
Jenna Ellis, formerly a lawyer in Trump’s White House and now a radio personality, claims that “we the people” have no right to scrutinize every vote and ask the courts for their opinion. (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-attorney-sides-with-supreme-court-knockingdown-case-to-reinstate-him/ar-AA168qeI)
She is perpetuating the laissez-faire attitude that allows unscrupulous people to get themselves elected and then write the rules for how they do their jobs as though they are the owners of America instead of servants of the American people.
Jenna claims that the proposed investigation is not a “justiciable” issue, not appropriate to adjudication by the judiciary. That is a curious statement since it is accepted since Marbury vs. Madison in 1803 that the Supreme Court has the right of Constitutional oversight of the other two branches. (https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/marbury-v-madison)
Jenna completely ignores that little phrase in Article VI of the Constitution that is the crux of the lawsuits. “The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; . . . .” If elected servants are not bound by this qualification then the entire Constitution is worthless. It might be iconoclastic at this point in time to stand up to federal tyranny, but we must begin to ENFORCE THIS STANDARD, THIS OATH, for EVERY SINGLE EMPLOYEE.
She dismisses the vote on the investigation as a “political question” with a flimsy discussion of “authority.” It is not a question of law regarding investigations, as Jenna suggests. The question is, when 100 members of congress were concerned about a possible threat to the nation, did they look into it? Did they obey their oath? Did they protect the Constitution and the country and the people of the United States from threats, both foreign and domestic?
In addition, Article IV, Section 4 of the Constitution provides that, “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion[.]” Did the three branches of the United States government do their job during the 2020 election to guarantee a republican form of government and to protect us against invasion?
Jenna is correct in saying that, if we don’t like their votes, we should send our representatives packing. But this particular vote/issue is a threat to our sovereignty, to our country’s continued existence, to the foundation of the United States of America. If those who are trusted with concocting laws to regulate our lives and tax our livelihoods will not protect us from enemies who threaten our free elections; if they do not even care to investigate the possibility that breaches occurred – then they must be held accountable.
So what if this fundamental precept of our Constitution hasn’t been enforced in the preceding 230 years! Now that we recognize our failures; now that we see clearly that our country is being systematically dismantled; now that we are learning about “enemies, foreign and domestic”; the time has come for radical action.
Does Jenna believe that the only role “we the people” have in our government is to vote every two years and otherwise support the candidates of our choice? And, what alternative do we have if voters of one state send good representatives to Washington but other states consistently send men who appear to hate the Constitution? Is there no recourse for “we the people” of the first state?
I think that a lot of people are afraid to upset the apple-cart. Others might worry that “we the people” will read the Constitution some more and realize that the federal government is exceeding by magnitudes the limits set by the Constitution; that the federal government has assumed many more powers than the few enumerated ones granted to it by the states. “We the people” might realize that we have been lied to about the “supremacy clause.” Article VI does not say that the federal government is supreme. The states would never have agreed to that! It declares that the Constitution itself and laws made in support of IT will take precedence over any laws (federal or state) that might conflict with it. And, at the same time, any law that is not authorized by the Constitution is, according to the Founding Fathers, null and void.
The courts haven’t been very helpful in our efforts to demand election integrity and to expose corruption, and that likely will continue. But, I agree with the Brunsons – who have given them several chances. Let’s give them another chance. They might get it right this time!
.
The Constitution Party of West Virginia supports Amendment 1
….West Virginia Amendment 1,
….Clarification of the Judiciary’s Role in Impeachment Proceedings Amendment
Clarifying that courts have no authority or jurisdiction to intercede or intervene in or interfere with impeachment proceedings of the House of Delegates or the Senate; and specifying that a judgment rendered by the Senate following an impeachment trial is not reviewable by any court of this state.
The constitution gives the sole power of impeachment to the House of Delegates and the sole power to try impeachments to the Senate. The amendment would simply clarify that “no court of this state” has any role at all, either in impeachment proceedings or in review of the outcome.
The court acted improperly in 2018 when the Supreme Court of Appeals prevented the Senate from conducting an impeachment trial of Supreme Court Justices when temporary (substitute) justices ruled that the impeachment proceedings violated the state constitution’s separation of powers clause. This is a ludicrous claim since the constitution allows that, “Any officer of the state may be impeached for maladministration, corruption, incompetency, gross immorality, neglect of duty, or any high crime or misdemeanor.” And, only the legislature may impeach.
This clarification is necessary to prevent any future errors of this kind.
The Constitution Party of West Virginia opposes Amendment 2
….West Virginia Amendment 2
….Property Tax Modernization Amendment To amend the State Constitution by providing the Legislature with authority to exempt tangible machinery and equipment personal property directly used in business activity and tangible inventory, personal property directly used in business activity, and personal property tax on motor vehicles from ad valorem property taxation by general law.
….First: Don’t be fooled. Although formally named the “Authorize Tax Exemptions for Vehicles and Personal Property Used for Business Amendment,” it does not authorize a single exemption; it only authorizes the Legislature to consider the matter sometime in the future.
….Second: Even though West Virginia has had Billion Dollar surpluses in recent years, there is actually no plan or incentive to reduce the tax burden on regular citizens.
As Governor Justice has said, the only reason the vehicle tax is included in Amendment 2 is to “get your vote.” What the Legislature wants is the constitutional ability to eliminate taxes on property, equipment and inventory used in business and manufacturing. They view this tax as a hindrance to business which discourages new business from locating in the state and they currently use an exemption of this tax as an incentive for new businesses to start up or move here.
….Third: Property tax is a county tax, administered by the counties. IF the Legislature were inclined to reduce our tax burden, it could easily – and without changing the constitution – have reduced the state income tax. The House has voted three times to reduce the state income tax but the Senate opposed it every time. Why are senators so unwilling to work within their own sphere of authority, attempting instead to commandeer the authority of counties and supplant the officials that are closer to the people?
.
The Constitution Party of West Virginia (strongly) opposes Amendment 3
….West Virginia Amendment 3
….Incorporation of Churches or Religious Denominations Amendment To Authorize the incorporation of ….churches or religious denominations.
The current/original wording of West Virginia Constitution, Article 6, Section 47:
“No charter of incorporation shall be granted to any church or religious denomination. Provisions may be made by general laws for securing the title to church property, and for the sale and transfer thereof, so that it shall be held, used, or transferred for the purposes of such church, or religious denomination.”
….Question 1: Why does the Legislature want this amendment passed? Perhaps it is to bring the constitution in line with W Va Code. Yes, that’s the opposite of proper law-making. But. . . . When HB 2899 (The West Virginia Nonprofit Corporation Act) was passed in 2002, it contained this line: “(b) No charters or certificates of incorporation may be granted or issued to any church or religious denomination.” Yet, somehow, that line is omitted from Code (Chapter 31E), and “religious” is inserted as a lawful purpose. Ask our law-makers how this happened! Every single church incorporation in this state is illegal because it is unconstitutional.
….Question 2: What about separation of church and state?
The founders of our constitutional republic and of our state clearly believed that churches must be free of government control. Corporations, however, are creations of government and must operate under its prescribed laws.
The West Virginia Nonprofit Corporation Act (2002, HB 2899) is a gargantuan law that, I’m fairly certain, covers every aspect of running a church that was left out of the Bible.
It is a fundamental truth that if our laws are in accordance with God’s laws then that can bringblessings and the other can bring cursings.
….Question 3: Is incorporation necessary to become a 501 C(3) with the IRS?
Why would a church even want 501 C(3) status? An incorporated church might become “tax exempt” (subject to the whims of the government and the bureaucrats running it) but an unincorporated church is “non-taxable” under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution which maintains that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; ….”
.
The Constitution Party of West Virginia supports Amendment 4
….West Virginia Amendment 4
….Education Accountability Amendment. The purpose of this amendment is to
clarify that the rules and policies promulgated by the State Board of Education, are subject to legislative review, approval, amendment, or rejection.
The Legislature has “rule-making review” of every department except education which calls itself; a “fourth branch of government.”
We would rather have education decisions made by someone more accountable to parents and voters yet we’re not sure that “politicians” will do a better job than the education establishment. Ideally, we would like a “third option” that would restore the voters’ ability to elect the Superintendent of Free Schools. That might happen next year, but this year we must settle for constraining the Board of Education through Legislative oversight. One thing for certain is that the current education system is not providing the rigorous academics and the incentives for achievement that parents are asking for.
.
Keep your eyes and ears open, folks, and your brains in gear! We are hearing more and more about an Article V constitutional convention (Con-Con) with several groups advocating for it, for several different reasons – from balancing the budget, to term limits, to campaign finance reform and limiting “constitutional rights” of corporations. Many of the groups work together, including sharing board members and belonging to a coalition named Call A Convention.
Call A Convention, whose goal is “a truly open and constructive” (i.e. unlimited) Article V convention, was formed in 2013 by Lawrence Lessig, a leftist, a blasphemer and friend and associate of both George Soros and Barack Obama. Lessig is also on the boards of Compact For America (CFA), ConventionUSA, and Rootstrikers and works closely with leftist Wolf-Pac as well as Mark Meckler’s Convention of States (COS). In West Virginia, it is mostly COS that has been wooing our legislators but recently CFA has been actively seeking supporters.
The COS website has a petition that calls for “an Article V convention to propose only amendments that would impose fiscal restraints on the federal government, limit its power and jurisdiction, and impose term limits on its officials and members of Congress.” Such a convention could easily become the “runaway” convention that sensible people fear would either radically alter our Constitution or even replace it with one of the socialist constitutions already written and waiting in the wings.
Compact for America calls for the creation of a compact of 38 states to petition Congress to call an Article V convention for proposing a balanced budget amendment (BBA) only. The application contains all the rules for governing the convention AND a pre-written BBA that would be “pre-ratified” within the initial applications. This appears to be the completely safe answer to all the fears previously expressed by critics.
But, please don’t believe in fairy tales. Not only is this Con-Con vulnerable to becoming a “runaway,” constitutional scholar Publius Huldah warns that it is “actually a tricky device for imposing a national sales tax or value added tax on the American People – on top of the income tax – and does nothing to limit federal spending.” Publius Huldah has also explained that – unlike the states, which require budgets – the federal government is limited by the Constitution to spending only for the few enumerated powers and obligations that it authorizes. A BBA would substitute a “budget” for the enumerated powers and authorize the national government to spend money on whatever it puts in the budget. “To add insult to injury,” Huldah alleges, “while all versions of a BBA pretend to limit spending, they actually permit increases in spending
and increases in debt whenever a majority votes to do so.”
Learn more about this http://ArticleVCon.weebly.com
“I will join the Constitution Party of West Virginia when you are organized in all 55 counties, have statewide ballot access, and run a full slate of candidates.” This sounds like a colonist who says he will join the revolution after the declaration is written, the war is fought, the constitution drafted, and thousands have sacrificed their lives and fortunes.
On Thursday, July 31, U.S. Senate candidate Phil Hudok and his “Mr. Obama Head” creation protested alongside 5000 mine workers in downtown Pittsburgh. Although ignored by the mainstream media, some independent media did cover the story. Links to the articles and video can be found on Phil’s campaign website at http://hudok.com/index.php/umwa-rally-rt-usa/ CPWVa Secretary Jeff Becker and Vice-Chairman Jeffrey-Frank..Jarrell, both state legislative candidates, were also on hand for the prior day’s rally at Highmark Stadium.
JOIN US for our next state party meeting to be held at Shoney’s in Charleston (116 Kanawha Blvd E) on Saturday, May 31, 2014. There will be a quick business meeting beginning promptly at 12:00 noon followed by some brief candidate presentations, and then members and supporters will head down the street to the University of Charleston’s Laidley Field Stadium to circulate our ballot access petitions among the patrons and participants of the Relay For Life event.
A number of members are planning to arrive around 11:00am to set-up and eat lunch first. As always, this is an open public meeting FREE OF CHARGE except of course for your own restaurant tab.
Based on the attendance of our previous meetings, we are expecting a good crowd. The specific agenda is TBD and will be available at the restaurant.
SEE YOU THERE!
Constitution Party 2014 U.S. Senate candidate Phil Hudok gave presentations to the Randolph County Commission and Board of Education regarding the proper interpretation and need for our Second Amendment. These actions have now resulted in a formal resolution by the Commission to members of Congress. Below is a link to an article in the InterMountain about this. THANK YOU PHIL !!
Here is an excerpt:
Randolph County Commissioners decided to take a stand on the 2nd Amendment Thursday, passing a resolution supporting the right to “keep and bear arms.” The measure will be sent to elected officials.
Commission President Chris See said the resolution was created after resident Phil Hudok spoke to the commission about gun control measures.
“We came up with this resolution and we will send it to Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.,) and Congresswoman Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.),” See said before reading the resolution.
The resolution states that it is the right of the people to “keep and bear arms for the defense of life, liberty and property,” and that the right is regarded as an “inalienable right by the people of Randolph County.”
http://www.theintermountain.com/page/content.detail/id/559185/Randolph-Commission-passes-gun-resolution.html?nav=5014
Constitution Party of West Virginia Chairman Jeff Becker has placed a number of redistricting ideas with detailed color maps on his website at http://jeffbecker.us. Columnist Phil Kabler commented on them in his West Virginia Gazette article last week: http://wvgazette.com/News/201106101179
There is a 30-member House of Delegates redistricting team that is holding meetings around the state on these, as well as John Unger’s State Senate task force. More information on these and other legislative activities can be found at http://www.legis.state.wv.us/redistricting.cfm
Read More
SOURCE: http://thirdpartypolitics.us/blog/2010/02/20/tea-party-hijackers
by Raymond Kish, Vice-Chairman and 2010 Candidate CP of Missouri
The Tea Party needs to make a choice between an “R” or a “D”, or so says Sarah Palin. The GOP rock star told an audience full of Tea Party members in Arkansas on Tuesday night, Feb. 16, that the Independents, who make up the Tea Party movement, need to start thinking about picking a party.
I think she is right. The Tea Party needs to make a choice, but not from within the two-party system that Palin claims we are stuck with. The Tea Party needs to decide right now whether they are going to let this movement be stolen by failed establishment candidates, or whether or not it is going to press forward and elect independent and third party candidates.
We do have choices, and they are not limited to Republicans and Democrats.
The Tea Party, from its beginning, was formed in response to the failure of both parties to listen to the will of the people. For Sarah Palin to suggest that we should pick between those same two failed parties is an insult. The rank in file members of the Tea Party movement should throw their current leaders out on their ear for allowing a movement of independents and Constitutionalists to be highjacked by either party.
Palin rightly points out that the Tea Party is not a Political party and cannot run candidates, but she is wrong to say there are only two choices because there is another choice: The Constitution Party. The Constitution Party has candidates running for office all across the United States, and the Constitution Party platform fits the Tea Party like a glove.
The Republicans and Democrats share the blame for our current economic crisis, and neither party has any real solution on how to fix it. Both parties gave us bailouts and stimulus programs adding mountains of debt that our children and grandchildren will have to pay back. In spite of all that money being spent, we still had 473,000 people file for unemployment benefits in the second week of February and have lost over 8 million jobs since 2007. With a track record like that, there is no reason whatsoever that America should choose between either party currently in power.
To say we have to pick between two incompetent choices is absolute lunacy. What America needs to do right now is make the decision not to return either Party back to Washington or any State office for that matter. Vote in a party with American ideas; a Party who has an American view of how the government should be run; a party that realizes that the Constitution is more than a word you say at a rally to get some applause. They need to vote in The Constitution Party.
If Palin was a true tea party patriot, she would not be asking us to choose between a Marxist party and a Fascist party. She would be leading her followers to a truly American party. . . . . The Constitution Party.
We are a nation, who is ruled by the consent of the governed. It is time the people remove their consent from the two establishment parties and put a Constitution Party candidate into office. The only way for both establishment parties to get the message is for both establishment parties to lose. To vote for either a Republican or a Democrat is to give your consent to two political parties who have made a living out of betraying the American people, our Founding Fathers and our Constitution, which each one swears fidelity to upon taking office.
America, don’t be fooled. Neither establishment party can be trusted. Send the hijackers packing, and let’s continue to build upon a truly great movement of the people.