receiver. You and I are different 'receivers' and so interpret the
same communiqué differently. A positive thinker, like me, wants a
"you're fired" man to be President. A negative thinker, like you, was
hoping Trump would not enter the race. You would have made a great
lawyer, because those like to make their point. They could do that in
a game of musical chairs with a tack in each seat. Get the point?
Ha, ha, HA! — J. A. A. —
>
On May 20, 10:41 pm, Jonathan <jonathanashle...@lavabit.com> wrote:
> John,
>
> Trump never dropped out of anything. He declared, "After considerable
> deliberation and reflection, I have decided not to pursue the office of
> the Presidency." That's not dropping out. That's declaring he has no
> intention of entering the race.
>
> On 05/20/2011 05:44 PM, NoEinstein wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > J. Ashley: Then what was Trump dropping out of? � J. A. A. �
> > On May 19, 6:50 pm, Jonathan<jonathanashle...@lavabit.com> wrote:
> >> *John, INLINE:*
>
> >> On 05/19/2011 01:47 PM, NoEinstein wrote:> Dear Jonathan:
>
> >>> (1.) Most in the media considered Donald Trump to be a contender for
> >>> President. You, an anarchist, aren't bright enough to know the
> >>> present, let alone project the way future events could have played
> >>> out.
> >> *I do not care what "most in the media" decided for YOU. Donald Trump
> >> never declared himself to be a candidate. Who are you going to believe?
> >> The media? Or, Donald Trump?*
>
> >>> Answer to (2.) is at *** in the preface, copied below:
> >>> "Preface:
> >>> The Will of the People is the foundation of government. The
> >>> People must be represented faithfully and without bias so that
> >>> government can properly and efficiently perform its functions in the
> >>> coming ages. Federal government shall be limited to functions that
> >>> cannot be better performed by local and state governments. Such shall
> >>> be the enabler of freedom, justice, fair commerce, climates of
> >>> opportunity, cooperative efforts, and national security both internal
> >>> and external. Such shall be businesslike yet human; impartial yet
> >>> focused; considerate of our environment, heritage, peace and
> >>> tranquillity; effective without boastfulness; *** and divorced from
> >>> politics. The federal government shall not be considered to be
> >>> synonymous with the USA, and those therein are not a ruling class nor
> >>> are they dictators; rather they are the servants of the USA and shall
> >>> be answerable to it and to any law-abiding Citizen or Citizens
> >>> thereof. We honor these objectives for the benefit of our-selves and
> >>> our posterity."
> >> *I am assuming you have just posted the preface to YOUR New
> >> Constitution. Once again, you are guilty of obfuscation. You did not
> >> answer my question. Where in the Constitution (the existing one - not
> >> YOURS) does it prohibit political parties?*> (3.) In my New Constitution the 'speaker' is simply a parliamentarian
> >>> who happens to be presiding. That person shall have no power to
> >>> direct the course of proceedings based on their personal biases. This
> >>> is the sentence which you neglected to copy:
> >>> " The House makes the rules for its proceedings, punishes disorderly
> >>> members, and with the assent of 60% can expel a member for a
> >>> violation. ***But no rule shall be made that concentrates power in
> >>> any individual(s) beyond his or her one vote." That excludes allowing
> >>> the speaker, or chairmen of any committees, to have any more 'power'
> >>> than the members have.
> >> *What does YOUR New Constitution have to do with reality?*> (4.) The Secret Service wasn't part of government during the earlier
> >>> years. It is required in the Constitution that candidates for
> >>> President be natural born citizens of the USA and at least 35 years
> >>> old. All members of the Secret service are required to take an oath
> >>> to uphold the Constitution. If such deliberately and flagrantly
> >>> overlook CRIMINALITY that is hugely harmful to the USA�the way all
> >>> socialist-communist policies are�then members of the S. S. who are
> >>> responsible, likewise, shall be guilty of treason, for giving aid and
> >>> comfort to the ENEMY (socialists and communists)! Since the
> >>> Constitution is the SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND, deliberately violating
> >>> that law for the obvious purpose of SUBVERTING the Constitution and
> >>> causing the failure of our economic systems is TREASON of the highest
> >>> order! Barack H. Obama should be hanged post haste!
> >> *The Constitution states, "No person except a natural born Citizen, or a
> >> Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this
> >> Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither
> >> shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained
> >> to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident
> >> within the United States."* *Unfortunately, that same Constitution
> >> offers no insight as to what constitutes a "natural born citizen" or how
> >> such provision shall be enforced. That the Secret Service was not
> >> created until 1865 (to suppress counterfeit currency) should be evidence
> >> enough that they have no responsibility for determining the eligibility
> >> of the POTUS. *
>
> >>> � John A. Armistead � Patriot
> >>> On May 19, 1:22 pm, Jonathan<jonathanashle...@lavabit.com> wrote:
> >>>> John,
> >>>> As usual, I have some comments and questions (which you will no doubt
> >>>> avoid answering, as usual):
> >>>> 1) Reality check: Donald Trump was never in "the race."
> >>>> 2) Where in the Constitution does it prohibit political parties?
> >>>> 3) "Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings..." As such,
> >>>> the House has chosen to elect a Speaker. This would prompt most people
> >>>> to call that person Speaker, much as most would call the head of a local
> >>>> PTA "Madam President."
> >>>> 4) Does any part of the Constitution or any Law require the Secret
> >>>> Service to look into the qualifications of the President? "The mission
> >>>> of the United States Secret Service is to safeguard the nation's
> >>>> financial infrastructure and payment systems to preserve the integrity
> >>>> of the economy, and to protect national leaders, visiting heads of state
> >>>> and government, designated sites and National Special Security Events."
> >>>> On 05/18/2011 07:53 PM, NoEinstein wrote:
> >>>>> A huge number of the na�ve among us are probably supposing that the
> >>>>> USA can be saved if we can just elect the right President. Our
> >>>>> Republican choices include those who have already sold their souls to
> >>>>> the lock-step rituals and the Pomp and Circumstance of Washington.
> >>>>> The same, typical, ego-maniacs, are content to form committees to
> >>>>> raise outlandish amounts of capital for waging months-long battles in�
> >>>>> the primaries. None of those same presidential hopefuls have a enough
> >>>>> practical sensibility to see that pressing-the-flesh in as many states
> >>>>> as possible is more of a disqualification than a qualification to be
> >>>>> President.
> >>>>> As many as 18% of Americans are unemployed or underemployed. The rock
> >>>>> hard, leftist Democrats for Obama are projected to be able to raise
> >>>>> over a billion dollars to get that traitor to America re elected. If,
> >>>>> as I�ve proposed, presidential candidates spend no more than five
> >>>>> million dollars on their campaigns, *** there can be, literally,
> >>>>> billions of dollars that can remain in the pockets of the voters,
> >>>>> rather than going to our close-to-universally-corrupt media. A huge
> >>>>> plus will be the suspension of the unconstitutional, spaced-out
> >>>>> primaries that give the most power to the voters of Iowa and etc.
> >>>>> When the primaries are suspended, there will be no more
> >>>>> unconstitutional party conventions such as gave us our Manchurian
> >>>>> Candidate, Barack Hussein Obama of Kenya. Once and for all there will
> >>>>> be an end to the unconstitutional political parties which have �split
> >>>>> the USA down the aisle� for far too long.
> >>>>> Voters should have no trouble choosing good choices for President
> >>>>> based simply on televised debates and fairly-formatted candidate
> >>>>> interviews. The entire election process should span no more than six
> >>>>> months, and the candidates can stay rested, rather than being frazzled
> >>>>> by the stupidity of jetting back and forth on the pretext of being
> >>>>> better able to� �serve� the people of the particular state they happen
> >>>>> to be in better than he or she can serve the citizens of a dozen other
> >>>>> states where the same dull speech was recited before.
> >>>>> With �give-�em-hell� Donald Trump out of the race, I�m not sure there
> >>>>> is a single presidential hopeful wise enough and practical enough to
> >>>>> Kick the Ass of the Entire Primary System! It only takes ONE brave
> >>>>> candidate to do that. Simply say: �The primaries give inequitable
> >>>>> power to the voters in the early primaries. That makes the spaced-out
> >>>>> primaries unconstitutional, as it does the party conventions that
> >>>>> follow. Nothing in the Constitution allows quasi-governmental bodies,
> >>>>> like our political parties, to have ANY say-so whatsoever in how
> >>>>> governmental processes are run. In a Republic, like the USA is so
> >>>>> clearly mandated to be, there can be no LEADERS in Congress! Every
> >>>>> representative, regardless of how recently he or she was elected,
> >>>>> shall have identical voting power. To call Newt Gingrich �Mr.
> >>>>> Speaker� is to create ROYALTY in Congress that was so detested by the
> >>>>> founding fathers. George Washington rejected the idea that he should
> >>>>> be king! And George Washington would reject the notion that Czars
> >>>>> under the control of the President can bypass the powers granted to
> >>>>> Congress alone.
> >>>>> Thus far, the �Ritual� of the Secret Service protecting the (gag)
> >>>>> President is preventing them from asking this simple question: Is the
> >>>>> �long form� birth certificate of Obama�which was posted on the
> >>>>> Internet in digital form�a LAYERED *. pdf file? If there are LAYERS,
> >>>>> then, that document is a definite forgery. I repeat: Is the �long
> >>>>> form� birth certificate of Obama�which was posted on the Internet in
> >>>>> digital form�a LAYERED *. pdf file? If the answer is confirmed to be
>
> ...
>
> read more »
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
No comments:
Post a Comment