Thread: The Constitutional Conspiracy: Courts Colluding With White H

April 12, 2008

The Constitutional Conspiracy: Courts Colluding With White House to Avoid Accountability

The proof is in. The federal courts have been found to be co-conspirators with the Executive Branch in a collusive scheme to avoid being held accountable to the Constitution by the People.

There can be no doubt. The federal judiciary is now being utilized as an weapon of oppression rather than for the ends of Justice for which it was designed.

Not only has the Judiciary abandoned its role as an independent arbiter of legal controversies involving injured citizens seeking remediation for Government wrongs, the Judiciary now refuses to even discuss the most basic, underlying Founding Principles upon which our Republic rests, i.e., the Rights of the People to Sovereignty and to hold Government accountable -- particularly its obligation to respond to Petitions for Redress of constitutional torts as provided by the First Amendment.

The most egregious result of these developments is that not only are the People effectively unable to secure Redress against Government entities that have harmed them, but the Judiciary has now abdicated its fundamental function under the Constitution by refusing to interpret the Constitution where questions of the Sovereignty of the People are implicated.

This is no small matter for the People. Without substantive recourse through the courts and no means by which to secure a declaration of these fundamental Principles from the Judiciary, the People are, indeed, left with very few means by which to peacefully secure their Rights against the majority or the tyrants.

Of course, the Government would much prefer that we quietly tolerate such despotic behavior, but it is now very clear that the People must begin to seriously assess their remaining options to restore Constitutional Order.

With the illusion of Justice now stripped away by the Judiciary herself, our nation rapidly approaches a crossroad: We will tolerate the continuing insolence of our servant government and quietly lose our remaining Freedoms, or we organize and do something to stop it.

The Congress has failed. The Executive has failed. And now, the Judiciary joined her sister branches in a conspiracy to prop up a cancerous and dangerous government.

The proof of the constitutional conspiracy can be found in two lawsuits that arose out of the Accountability Clause of the Constitution: 1) The landmark Right-to-Petition lawsuit, We The People v. United States; and 2) the current "6700" civil lawsuit, United States v. We The People.

At the heart of the constitutional question is the long-forgotten unalienable Right of the People, as articulated by the last ten words of the First Amendment, to hold their servant government directly accountable. According to the clear, and (still) un-refuted historical evidence, this important Right also embodies the Right of the People to peacefully secure Accountability by withholding their financial support should the Government fails to provide Redress.

The behavior of the courts as evidenced by the record can leave but one interpretation: The three branches of Government have colluded in a constitutional conspiracy to impede the exercise of the Right of the People to secure Constitutional Order.

This conspiracy against the Constitution cannot be tolerated any longer.

Admittedly, this article is longer than we prefer to post. There have been a number of significant recent developments as these cases have moved through the courts that we have not reported about until now. Some of these shocking developments are provided within context below along with the potent legal pleadings we have responded to them with. We trust you will find the escalating conspiracy against the Constitution to be most troubling and worthy of your investigation. Thank you for your continuing interest and support of our noble cause.

We The People v. United States

The first case, the landmark Right-to-Petition lawsuit, We The People v. United States, arose from the Accountability Clause as a result of the Peoples’ Petitions for Redress of injuries due to the Government's adoption of the Iraq Resolution in violation of the war powers clause of the Constitution, the Government’s adoption of the Federal Reserve Act in violation of the money clauses, the Government’s adoption of the USA Patriot Act in violation of the privacy clauses, and the Government’s operation and enforcement of a direct, un-apportioned tax on the People’s labor in violation of the tax clauses.

The People repeatedly Petitioned for Redress of these injuries in the most humble terms. The only remedy the People sought was for official, specific answers to the questions included in the Petitions, questions that challenged the constitutionality of the acts of the Government.

The People’s injuries increased; the Government refused to respond, ignoring the People’s Right of Redress.

The People decided to claim and exercise their Right to retain their money until their Grievances were Redressed, a Right guaranteed by the Accountability Clause of the First Amendment.

The People’s insulting injuries multiplied. The United States answered by retaliating against the People with liens, levies and seizures of property.

The People took the United States to court, claiming the retention of their money under the circumstances was protected by the Accountability Clause of the First Amendment.

During the entire history of the United States of America, no court had interpreted the meaning of the Accountability Clause – that is, no court had ever declared the Rights of the People and the obligations of the Government under the last ten words of the First Amendment, words that guarantee the fifth of the five Freedoms guaranteed by the First Amendment. The People’s case rested on a thoroughly researched review of the historical context and purpose of the Accountability Clause – i.e., the original intent of the Founding Fathers. Critically, there was nothing in American history or jurisprudence that contradicted the People’s interpretation of the meaning of the Accountability Clause.

The People’s unjust injuries grew. The Attorney General’s defensive argument was, “The Constitution says the People have the Right to Petition for Redress, but the Constitution does not say the Government has to listen or respond.â€

Blame the CFR, they got their dirty hands on everything.