Our organization will make politicians and attorneys obsolete. You only need the attorney for example, because the cop violated his oath. The politician can't effect you with unconstitutional legislation if the cop isn't willing to carry out the unlawful orders. This organization will effectively nullify bad government.
I'm talking about multiple legal layers. The group is talking about enforcing the constitution but disregarding the corrupt laws that twist the constitution. To keep the group from destroying themselves I think they need to be well informed about what is in the constitution. If I'm reading this right then the group wants to uphold constitutional laws and not create anarchy. Not everyone knows the constitution inside and out.
Are you an ATTORNEY sir? It sounds like you are just an attorney threatened by something that is going to effect his bottom line. I addressed these concerns in the previous comment. There's not going to be any "legal layers" bro... sorry. The reason I ask if you are an attorney is because this sounds like the typical "You're stupid and you don't know what your rights are" schpeel.
Absolutely not. I'm worse. One of the normal 'middle of the road' people that you would need to convince to join a group like this. Consider my replies as 'wimpy' but constructive criticism. I think more people would need a lot more information before putting their families in immediate danger. If the movement is truly about being well informed and intelligent then I would think it would need to be able to back up it's claims better. A good example would be a list of laws that are twisting what parts of the constitution and why it's wrong. In lay man's terms. I think you would convince more people to join your movement that way than just basing the plan off of rage and being pissed off that the election was stolen. A constitutional lawyer would be helpful in understand the constitution and correct laws that should be in place and not for working within the current legal system that is failing us. It's not 1776. You're not fighting a king. You're not creating a new constitution. You're talking about repairing what is being destroyed. I would bet that more people would be willing to put themselves at risk if they knew where the line was drawn constitutionally. I believe even the forefathers created justification for what they were doing.
Don't we have the right to confront our ACCUSER in court? Where is the accuser? Is it the cop? No that's just a witness for the state. WHO is the state sir. Please tell me WHO is the accuser when the STATE is listed as the plaintiff?
Literally the state is your accuser. Your “right to face your accuser” is satisfied through your opportunity to impeach evidence of your criminality at trial.
The state passes criminal codes. The state represents the public at large when you break such laws. That is from the Police Powers clause of the 10th amendment to the constitution.
If you got up in front of a judge and said what you just posted, you would be laughed out of the courtroom and directly into a jail cell.
Sovereign citizens (which I assume you are) have literally never won a case, in ever
Are constitutional lawyer availible to the groups?
Our organization will make politicians and attorneys obsolete. You only need the attorney for example, because the cop violated his oath. The politician can't effect you with unconstitutional legislation if the cop isn't willing to carry out the unlawful orders. This organization will effectively nullify bad government.
I'm talking about multiple legal layers. The group is talking about enforcing the constitution but disregarding the corrupt laws that twist the constitution. To keep the group from destroying themselves I think they need to be well informed about what is in the constitution. If I'm reading this right then the group wants to uphold constitutional laws and not create anarchy. Not everyone knows the constitution inside and out.
Are you an ATTORNEY sir? It sounds like you are just an attorney threatened by something that is going to effect his bottom line. I addressed these concerns in the previous comment. There's not going to be any "legal layers" bro... sorry. The reason I ask if you are an attorney is because this sounds like the typical "You're stupid and you don't know what your rights are" schpeel.
Absolutely not. I'm worse. One of the normal 'middle of the road' people that you would need to convince to join a group like this. Consider my replies as 'wimpy' but constructive criticism. I think more people would need a lot more information before putting their families in immediate danger. If the movement is truly about being well informed and intelligent then I would think it would need to be able to back up it's claims better. A good example would be a list of laws that are twisting what parts of the constitution and why it's wrong. In lay man's terms. I think you would convince more people to join your movement that way than just basing the plan off of rage and being pissed off that the election was stolen. A constitutional lawyer would be helpful in understand the constitution and correct laws that should be in place and not for working within the current legal system that is failing us. It's not 1776. You're not fighting a king. You're not creating a new constitution. You're talking about repairing what is being destroyed. I would bet that more people would be willing to put themselves at risk if they knew where the line was drawn constitutionally. I believe even the forefathers created justification for what they were doing.
My rights end where yours begin. That's what we'll be enforcing.
Guy asks an honest question and you attack him.
Lawyer here: good luck proving the “officer violated his oath” and your arrest was unconstitutional without a lawyer.
Pro se litigants have a 0.0% chance of correctly or adequately defending themselves in a criminal proceeding.
Don't we have the right to confront our ACCUSER in court? Where is the accuser? Is it the cop? No that's just a witness for the state. WHO is the state sir. Please tell me WHO is the accuser when the STATE is listed as the plaintiff?
Literally the state is your accuser. Your “right to face your accuser” is satisfied through your opportunity to impeach evidence of your criminality at trial.
The state passes criminal codes. The state represents the public at large when you break such laws. That is from the Police Powers clause of the 10th amendment to the constitution.
If you got up in front of a judge and said what you just posted, you would be laughed out of the courtroom and directly into a jail cell.
Sovereign citizens (which I assume you are) have literally never won a case, in ever