NO LONGER A NATION OF LAWS

ROMNEY WORDSWORTH – What is the point of being a lawyer when the law is whatever a powerful politician or appointed judge thinks it should be on any given day?  What are your rights under the U.S. Constitution?  Did you know it gave men the right to use the women’s bathroom two years ago?  What new rights will you have two years from now?  What rights will you no longer have?

Supposedly, the Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land.  But how many lesser statutes and ordinances today curtail your First Amendment rights of Freedom of Speech?  Universities take public funding and are technically acting as an arm of the Department of Education, but these same schools enact “Speech Codes” that are enforced as if they trump the First Amendment.  It is supposed to be the other way around.

The Second Amendment says that the right of the people to keep and bear arms “shall not be infringed”.  But you cannot keep and bear arms without going through the permitting process of every town and hamlet in the nation, all of which have different rules and requirements, some far more draconian than others.

Why is it that your Second Amendment Rights change in scope and character depending on which State you live in?  How is it that I can buy a handgun without a permit in one state, while another may make it nearly impossible to do so no matter what permits I apply for (looking at you, Chicago)?  Why is it that in one state I have an automatic right to conceal carry a weapon, but in another I have to get a special permit to do so?  How is it that the Supreme Law of the Land can be altered by every municipal authority?  I thought the Constitution can only be amended through an Act of Congress, as Ratified by a Majority of the States?

The answer is that we really don’t have a Constitution anymore, and we are no longer a nation of laws.  The laws are an ever-changing quicksand composed of whatever arbitrary and capricious impulse our de facto Lords feel like, day to day and sometimes even hour by hour.

housefrau

Barbara Bellis:  Emotional, Agenda Driven, Elevated Housefrau Singlehandedly Undoes the Constitution and The Enlightenment, Putting Americans Back Under the Yoke of Tyranny

So when a certain unaccountable appointed Judge, by the name of Barbara Bellis, decided to deny a motion by Remington to dismiss the lawsuit brought by families of the Sandy Hook mass shooting against it, it was another example of the law not being the law, but rather being whatever it needs to be to advance an anti-gun agenda harbored by a set of litigants and the Judge hearing the case.

It ought to be a no-brainer that the manufacturer of a lawful product, lawfully manufactured and lawfully sold, bears no responsibility for a subsequent criminal who steals said product and commits a crime with it.  For one thing, there is no proximate causation accruing to the manufacturer.  For a second thing, there is no such law making a manufacturer liable for criminal acts beyond their control.

But none of this matters in Lawless America.  In this case, Judge Bellis made up a new “law”, presumably pulling it out of her ass while sitting on the toilet that morning.  This new “law” says that a gun manufacturer is liable for civil damages when it makes and sells a military-style weapon “without regard for the unreasonable and egregious risk of physical injury to others”.  Huh?  There is no such requirement. 

blind_justice (1)

The Plaintiffs did the Judge one better, asserting that there ought to be liability where “a gun maker and sellers knew that civilians are unfit to operate the assault rifle and yet continue selling it to civilians disregarding the threat the gun posed.”  This standard, which isn’t supported or codified by any State or Federal Law, doesn’t even fit the facts of the Sandy Hook case.  Adam Lanza stole his mother’s AR-15, a gun which his mother lawfully purchased and which under Connecticut and Federal laws was legal to make and sell.  Since the buyer of the gun never committed a crime with the gun, there can be no showing that “civilians are unfit to operate” the AR-15.  At best, the facts can only support a conclusion that a mentally ill adolescent on psychotropic drugs is unfit to operate an AR-15. 

Another inconvenient fact is that Adam Lanza left the AR-15 in the trunk of his car, and committed the alleged killing spree with a pair of pistols.

Thus the Motion to Dismiss by Remington Outdoor Co. (Remington Arms) to dismiss a lawsuit based on a theory of liability not supported by any written law, or even a plausible inference of a written law.  If anything, Federal Pre-Emption should have been applied, as the manufacture and sale of AR-15’s were explicitly sanctioned by the Federal Government.  This is a textbook example of a Frivolous Lawsuit.

2159935-queengedren_movie_01

But the law no longer matters.  The facts no longer matter.  Your 2nd Amendment Rights now depend solely on the emotional state and political proclivities of an unelected woman wearing a black robe.  We may as well be living under Monarchs and Lords again.  What was the American Revolution about, if not to save us from this kind of tyranny?

HERE Is WHAT WILL HAPPEN If The DEEP STATE TAKES DOWN PRESIDENT TRUMP & It’s NOT PRETTY … FOR THEM “The tree of liberty must be refreshed with the blood of patriots and tyrants.” – Thomas Jefferson ELDER PATRIOT – Corrupt politicians ignore Jefferson’s directive to their own detriment. It’s no longer political, it’s personal. Americans have had their eyes opened by the ascension of Donald Trump and no amount of leftwing money can put the Freedom Movement genie back in the bottle. Conservative Senator Ted Cruz made that observation after reviewing the results of the 2016 elections and the expectations of the voters. Cruz, who had the most high profile personality clash with Donald Trump during the Republican primary process nevertheless embraced Trump’s America First agenda and said, “If we’re given the White House and both houses of Congress and we don’t deliver, I think there will be pitchforks and torches in the streets. And I think quite rightly.” Candidate Trump promised many things – border control, lower taxes, fairer trade relations, a balanced budget, healthcare that puts the people first not the government, safer communities, and – to the extent possible – an end to foreign wars. What, among those promises, should any Republican, nay any American, have a problem with? After four months without a single legislative achievement, Congressional and Senatorial Republicans – notably John McCain, Paul Ryan and Lindsey Graham – have joined the Democrats in investigating President Trump absent a single shred of evidence that an underlying crime has been committed. So, what gives? Well, there was one additional promise that Trump made on his way to the White House that has some Republicans joining with Democrats and quaking in their boots, Trump’s promise to “Drain the Swamp.” As we reported yesterday, “An F.B.I. agent with ‘intimate knowledge of the inner workings of the Clinton case’ told us that they uncovered evidence of such massive corruption that the agents involved realized that damned near the entire government could be brought down.” The criminal co-conspirators in both parties realized almost immediately that the new sheriff wasn’t interested in joining them in the swamp so they launched, what can only be characterized as, a coup attempt. Democrats are well schooled in such things probably because of their close alliance with Marxist regimes that can only gain power by seizing it through bloody civil wars. It should be noted that the Democratic Party has already done this once before. One Hundred and Fifty-Seven years ago the Democrats waged a war against the First Republican President Abraham Lincoln for giving Blacks their freedom. That war came at a high price, as many as 700,000 Americans died fighting for what they believe in. To put that in perspective, these casualties exceed the nation’s loss in all its other wars, from the Revolution through Vietnam. Today, Americans are still prepared to fight and die to protect their children’s God-given freedoms. Despite what you are reading and hearing in the mainstream media, they aren’t the leftwing-funded rioters, the pussy hat-wearing feminists, or the cuck bois that cant handle a micro aggression. No, the Americans that back Donald Trump are well armed. Donald Trump’s presidency will move forward politically lest the sixty million patriots who voted for him, that are comprised of the large majority of military voters, police, and NRA members, move it forward by force. These patriots are armed, trained, prepared, and have proven their discipline. They have grown disgusted by the corruption in Washington and will do whatever is necessary to make sure Trump’s Freedom Agenda moves forward and under the direction of Donald Trump himself. No amount of fake news based on unsubstantiated charges by unnamed sources is going to change that. The battle lines have been drawn and no amount of finger pointing is going to convince these patriots to let anyone overturn the election results. So why are establishment politicians courting a bloodbath on the streets of America that will also threaten them personally when they could be part of Making America Great Again? It’s because they have been caught red-handed and up to their eyeballs in a worldwide criminal conspiracy that has nothing to do with politics and everything to do with defrauding the American taxpayers. And, now that they’ve been caught robbing the world’s largest bank – the U.S. treasury – they have chosen to go out in a blaze of glory rather than try to defend the indefensible at trial. Washington’s criminal elites have chosen to go to war to unseat our duly elected president. It’s time to make our voices heard before this turns very ugly. Buckle your chin strap, America is counting on you. EDITORS NOTE: THIS IS NOT A CALL TO ARMS BUT RATHER AN ANALYSIS OF WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF THE DEEP STATES OVERTURNS A DUELY ELECTED PRESIDENT. HERE IS A LIST OF EVERY SINGLE TIME OBAMA COMMITTED AN IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE THAT DEMS & MEDIA COVERED UP “Impeach!” It’s been more than eight years since Democrats uttered that word – long enough for anyone to wonder if it was still in their vocabulary, considering the deafening silence through the dozens of serious scandals during President Obama’s administration – but now that President Trump is the man in the White House, it’s back with a vengeance. Democrats everywhere are wildly slinging the “I” word, hoping to nail Trump for high crimes and misdemeanors after the New York Times claimed a memo written by former FBI Director James Comey said the president urged him to end the federal investigation into former national security adviser Michael Flynn. Some members of Congress are getting in on the action. They include Reps. Maxine Water, D-Calif., and Al Green, D-Texas. Even a Republican, Rep. Justin Amash, claimed Wednesday there are grounds to impeach President Trump. House Oversign Committee Chair Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, asked for the alleged Comey memo and other documents. Chaffetz tweeted that he is prepared to subpoena the information. And Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., invoked “Watergate.” Now the Democratic Party is reportedly poll testing impeachment as a 2018 election issue. More than 1 million people signed a petition calling on Congress to impeach Trump. Wasting no time Wednesday, the mainstream media sprang into action, enthusiastically echoing the left’s impeachment calls. MSNBC launched a Watergate ad implying Trump is America’s new Richard Nixon. “Watergate. We know its name because there were reporters who never stopped asking questions,” says MSNBC host Chris Hayes, who hinted that Trump is next on the impeachment chopping block. “Now, who knows where the questions will take us. But I know this: I’m not going to stop asking them.” Meanwhile, some overzealous members of the left plastered fliers around Washington, D.C., demanding all White House staffers resign Wednesday. The posters read: “If you work for this White House you are complicit in hate-mongering, lies, corrupt taking of Americans’ tax money via self-dealing and emoluments, and quite possibly federal crimes and treason. Also, any wars will be on your soul. … Resign now.” But constitutional scholar Jonathan Turley, who voted for President Obama, warned “impeachment” enthusiasts not to get ahead of themselves with President Trump. Why? At this time, there’s no evidence Trump actually committed a crime. “The criminal code demands more than what Comey reportedly describes in his memo,” Turley wrote in a May 17 opinion piece posted at the Hill. Turley explained: For the first time, the Comey memo pushes the litany of controversies surrounding Trump into the scope of the United States criminal code. However, if this is food for obstruction of justice, it is still an awfully thin soup. Some commentators seem to be alleging criminal conduct in office or calling for impeachment before Trump completed the words of his inaugural oath of office. Not surprising, within minutes of the New York Times report, the response was a chorus of breathless “gotcha” announcements. But this memo is neither the Pentagon Papers nor the Watergate tapes. Indeed, it raises as many questions for Comey as it does Trump in terms of the alleged underlying conduct. A good place to start would be with the federal law, specifically 18 U.S.C. 1503. The criminal code demands more than what Comey reportedly describes in his memo. There are dozens of different variations of obstruction charges ranging from threatening witnesses to influencing jurors. None would fit this case. That leaves the omnibus provision on attempts to interfere with the “due administration of justice.” However, that still leaves the need to show that the effort was to influence “corruptly” when Trump could say that he did little but express concern for a longtime associate. The term “corruptly” is actually defined differently under the various obstruction provisions, but it often involves a showing that someone acted “with the intent to secure an unlawful benefit for oneself or another.” Encouraging leniency or advocating for an associate is improper but not necessarily seeking an unlawful benefit for him. . Obama’s Iran nuke deal Obama knew about Hillary’s private email server Obama IRS targets conservatives Obama’s DOJ spies on AP reporters Obamacare & Obama’s false promises Illegal-alien amnesty by executive order Benghazi-gate Operation Fast & Furious 5 Taliban leaders for Bergdahl Extortion 17 ‘Recess ‘ appointments – when Senate was in session Appointment of ‘czars’ without Senate approval Suing Arizona for enforcing federal law Refusal to defend Defense of Marriage Act Illegally conducting war against Libya NSA: Spying on Americans Muslim Brotherhood ties Miriam Carey Birth certificate Executive orders Solyndra and the lost $535 million Egypt Cap & Trade: When in doubt, bypass Congress Refusal to prosecute New Black Panthers Obama’s U.S. citizen ‘hit list’