The Federal government has been seeking to expand it’s power for years, and President Obama has insisted that because he was a professor of Constitutional law he somehow is more equipped and capable to teach us how this country should run and why we must obey whatever he says.
He therefore jammed Obamacare through Congress with not one Republican supporter, and then somehow conned the Supreme Court into affirming that U.S. citizens MUST purchase insurance or be fined. This is typical of the lawless Obama administration, and we have truly become a banana republic, though that is not how the Constitution is written.
See the excellent video on page 2 regarding Constitutional limitations that are being violated.
The Federal governments seems to think that the citizens only own property leave of the government, and in essence that is true.
If a person buys a piece of property and pays property taxes on it, that is a form of rent paid to the government, and the government can seize that property and push the rightful owner off of that land if the taxes are not paid. How then does someone own a piece of property if the government can demand rent and evict if that rent or tax is not paid? It is stunning when seen this in the broad context, and true students of the Consititution will recognize the con that we have all bought in to.
The latest land and power battle is over father and son ranchers in Oregon by the name of Hammond went to jail on an arson charge. In 2002 and 2006, these ranchers decided to clear some brush and overgrowth on their ranch land by conducting a controlled burn, a very common activity in large areas such as their ranch in Oregon. The fire accidentally spread onto federal lands but was put out by the ranchers without any help from the feds. However, the Federal government still charged the ranchers with arson and are determined to jail them for 5 years each. Incidentally, the Federal land is flourishing, is now less of a wild fire hazard, and no properties were damaged in the incident.
The Constitutional attorney in the following video cites the Hammond case, but then goes on to instruct us on why it is only a small part of the huge overreach of the Federal government, as shown by the Constitutional limitations that the Federal government has been ignoring.
Watch video, page 2:
Interesting read on the ranch in question and other land issues: http://www.wsj.com/articles/roots-of-oregon-land-dispute-stretch-back-decades-1452042408
Interesting comments on the subject from other threads:
Josef Sharp If anyone is curious, Amanda Marshall (sentencing Judge) is the crazed, venomous, liberal moon-child, former US Attorney for the State of Oregon that initiated and pushed for illegal double jeopardy – ruining the lives of the Hammond ranching family.
You may be interested to know that she had absolutely no federal prosecuting experience at all, before she was appointed by Obama. However, she lived in a commune growing up, hung out backstage at Grateful Dead concerts, was under internal investigation for stalking her co-worker, and stepped down to avoid being fired. So, she is more qualified than most of his appointees, it would appear.
Interestingly, her nickname given to her from co-workers is “Black Heart”. She will be most famous for the rest of her personal history, for sending an old-man back to die in prison over a ranching practice that has been used in the West for hundreds of years.
I’m sure she would be delighted if some of you chose to look her up.
http://www.wweek.com/portland/blog-preview-32962-the-federal-prosecutor-allegedly-stalked-by-us-attorney-amanda-marshall-was-under-armed-protection-at-the-time.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amanda_Marshall_(attorney)
A great write up on the investigated and resigned Judge Amanda Marshall, Obuma appointee: http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2016/01/04/unbelievable-update-oregon-bundy-militia-standoff-the-federal-prosecutor-at-the-heart-of-the-hammond-family-problem/
Clay Ramsay This is not just a case of mandatory minimums, or even primarily that. They were incorrectly charged with arson originally. Arson has a specific definition in law, and this did not fit the criteria. Then, even more outrageously, they were charged with terrorism. In addition, there is the question of double jeopardy, and the travesty of serving time, being correctly released, then sent back to prison.
Tom Wynn This is the story that people are not hearing.. A 75 year old man is being sent to prison and being called a terrorist.. Folks, the libtards are trying to take down this country..
John Silverio “The government used an anti-terrorism statute to secure its convictions.” Pay close attention. You may be next in line. Burning an acre of ranch land and terrorism? Please. I may have been born in the night, but not last night.
Brandon Polkowski The BLM has a track record of doing people wrong. Look up a case thats been on going for years in Nevada. A rancher named Wayne Hage was trampled by the BLM so much that when the Feds came to his property the Nye County Sherrifs Office literally stood between them to defend Hage families constitutional rights. It’s very similar to the Bundy situation but with a more humble rancher who got no coverage, just oppressed by overzealous government agencies.
A great write up on the investigated and resigned Judge Amanda Marshall, Obuma appointee: http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2016/01/04/unbelievable-update-oregon-bundy-militia-standoff-the-federal-prosecutor-at-the-heart-of-the-hammond-family-problem/
America is the result of a land grab… land grabbing should be encouraged and claims honored.
Obama is a professor of the Constitution just like every criminal is a professor of law…
Very eye opening video. She presents the facts well. So my question is outside of total bloodshed and a civil war how do we take back what is ours? Honestly I am past the point of being fed up with what is going on..
Article 4 section 3 states
New states may be admitted by the Congress into this union; but no new states shall be formed or erected within the jurisdiction of any other state; nor any state be formed by the junction of two or more states, or parts of states, without the consent of the legislatures of the states concerned as well as of the Congress.
The Congress shall have power to dispose of and make all needful rules and regulations respecting the territory or other property belonging to the United States; and nothing in this Constitution shall be so construed as to prejudice any claims of the United States, or of any particular state.
Unless I’m reading this wrong that says that congress can indeed regulate the land.
No Allen America is not the result of land grabbing, they need to keep their hands off of people’s property and move on
Shared extensively.
Also your explanation of this clause in the constitution omits language to further your argument.This is the full wording.
To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;-And