|
|
|
|
Hello, Subscriber!
|
Federal Faux Pas at Mar A Lago
|
|
|
|
Monday's shocking trespass of former President Trump's Mar A Lago resort home has raised eyebrows and questions all week. As reviewed in this conversation between Andrew Napolitano, former federal judge, legal, and political commentator, and Gerald Celente as host and professional listener, there are very few valid reasons for such treatment.
|
|
What's truly disturbing is that this type of treatment by FBI and "law enforcement" in general is common and has been growing in it's application among the "free people of America" over the past few decades. The only reason we are so painfully aware of this particular instance is it was perpetrated upon a pervasively famous man who characteristically shouts nearly everything from the rooftops; God bless him... It does seem that the progressive left are becoming increasingly desperate and beginning to commit seriously dumb errors.
|
|
Judge Napolitano's comments are interesting, especially with his analysis of the classified documents in question and the process by which a "lawful warrant" is issued with perspective from his seat at the federal bench.
Here is Judge Napolitano's analysis... my apologies to readers, I couldn't find the options to embed a video in this email service's HTML... even "embed code" fails to format a working video player. Here's a link:
|
|
|
|
Amendment IV
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
From Arizona's Revised Statutes, ARS 13-3911 through 13-3914, here are links to what Arizona views as lawful warrants and probable cause. I'm certain you could find similar code, statute, and descriptions in your state codes:
|
- Arizona Constitution, Article 2, §8 Right to privacy – No person shall be disturbed in his private affairs, or his home invaded, without authority of law. (read “probable cause”: known violation, known intent to violate, claim of damage or harm)
- ARS 13-3911: Definition "signed by a magistrate" (that's a wet-ink signature)
- ARS 13-3912: Grounds for issuance
- ARS 13-3913: Conditions precedent to issuance; "on probable cause, supported by affidavit, describing the property... and the place"
- ARS 13-3914: Examination on oath; affidavits; "magistrate may examine on oath... must take his affidavit... in writing... subscribed by the party (signed under penalty of perjury)... to establish probable cause"
- related: ARS 13-3915 and 3916
|
The point I don't buy is the federal agent presenting the "affidavit". An affidavit is a written sworn-under-penalty-of-perjury testimony of a "victim" of damage or trespass, constituting "probable cause", with evidence (even if only backed by other witnesses) of that crime. The big issue here is "code violations" are NOT crimes. "Probable suspicion" of a government agent on duty in no way equates with a "damaged or trespassed victim" who can back up their testimony with evidence.
|
"Probable Suspicion" is not lawful by any stretch of the imagination. It's not a lawful construct. If they had any suspicion, the question reverts to "where is the warrant issued to gather such information on the private activities of a man", and was that warrant a lawful warrant? Where did the information for this "suspicion" come from? Is it "fruit of a poisonous tree"; being unlawfully gotten information or surveillance?
|
An officer of the state cannot "play the victim" and officer role at the same time. A victim must have "standing", a right to stand and claim they have been damaged. A police officer can't go to a judge and request a warrant because you "ran a stop sign"; neither he nor anyone else has been damaged, there is nobody with "standing". [1] Rolling through a stop sign may be a code violation; but it's not a valid basis for a warrant. The question is, "who was damaged, injured, or trespassed and can they be "made whole" by remedy?" Failing that, there is no probable cause, no damaged party nor immanent threat, so is the warrant "lawful"? The question remains...
|
It is written, "nothing is hidden that will not be revealed" [Luke 12:2-3]
|
Fifteen minutes into the interview, Napolitano comments that 5500 federal statutes and most "three-letter agencies", such as the FBI, NSA, HSA, and others, are "unconstitutional" although he doesn't explain the basis for his comment.
|
My basis for similar comments I have made is that [1] the constitution is a contract by the 50 several states for a federal government to [2] undertake 19 specific portions of "the people's business" best addressed at the national level; such as foreign policy and national defense. [3] The "federal monstrosity" erupting beyond the scope of authority far oversteps it's "granted authority" by the states, and by proxy the people, to the point of [4] massive emolument violations because "we the people" [5] haven't been holding up the civil end, the unincorporated organization to address the business of the people as we should have been back nearly 160 years. We should be calling "foul" when these take the money we pay them and use the authority we grant them to in turn damage "we the people".
|
|
So, let us be about our business...
|
|
[1] Even a citation for a moving violation is contingent upon the "driver's" acceptance and agreement to the charge. It's a matter of contract. A U.S. Citizen, in this case as "driver", is contracted under the code and jurisdiction that governs "U.S. Citizens" and other officers, employees, and property of the state. If you are a "man or woman" rather than a "person" [an office] to which the codes and statutes apply, you can simply rescind the offer to contract under false presumptions that "men and women" are obligated to such "code", not being party to such contract, and go on about your private business. No kidding!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Which amendment to the U.S. Constitution covers the content of a lawful warrant?
|
|
[see end of email for the answer]
|
|
|
|
If you find this interesting or helpful, please share it.
Here's some more noteworthy information:
|
|
|
|
A great teaching moment: While Biden touts "zero percent inflation" for July, Peter Schiff digs into the nuts and bolts of the economy and inflation. The only pinch-hitter being the Fed, they will choose to fight recession and default over inflation, furthering economic problems. "Inflation is "double" government numbers."
Peter Schiff on Kitco News [LINK]
|
|
|
|
"I See the Future and It's Hell on Earth"
Gerald Celente describes "the freak show"; how what we're told belies any stretch of reality. The discussion of economics and inflation turns to a search for the "one brilliant thing government has done in [our] lifetime"! Always entertaining, on his "best behavior" with Daniela Cambone.
Gerald Celente on Stansbury Research [LINK]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I've moved my financial services business from public to private. Learn how government policy like regulations and taxes can be kicked to the curb!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What is the term for the type of violation in which a government agency or officer oversteps the scope of authority granted to them?
[see end of email for the answer]
|
|
|
|
|
|
Merch helps keep your eye on what's important:
|
|
|
Freedom matters...
|
|
|
"The United States of AMERICA is 3.5 Million Square Miles of FREEDOM & zero room for petty tyrants." One of my early designs and one which I still get consistent compliments on when I'm wearing it. Truth bears it's own reward.
|
|
Spark a conversation:
|
|
|
With the overstep of federal law enforcement into the private lives of "we the people" becoming more frequent, this design showing the "Tiny Space" that government should occupy seemed a good concept to review and present this week. "Let's work to put government back into the tiny box in which it came." is included on the back of this design.
|
|
|
|
|
|
MoneySmart Chapter Tours
|
|
Having more money to manage is matter of the habits you use to manage the money you have! Check out the MoneySmart online chapter tours here:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
