• "Spreading the ideas of freedom loving people on matters regarding high finance, politics, constructionist Constitution, and mental masturbation of all types"

What is really going on???

Cigarlover

Midas Member
Midas Member
Midas Supporter
Joined
Dec 18, 2011
Messages
7,720
Likes
15,104
In italy they have stopped treating the elderly which now I believe is 60 and above. That same group also has a lot of smokers so it is hitting the pretty bad. And 3rdly, Italy has the highest elderly population in Europe with many generations living together.

Who knows about China. To much info or disinformation out there to find the truth.
 

newmisty

Splodey-Headed
Midas Member
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
29,257
Likes
44,080
Location
Qmerica
In italy they have stopped treating the elderly which now I believe is 60 and above. That same group also has a lot of smokers so it is hitting the pretty bad. And 3rdly, Italy has the highest elderly population in Europe with many generations living together.

Who knows about China. To much info or disinformation out there to find the truth.
Why would they stop treating the elderly?
 

Cigarlover

Midas Member
Midas Member
Midas Supporter
Joined
Dec 18, 2011
Messages
7,720
Likes
15,104
One thing you can be sure of. Terrorists are watching very closely. They now know how to shut down the entire global economy.
 

Cigarlover

Midas Member
Midas Member
Midas Supporter
Joined
Dec 18, 2011
Messages
7,720
Likes
15,104
Why would they stop treating the elderly?
Better survival rates for those that are younger and healthier. I'm sure it has nothing to do with the fact that the elderly are a drain on the system as well.
 

newmisty

Splodey-Headed
Midas Member
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
29,257
Likes
44,080
Location
Qmerica
Better survival rates for those that are younger and healthier. I'm sure it has nothing to do with the fact that the elderly are a drain on the system as well.
Pretty brazen
 

JayDubya

pies klasy robotniczej
Midas Member
Midas Supporter
Joined
Apr 5, 2010
Messages
5,518
Likes
7,300

Cigarlover

Midas Member
Midas Member
Midas Supporter
Joined
Dec 18, 2011
Messages
7,720
Likes
15,104
It's actually over age 80.

Italians over 80 'will be left to die' as country overwhelmed by coronavirus

Remember when Republicans said that there would be death panels when Obamacare was instituted and the left said it would never happen? Well, it's happening in Italy right now.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/italians-over-80-left-die-151225888.html
I read somewhere that it was lowered to 60 in the last day or 2.. If I run into it again I'll post the link here.
 

Cigarlover

Midas Member
Midas Member
Midas Supporter
Joined
Dec 18, 2011
Messages
7,720
Likes
15,104

Thecrensh

Midas Member
Midas Member
Site Supporter
Joined
Jun 26, 2013
Messages
8,191
Likes
11,719
I've been watching the numbers and they are hard to decipher, since they make no real sense.

The USA is showing a 1.2% mortality rate. Worldwide, the rate has crept up to 4.4%. In Italy, the mortality rate is approaching 10%.
Why would this be 10 times more lethal in Italy than here? My own state has had its proportionate share of the virus, with almost no deaths. In Wuhan, the death rate was 4.0%, but that's commie math, so the real death rate could be higher or lower, who knows?

I think the testing protocols are so haphazard and inconsistent, that the figures reported are probably grossly exaggerated in areas where the death rate is well below 4%. What we are seeing is the reporting of a number of different things, COVID-19 being one of them and likely, the most lethal.

I can't read much from this, other than the fact the governments all over the world are completely impotent in the face of this, including our own USA with the limp-dicks at the CDC at the helm. They've got no fist in their glove, they got nothing. They keep trotting out Fauci and he's a tired old government has-been.

So, we're left with is an over-the-top response to what may or may not be a real threat, it's hard to really know without information. One thing I know for sure. Governments everywhere will kill more people in the long run than COVID-19 will, due to their stupidity and corruption.
Maybe the virus only kills pedophiles who take adrenochrome...THAT would be some justice!
 

newmisty

Splodey-Headed
Midas Member
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
29,257
Likes
44,080
Location
Qmerica
Maybe the virus only kills pedophiles who take adrenochrome...THAT would be some justice!
There would be no denying Devine justice then.
 

chris_is_here

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
1,337
Likes
1,806
Location
Loon Lake
Made some contacts yesterday and learned a few new things, some of them very disturbing.....

My own state is planning a full on lock-down as soon as they martial the necessary resources. So far, the National Guard response has been "lethargic and unwilling" (those were the exact words from one member). The rumors are disturbing, because the length of the quarantine could be very lengthy. My only hope is that more than a few NCO's in the guard flat out refuse to participate. They'll need very high compliance from the Guard to assure any reasonable chance of enforcing a lock-down.

Gun control efforts are going to be escalated at both federal and state levels. In my (very blue) state, they are looking to confiscate guns, but not sure how they will do this, since they do not have the resources to accomplish this, as I noted above. But, it is int he works. At the federal level, the DNC in the House is proposing multiple bills to restrict gun ownership. Someone earlier posted a thread with a link to a Youtube video that had info on a bill in the House that would federalize gun control and immediately nullify state regulation. For some reason, I cannot find that post on here, if it didn't get pulled, I'd appreciate someone posting a link to it here. In the meantime, I found this link, which I believe references the same bill as posted here earlier, HR5717.....the bill is not new, but it is still floating around out there. The bill sponsor was the esteemed solon Hank Johnson (yes, that same goofball who was worried about Guam "tipping over").

https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/5717/text

One ray of hope ,NY is starting trials of the new anti-viral quinine-type drug (I can't spell it, so we'll just call it that) on Tuesday of this week. If it works, this thing could be effectively over. With a viable treatment protocol, blue state pol's will be hard-pressed to justify continued lock-down efforts.


EDIT, I copied and pasted below the co-sponsors of this bill. Note the prevalence of R's in this list of traitors, very illuminating:

Rep. Deutch, Theodore E. [D-FL-22]
Rep. Upton, Fred [R-MI-6]
Rep. Dingell, Debbie [D-MI-12]
Rep. Fortenberry, Jeff [R-NE-1]
Rep. Paulsen, Erik [R-MN-3]
Rep. Coffman, Mike [R-CO-6]
Rep. Dent, Charles W. [R-PA-15]
Rep. Bera, Ami [D-CA-7]
Rep. Costello, Ryan A. [R-PA-6]
Rep. Carson, Andre [D-IN-7]
Rep. MacArthur, Thomas [R-NJ-3]
Rep. Moulton, Seth [D-MA-6]
Rep. Fitzpatrick, Brian K. [R-PA-8]
Rep. Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana [R-FL-27]
Rep. Kilmer, Derek [D-WA-6]
 
Last edited:

the_shootist

Trump 2020
Midas Member
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
May 31, 2015
Messages
42,397
Likes
67,865
Made some contacts yesterday and learned a few new things, some of them very disturbing.....

My own state is planning a full on lock-down as soon as they martial the necessary resources. So far, the National Guard response has been "lethargic and unwilling" (those were the exact words from one member). The rumors are disturbing, because the length of the quarantine could be very lengthy. My only hope is that more than a few NCO's in the guard flat out refuse to participate. They'll need very high compliance from the Guard to assure any reasonable chance of enforcing a lock-down.

Gun control efforts are going to be escalated at both federal and state levels. In my (very blue) state, they are looking to confiscate guns, but not sure how they will do this, since they do not have the resources to accomplish this, as I noted above. But, it is int he works. At the federal level, the DNC in the House is proposing multiple bills to restrict gun ownership. Someone earlier posted a thread with a link to a Youtube video that had info on a bill in the House that would federalize gun control and immediately nullify state regulation. For some reason, I cannot find that post on here, if it didn't get pulled, I'd appreciate someone posting a link to it here. In the meantime, I found this link, which I believe references the same bill as posted here earlier, HR5717:

https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/5717/text

One ray of hope ,NY is starting trials of the new anti-viral quinine-type drug (I can't spell it, so we'll just call it that) on Tuesday of this week. If it works, this thing could be effectively over. With a viable treatment protocol, blue state pol's will be hard-pressed to justify continued lock-down efforts.
Gun grabbers gonna try and gun grab but they can't. They're vastly outnumbered and they know it! I'm struggling with how the NG can simply ignore orders unless the country is in an all out revolt. I don't see that yet but perhaps I'm just not looking in the right places.

The level of biblical-esc times we live in is, well...biblical
 
Last edited:

Cigarlover

Midas Member
Midas Member
Midas Supporter
Joined
Dec 18, 2011
Messages
7,720
Likes
15,104
Made some contacts yesterday and learned a few new things, some of them very disturbing.....

My own state is planning a full on lock-down as soon as they martial the necessary resources. So far, the National Guard response has been "lethargic and unwilling" (those were the exact words from one member). The rumors are disturbing, because the length of the quarantine could be very lengthy. My only hope is that more than a few NCO's in the guard flat out refuse to participate. They'll need very high compliance from the Guard to assure any reasonable chance of enforcing a lock-down.

Gun control efforts are going to be escalated at both federal and state levels. In my (very blue) state, they are looking to confiscate guns, but not sure how they will do this, since they do not have the resources to accomplish this, as I noted above. But, it is int he works. At the federal level, the DNC in the House is proposing multiple bills to restrict gun ownership. Someone earlier posted a thread with a link to a Youtube video that had info on a bill in the House that would federalize gun control and immediately nullify state regulation. For some reason, I cannot find that post on here, if it didn't get pulled, I'd appreciate someone posting a link to it here. In the meantime, I found this link, which I believe references the same bill as posted here earlier, HR5717.....the bill is not new, but it is still floating around out there. The bill sponsor was the esteemed solon Hank Johnson (yes, that same goofball who was worried about Guam "tipping over").

https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/5717/text

One ray of hope ,NY is starting trials of the new anti-viral quinine-type drug (I can't spell it, so we'll just call it that) on Tuesday of this week. If it works, this thing could be effectively over. With a viable treatment protocol, blue state pol's will be hard-pressed to justify continued lock-down efforts.


EDIT, I copied and pasted below the co-sponsors of this bill. Note the prevalence of R's in this list of traitors, very illuminating:

Rep. Deutch, Theodore E. [D-FL-22]
Rep. Upton, Fred [R-MI-6]
Rep. Dingell, Debbie [D-MI-12]
Rep. Fortenberry, Jeff [R-NE-1]
Rep. Paulsen, Erik [R-MN-3]
Rep. Coffman, Mike [R-CO-6]
Rep. Dent, Charles W. [R-PA-15]
Rep. Bera, Ami [D-CA-7]
Rep. Costello, Ryan A. [R-PA-6]
Rep. Carson, Andre [D-IN-7]
Rep. MacArthur, Thomas [R-NJ-3]
Rep. Moulton, Seth [D-MA-6]
Rep. Fitzpatrick, Brian K. [R-PA-8]
Rep. Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana [R-FL-27]
Rep. Kilmer, Derek [D-WA-6]
Passing an unconstitutional law doesn't suddenly make it constitutional.
 

GOLDBRIX

God,Donald Trump,most in GIM2 I Trust. OTHERS-meh
Midas Member
Midas Supporter
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
13,154
Likes
17,436

Buck

Village Idiot
Midas Member
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Apr 13, 2011
Messages
10,152
Likes
10,121
never say never...

I think the same as you, but.........
 

Cigarlover

Midas Member
Midas Member
Midas Supporter
Joined
Dec 18, 2011
Messages
7,720
Likes
15,104
But it can be enforced until USSC rules.
Sc has also ruled that any law can be ignored with impunity if it is unconstitutional. So passing an unconstitutional law is as if there was no law passed at all in my books.. I am sure the Gov sees it differently when they shoot me down. All the more reason to just shut the entire country down and put an end to the tyranny that has taken place here.
 

Cigarlover

Midas Member
Midas Member
Midas Supporter
Joined
Dec 18, 2011
Messages
7,720
Likes
15,104
This didn't cut and paste very well. For easier reading here the link I got this from.
http://www.voidjudgements.net/suedc/constitutionalcaselaw.pdf
CONSTITUTIONAL CASE LAW
Bennett v. Boggs, 1 Baldw 60, “Statutes that violate the plain and obvious principles of common right and common reason are null and void”. Would we not say that these judicial decisions are straight to the point --that there is no lawful method for government to put restrictions or limitations on rights belonging to the people? Other cases are even more straight forward: “The assertion of federal rights, when plainly and reasonably made, is not to be defeated under the name of practice.”
Davis v. Wechsler , 263 US 22, 24. “Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them.”
Miranda v. Arizona, 384 US 436, 491. “The claim and exercise of a constitutional right cannot be converted into a crime.”
Miller v. US, 230 F 486, 489. “There can be no sanction or penalty imposed upon one because of this exercise of constitutional rights.”
Sherer v. Cullen , 481 F 946. We could go on, quoting court decision after court decision, however, the Constitution itself answers our question � Can a government legally put restrictions on the rights of the American people at anytime, for any reason? The answer is found in Article Six of the U.S. Constitution: Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 426, 491; 86 S. Ct. 1603
"Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no 'rule making' or legislation which would abrogate them."
Norton v. Shelby County , 118 U.S. 425 p. 442
"An unconstitutional act is not law; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties; affords no protection; it creates no office; it is in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed."
Sherar v. Cullen , 481 F. 2d 946 (1973)
"There can be no sanction or penalty imposed upon one because of his exercise of constitutional rights."
Simmons v. United States , 390 U.S. 377 (1968)
"The claim and exercise of a Constitution right cannot be converted into a crime"... "a denial of them would be a denial of due process of law". Cooper v. Aaron, 358 U.S. 1, 78 S. Ct. 1401 (1958) Note: Any judge who does not comply with his oath to the Constitution of the United States wars against that Constitution and engages in acts in violation of the supreme law of the land. The judge is engaged in acts of treason. The U.S. Supreme Court has stated that "no state legislator or executive or judicial officer can war against the Constitution without violating his undertaking to support it". See also In Re Sawyer, 124 U.S. 200 (188); U.S. v. Will, 449 U.S. 200, 216, 101 S. Ct. 471, 66 L. Ed. 2d 392, 406 (1980); Cohens v. Virginia,
19 U.S. (6 Wheat) 264, 404, 5 L. Ed 257 (1821).
Hoffsomer v. Hayes, 92 Okla 32, 227 F. 417 "The courts are not bound by an officer's interpretation of the law under which he presumes to act."
Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. (2 Cranch) 137, 180 (1803)
"... the particular phraseology of the constitution of the United States confirms
and strengthens the principle, supposed to be essential to all written constitutions, that a law repugnant to the constitution is void, and that courts,as well as other departments, are bound by that instrument." "In declaring what shall be the supreme law of the land, the Constitution itself is first mentioned; and not the laws of the United States generally, but those only which shall be made in pursuance of the Constitution, have that rank". "All law (rules and practices) which are repugnant to the Constitution are VOID". Since the 14th Amendment to the Constitution states "NO State (Jurisdiction) shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the rights, privileges, or immunities of citizens of the United States nor deprive any citizens of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law, ... or equal protection under the law", this renders judicial immunity unconstitutional.
Scheuer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232, 94 S. Ct. 1683, 1687 (1974)
Note: By law, a judge is a state officer. The judge then acts not as a judge, but as a private individual (in his person). When a judge acts as a trespasser of the law, when a judge does not follow the law, the Judge loses subject-matter jurisdiction and the judges' orders are not voidable, but VOID, and of no legal force or effect. The U.S. Supreme Court stated that "when a state officer acts under a state law in a manner violative of the Federal Constitution, he comes into conflict with the superior authority of that Constitution, and he is in that case stripped of his official or representative character and is subjected in his person to the consequences of his individual conduct. The State has no power to impart to him any immunity from responsibility to
the supreme authority of the United States."
Miller v. U.S., 230 F. 2d. 486, 490; 42
"There can be no sanction or penalty imposed upon one, because of his exercise of constitutional rights."
Murdock v. Pennsylvania, 319 U.S. 105
"No state shall convert a liberty into a license, and charge a fee therefore."
Shuttlesworth v. City of Birmingham, Alabama, 373 U.S. 262
"If the State converts a right (liberty) into a privilege, the citizen can ignore the license and fee and engage in the right (liberty) with impunity."
Brinegar v. U.S.,388 US 160 (1949)
Probable Cause to Arrest - Provides details on how to determine if a crime has been or is being committed.

Carroll v. U.S., 267 US 132 (1925)
Probable Cause to Search - Provides details on the belief that seizable property exists in a particular place or on a particular person.
Draper v. U.S. (1959)
Probable cause is where known facts and circumstances, of a reasonably trustworthy nature, are sufficient to justify a man of reasonable caution in the belief that a crime has been or is being committed. Reasonable man definition; common textbook definition; comes from this case.
Davis v. Wechler, 263 U.S. 22, 24; Stromberb v. California, 283 U.S. 359; NAACP v. Alabama, 375 U.S. 449 "The assertion of federal rights, when plainly and reasonably made, are not to be defeated under the name of local practice."
Elmore v. McCammon (1986) 640 F. Supp. 905
"... the right to file a lawsuit pro se is one of the most important rights under the constitution and
laws."
Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519 (1972)
"Allegations such as those asserted by petitioner, however in artfully pleaded, are sufficient"...
"which we hold to less stringent standards than formal pleadings drafted by lawyers."
Jenkins v. McKeithen, 395 U.S. 411, 421 (1959); Picking v. Pennsylvania R. Co.,
151 Fed 2nd 240 ; Pucket v. Cox,456 2nd 233 Pro se pleadings are to be considered without regard to technicality; pro se litigants' pleadings are not to be held to the same high standards of
perfection as lawyers.
Picking v. Pennsylvania Railway, 151 F.2d. 240, Third Circuit Court of Appeals
The plaintiff's civil rights pleading was 150 pages and described by a federal judge as "inept". Nevertheless, it was held "Where a plaintiff pleads pro se in a suit for protection of civil rights, the Court should endeavor to construe Plaintiff's Pleadings without regard to technicalities."
Puckett v. Cox, 456 F. 2d 233 (1972) (6th Cir. USCA)
It was held that a pro se complaint requires a less stringent reading than one drafted by a lawyer per Justice Black in Conley v. Gibson (see case listed above, Pro Se Rights Section).
Sims v. Aherns, 271 SW 720 (1925) "The practice of law is an occupation of common right." “Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many Citizens, because of their respect for what appears to be law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their rights due to
ignorance.”
US v Minker, 350 US 179 at 187(1956)
� Supreme Court of the United States 1795 "Inasmuch as every government is an artificial person, an abstraction, and a creature of the mind only, a government can interface only with other artificial persons. The imaginary, having neither actuality nor substance, is foreclosed from creating and attaining parity with the tangible. The legal manifestation of this is that no

government, as well as any law, agency, aspect, court, etc. can concern itself with anything other
than corporate, artificial persons and the contracts between them."
S.C.R. 1795, Penhallow v. Doane's Administraters (3 U.S. 54; 1 L.Ed. 57; 3 Dall.
54), "The prosecutor is not a witness; and he should not be permitted to add to the record either by subtle or gross improprieties. Those who have experienced the full thrust of the power of government when leveled against them know that the only protection the citizen has is in the requirement for a fair trial."
Donnelly v. Dechristoforo, 1974.SCT.41709 ¶ 56; 416 U.S. 637 (1974) McNally v. U.S., 483 U.S. 350, 371-372, Quoting U.S. v Holzer, 816 F.2d. 304, 307 Fraud in its elementary common law sense of deceit... includes the deliberate concealment of material information in a setting of fiduciary obligation.
A public official is a fiduciary toward the public,... and if he deliberately conceals material information from them he is guilty of fraud.
"The law requires proof of jurisdiction to appear on the record of the administrative agency and all administrative proceedings."
Hagans v Lavine 415 U. S. 533. “A judgment rendered by a court without personal jurisdiction over the defendant is void. It is a nullity.”
Sramek v. Sramek, 17 Kan. App 2d 573, 576-7, 840 P. 2d 553 (1992) rev. denied 252 Kan. 1093(1993) “The law provides that once State and Federal jurisdiction has been challenged, it musts be proven.”
Main v Thiboutot, 100 S Ct. 2502(1980) “Jurisdiction can be challenged at any time,” and
“Jurisdiction, once challenged, cannot be assumed and must be decided.”
Basso v. Utah Power & Light Co. 395 F 2d 906, 910
“Once challenged, jurisdiction cannot be assumed, it must be proved to exist.”
Stock v. Medical Examiners 94 Ca 2d 751. 211 P2d 289 In Interest of M.V., 288 Ill.App.3d 300, 681 N.E.2d 532 (1st Dist. 1997) "Where a court's power to act is controlled by statute, the court is governed by the rules of limited jurisdiction, and courts exercising jurisdiction over such matters must proceed within the structures of the statute." "The state citizen is immune from any and all government attacks and procedure, absent contract." see, Dred Scott vs. Sanford, 60 U.S. (19 How.) 393 or as the Supreme Court has stated clearly, “...every man is independent of all laws, except those prescribed by nature. He is not bound by any institutions formed by his fellowmen without his consent.”
CRUDEN vs. NEALE, 2 N.C. 338 2 S.E. 70 "Corpus delecti consists of a showing of "1) the occurrence of the specific kind of injury and 2) someone's criminal act as the cause of the
injury."
Johnson v. State, 653 N.E.2d 478, 479 (Ind. 1995). “State must produce corroborating evidence of “corpus delecti,” showing that injury or harm constituting

crime occurred and that injury or harm was caused by someone’s criminal activity.”
Jorgensen v. State, 567 N.E.2d 113, 121. "To establish the corpus delecti, independent evidence must be presented showing the occurrence of a specific kind of injury and that a criminal act
was the cause of the injury."
Porter v. State , 391 N.E.2d 801, 808-809. "When governments enter the world of commerce, they are subject to the same burdens as any private firm or corporation" -- U.S. v. Burr, 309 U.S. 242 See: 22 U.S.C.A.286e, Bank of U.S. vs. Planters Bank of Georgia, 6L, Ed. (9 Wheat) 244; 22 U.S.C.A. 286 et seq., C.R.S. 11-60-103
TREZEVANT CASE DAMAGE AWARD STANDARD
"Evidence that motorist cited for traffic violation was incarcerated for 23 minutes during booking process, even though he had never been arrested and at all times had sufficient cash on hand to post bond pending court disposition of citation, was sufficient to support finding that municipality employing officer who cited motorist and county board of criminal justice, which operated facility in which motorist was incarcerated, had unconstitutionally deprived motorist of his right to liberty. 42 U.S.C.A. Sec. 1983." Trezevant v. City of Tampa (1984) 741 F.2d 336, hn. 1
"Jury verdict of $25,000 in favor of motorist who was unconstitutionally deprived of his liberty when incarcerated during booking process following citation for traffic violation was not excessive in view of evidence of motorist's back pain during period of incarceration and jailor's refusal to provide medical treatment, as well as fact that motorist was clearly entitled to compensation for incarceration itself and for mental anguish that he had suffered from entire episode. 42 U.S.C.A. Sec. 1983." Trezevant v. City of Tampa (1984) 741 F.2d 336, hn. 5
Mattox v. U.S., 156 US 237,243. (1895) "We are bound to interpret the Constitution in the light of the law as it existed at the time it was adopted."
SHAPIRO vs. THOMSON, 394 U. S. 618 April 21, 1969. Further, the Right to TRAVEL by private conveyance for private purposes upon the Common way can
NOT BE INFRINGED. No license or permission is required for TRAVEL when such TRAVEL IS NOT for the purpose of [COMMERCIAL] PROFIT OR GAIN on the open highways operating under license IN COMMERCE. "The rights of the individuals are restricted only to the extent that they have been voluntarily surrendered by the citizenship to the agencies of government."
City of Dallas v Mitchell, 245 S.W. 944 “To take away all remedy for the enforcement of a right is to take away the right itself. But that is not within the power of the State.”
Poindexter v. Greenhow, 114 U.S. 270, 303 (1885). Brady v. U.S., 397 U.S. 742, 748, (1970)
"Waivers of Constitutional Rights, not only must they be voluntary, they must be knowingly intelligent acts done with sufficient awareness."
Carnley v. Cochran, 369 U.S. 506, 516 (1962), "Presuming waiver from a silent record is impermissible. The record must show, or there must be an allegation and evidence which show,

Nudd v. Burrows, 91 U.S 426. “Fraud vitiates everything”
that an accused was offered counsel but intelligently and understandingly rejected the offer. Anything less is not waiver."
Cooper v. Aaron, 358 U.S. 1, 78 S.Ct. 1401 (1958). "No state legislator or executive or judicial officer can war against the Constitution without violating his undertaking to support it." The constitutional theory is that we the people are the sovereigns, the state and federal officials only our agents." "The individual, unlike the corporation, cannot be taxed for the mere privilege of existing. The corporation is an artificial entity which owes its existence and charter powers to the state; but, the individual's rights to live and own property are natural rights for the enjoyment of which an excise cannot be imposed."
Redfield v Fisher, 292 P 813, at 819 [1930] "...an officer may be held liable in damages to any person injured in consequence of a breach of any of the duties connected with his office...The liability for nonfeasance, misfeasance, and for malfeasance in office is in his 'individual' , not his official capacity..."
70 Am. Jur. 2nd Sec. 50, VII Civil Liability
“Fraud destroys the validity of everything into which it enters,”
Boyce v. Grundy, 3 Pet. 210 "Fraud vitiates the most solemn contracts, documents and even judgments."
U.S. v. Throckmorton, 98 US 61 WHEREAS, officials and even judges have no immunity (See, Owen vs. City of Independence, 100 S Ct. 1398; Maine vs. Thiboutot, 100 S. Ct. 2502; and Hafer vs. Melo, 502 U.S. 21; officials and judges are deemed to know the law and sworn to uphold the law; officials and judges cannot claim to act in good faith in willful deprivation of law, they certainly cannot plead ignorance of the law, even the Citizen cannot plead ignorance of the law, the courts have ruled there is no such thing as ignorance of the law, it is ludicrous for learned officials and judges to plead ignorance of the law therefore there is no immunity, judicial or otherwise, in matters of rights secured by the Constitution for the United States of America. See: Title 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983. "When lawsuits are brought against federal officials, they must be brought against them in their "individual" capacity not their official capacity. When federal officials perpetrate constitutional torts, they do so ultra vires (beyond the
powers) and lose the shield of immunity."
Williamson v. U.S. Department of Agriculture, 815 F.2d. 369, ACLU Foundation v. Barr, 952 F.2d. 457, 293 U.S. App. DC 101, (CA DC 1991).
"It is the duty of all officials whether legislative, judicial, executive, administrative, or ministerial to so perform every official act as not to violate constitutional provisions."
Montgomery v state 55 Fla. 97-45S0.879
a. "Inasmuch as every government is an artificial person, an abstraction, and a creature of the mind only, a government can interface only with other artificial persons. The imaginary, having neither actuality nor substance, is foreclosed from creating and attaining parity with the tangible.

The legal manifestation of this is that no government, as well as any law, agency, aspect, court, etc. can concern itself with anything other than corporate, artificial persons and the contracts between them."
S.C.R. 1795, Penhallow v. Doane’s Administrators 3 U.S. 54; 1 L.Ed. 57; 3
Dall. 54; and,
b. "the contracts between them" involve U.S. citizens, which are deemed as Corporate Entities:
c. "Therefore, the U.S. citizens residing in one of the states of the union,
are classified as property and franchises of the federal government as an "individual
entity"", Wheeling Steel Corp. v. Fox, 298 U.S. 193, 80 L.Ed. 1143, 56 S.Ct. 773
Alexander v. Bothsworth, 1915. “Party cannot be bound by contract that he has not made or
authorized. Free consent is an indispensable element in making valid contracts.”
HALE v. HENKEL 201 U.S. 43 at 89 (1906) Hale v. Henkel was decided by the united States Supreme Court in 1906. The opinion of the court states: "The "individual" may stand upon "his Constitutional Rights" as a CITIZEN. He is entitled to carry on his "private" business in his own way. "His power to contract is unlimited." He owes no duty to the State or to his neighbors to divulge his business, or to open his doors to an investigation, so far as it may tend to incriminate him. He owes no duty to the State, since he receives nothing there from, beyond the protection of his life and property. "His rights" are such as "existed" by the Law of the Land (Common Law) "long antecedent" to the organization of the State", and can only be taken from him by "due process of law", and "in accordance with the Constitution." "He owes nothing" to the public so long as he does not trespass upon their rights."
HALE V. HENKEL 201 U.S. 43 at 89 (1906) Hale v. Henkel is binding on all the courts of the United States of America until another Supreme Court case says it isn’t. No other Supreme Court case has ever overturned Hale v. Henkel None of the various issues of Hale v. Henkel has ever been overruled since 1906, Hale v. Henkel has been cited by the Federal and State Appellate Court systems over 1,600 times! In nearly every instance when a case is cited, it has an impact on precedent authority of the cited case. Compared with other previously decided Supreme Court cases, no other case has surpassed Hale v. Henkel in the number of times it has been cited by the courts. "The rights of the individuals are restricted only to the extent that they have been voluntarily surrendered by the citizenship to the agencies of government."
City of Dallas v Mitchell, 245 S.W. 944
“An illegal arrest is an assault and battery. The person so attempted to be restrained of his liberty has the same right to use force in defending himself as he would in repelling any other assault and battery.” (State v. Robinson, 145 ME. 77, 72 ATL. 260).
TITLE 18
>
PART I
> CHAPTER 2


31Definitions (6)
Motor vehicle.� The term “motor vehicle” means every description of carriage or other contrivance propelled or drawn by mechanical power and used for commercial purposes on the highways in the transportation of passengers, passengers and property, or property or cargo. "Highways are for the use of the traveling public, and all have the right to use them in a reasonable and proper manner; the use thereof is an inalienable right
of every citizen." Escobedo v. State 35 C2d 870 in 8 Cal Jur 3d p.27
The use of the automobile as a necessary adjunct to the earning of a livelihood in modern life requires us in the interest of realism to conclude that the RIGHT to use an automobile on the public highways partakes of the of a liberty within the meaning of the Constitutional guarantees. ..."
Berberian v. Lussier (1958) 139 A2d 869, 872 "The RIGHT of the citizen to DRIVE on the public street with freedom from police interference, unless he is engaged in suspicious conduct associated in some manner with criminality is a FUNDAMENTAL CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT which must be protected by the courts."
People v. Horton 14 Cal. App. 3rd 667 (1971) “A “US Citizen” upon leaving the District of Columbia becomes involved in “interstate commerce”, as a “resident” does not have the common-law right to travel, of a Citizen of one of the several states.”
Hendrick v. Maryland S.C. Reporter’s Rd. 610-625. (1914) "One who DRIVES an automobile is an operator within meaning of the Motor Vehicle Act."
Pontius v. McClean 113 CA 452 "The word 'operator' shall not include any person who
solely transports his own property and who transports no persons or property for hire or compensation." Statutes at Large California Chapter 412 p.833 "The right of a citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, by horse-drawn carriage, wagon, or automobile is not a mere privilege which may be permitted or prohibited at will, but a common right which he has under his right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."
Slusher v. Safety Coach Transit Co., 229 Ky 731, 17 SW2d 1012, and affirmed by the Supreme Court in Thompson v. Smith 154 S.E. 579.
Also See:
- EDWARDS VS. CALIFORNIA, 314 U.S. 160
- TWINING VS NEW JERSEY, 211 U.S. 78
- WILLIAMS VS. FEARS, 179 U.S. 270, AT 274
- CRANDALL VS. NEVADA, 6 WALL. 35, AT 43-44
- THE PASSENGER CASES, 7 HOWARD 287, AT 492
- U.S. VS. GUEST, 383 U.S. 745, AT 757-758 (1966)
- GRIFFIN VS. BRECKENRIDGE, 403 U.S. 88, AT 105-106 (1971) - CALIFANO VS. TORRES, 435 U.S. 1, AT 4, note 6
- SHAPIRO VS. THOMPSON, 394 U.S. 618 (1969)
- CALIFANO VS. AZNAVORIAN, 439 U.S. 170, AT 176 (1978)
 

Scorpio

Hunter of elusive Beer Virus
Founding Member
Board Elder
Site Mgr
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 25, 2010
Messages
30,829
Likes
42,305
with the declaration of 'emergency', all the constitutional arguments are washed away,

and it is high time people starting realizing we have been under emergency declaration since at least WWII

this renders the arguments about constitutionality as mute or not material
 

Cigarlover

Midas Member
Midas Member
Midas Supporter
Joined
Dec 18, 2011
Messages
7,720
Likes
15,104
with the declaration of 'emergency', all the constitutional arguments are washed away,

and it is high time people starting realizing we have been under emergency declaration since at least WWII

this renders the arguments about constitutionality as mute or not material
The why not just shut down the Supreme court? Send all the judges home and declare that anything the gov tells you to do you must do? The fact that the court takes cases to determine the constitutionality tells me the constitution is still intact and valid.
 

chris_is_here

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
1,337
Likes
1,806
Location
Loon Lake
Gun grabbers gonna try and gun grab but they can't. They're vastly outnumbered and they know it! I'm struggling with how the NG can simply ignore orders unless the country is in an all out revolt. I don't see that yet but perhaps I'm just not looking in the right places.

The level of biblical-esc times we live in is, well...biblical
You are correct. They outlined a confiscation plan (a bigger version of what they pulled during the Marathon bombing) but couldn't put enough support together to pull it off. But, they are locking down the state starting tomorrow. I wouldn't be surprised to see a few critical people get Red Flagged. If they do confiscation, it will have to be in stages.
 

Scorpio

Hunter of elusive Beer Virus
Founding Member
Board Elder
Site Mgr
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 25, 2010
Messages
30,829
Likes
42,305
The fact that the court takes cases to determine the constitutionality tells me the constitution is still intact and valid.
naww, that is just being obtuse regarding it,

the whole chain is a acceptance of cases, and much of that is related to maintaining the illusion,
they pick and choose cases all the time,

kenyan kare is not constitutional
false flag laws from 911 are still not constitutional
etc

tired of wasting breath on the same old stuff,
look it up yourself
 

the_shootist

Trump 2020
Midas Member
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
May 31, 2015
Messages
42,397
Likes
67,865
You are correct. They outlined a confiscation plan (a bigger version of what they pulled during the Marathon bombing) but couldn't put enough support together to pull it off. But, they are locking down the state starting tomorrow. I wouldn't be surprised to see a few critical people get Red Flagged. If they do confiscation, it will have to be in stages.
Cops in my town won't cooperate in any gun confiscation, if anything they'll shoot back at anyone who enters the town to try. My town is not exactly up there in population and therefore not too high on the confiscation list. We'll see it coming long before we see it happen here.
 

Evl Bnkr

Silver Member
Silver Miner
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 27, 2014
Messages
70
Likes
207
I've been watching the numbers and they are hard to decipher, since they make no real sense.

The USA is showing a 1.2% mortality rate. Worldwide, the rate has crept up to 4.4%. In Italy, the mortality rate is approaching 10%.
Why would this be 10 times more lethal in Italy than here? My own state has had its proportionate share of the virus, with almost no deaths. In Wuhan, the death rate was 4.0%, but that's commie math, so the real death rate could be higher or lower, who knows?

I think the testing protocols are so haphazard and inconsistent, that the figures reported are probably grossly exaggerated in areas where the death rate is well below 4%. What we are seeing is the reporting of a number of different things, COVID-19 being one of them and likely, the most lethal.

I can't read much from this, other than the fact the governments all over the world are completely impotent in the face of this, including our own USA with the limp-dicks at the CDC at the helm. They've got no fist in their glove, they got nothing. They keep trotting out Fauci and he's a tired old government has-been.

So, we're left with is an over-the-top response to what may or may not be a real threat, it's hard to really know without information. One thing I know for sure. Governments everywhere will kill more people in the long run than COVID-19 will, due to their stupidity and corruption.

When one starts with bad/incomplete data, then builds assumptions based on analysis of same, then uses the assumptions as the foundation to create predictive models you are demonstrating very effectively that all models are flawed, and that some models may be more useful than others. All depends on what you do with the flawed results that come out of the less than accurate models...
 
Last edited:

DodgebyDave

Metal Messiah
Midas Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2010
Messages
12,263
Likes
14,409
LDG's state agency just shut down. Disability Determination, Social Security.
 

tigerwillow1

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
1,026
Likes
1,734
with the declaration of 'emergency', all the constitutional arguments are washed away,

and it is high time people starting realizing we have been under emergency declaration since at least WWII
A good example: For the last few years just about every tax bill, and others, passed in Oregon has been declared an emergency. This declaration prevents it from being subject to a vote of the people.
 

Hystckndle

SWEATEQUITYIS$$$
Site Mgr
Midas Supporter ++
GIM Hall Of Fame
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
7,614
Likes
9,139
Location
Central Florida
Key words.
And used by Scorp.
It is not that some things are UNconstitutional
( which would infer that whatever it is is indeed enforceable or debateable or votable etc )
It is that some things are NON( not )constitutional
( different construct for different people and a different class and a different system
enforced by coercion, force, guns etc )
Just how I see it.
YMMV
 

TAEZZAR

LADY JUSTICE ISNT BLIND, SHES JUST AFRAID TO WATCH
Midas Member
Midas Supporter ++
GIM Hall Of Fame
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
18,213
Likes
34,541
Location
ORYGUN
Key words.
And used by Scorp.
It is not that some things are UNconstitutional
( which would infer that whatever it is is indeed enforceable or debateable or votable etc )
It is that some things are NON( not )constitutional
( different construct for different people and a different class and a different system
enforced by coercion, force, guns etc )
Just how I see it.
YMMV
Ether/either way, UN/NON, I don't like it ! :totally steamed:
 

Scorpio

Hunter of elusive Beer Virus
Founding Member
Board Elder
Site Mgr
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 25, 2010
Messages
30,829
Likes
42,305
hey guys,

was just talking to a canadian dr I know,

confirmed what I have been stating independently, without me coercing him

he said that he has looked at the virus at the atomic level, and stated that it has a long protein chain that is not consistent with a virus or any flu. Stated he is now at the point where this is in fact a man made creation.

then he went on to say, that he can only assume some chump li over there messed up, and it got out into the world and the rest is what we are seeing.

I let him know that it did confirm what I thought, but I cannot speak to accident or other. Then also let him know that it is my current understanding that this thing is mutating real time, and is a bit different than when first released.

sure would be nice to know if anyone else can confirm or deny the existence of that protein chain, and the structure differing from a cold/flu/virus.

we here have been stating for some time that it is not as they are propagandizing it to be. This is but a piece of meat to chew on as we sift thru the misinformation.
 

Thecrensh

Midas Member
Midas Member
Site Supporter
Joined
Jun 26, 2013
Messages
8,191
Likes
11,719
hey guys,

was just talking to a canadian dr I know,

confirmed what I have been stating independently, without me coercing him

he said that he has looked at the virus at the atomic level, and stated that it has a long protein chain that is not consistent with a virus or any flu. Stated he is now at the point where this is in fact a man made creation.

then he went on to say, that he can only assume some chump li over there messed up, and it got out into the world and the rest is what we are seeing.

I let him know that it did confirm what I thought, but I cannot speak to accident or other. Then also let him know that it is my current understanding that this thing is mutating real time, and is a bit different than when first released.

sure would be nice to know if anyone else can confirm or deny the existence of that protein chain, and the structure differing from a cold/flu/virus.

we here have been stating for some time that it is not as they are propagandizing it to be. This is but a piece of meat to chew on as we sift thru the misinformation.
THAT could be construed as an act of war...
 

newmisty

Splodey-Headed
Midas Member
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
29,257
Likes
44,080
Location
Qmerica
hey guys,

was just talking to a canadian dr I know,

confirmed what I have been stating independently, without me coercing him

he said that he has looked at the virus at the atomic level, and stated that it has a long protein chain that is not consistent with a virus or any flu. Stated he is now at the point where this is in fact a man made creation.

then he went on to say, that he can only assume some chump li over there messed up, and it got out into the world and the rest is what we are seeing.

I let him know that it did confirm what I thought, but I cannot speak to accident or other. Then also let him know that it is my current understanding that this thing is mutating real time, and is a bit different than when first released.

sure would be nice to know if anyone else can confirm or deny the existence of that protein chain, and the structure differing from a cold/flu/virus.

we here have been stating for some time that it is not as they are propagandizing it to be. This is but a piece of meat to chew on as we sift thru the misinformation.
Wasn't there a us patent for it? Or was that just for a generic type?
 

Buck

Village Idiot
Midas Member
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Apr 13, 2011
Messages
10,152
Likes
10,121
and treason...

plus the Harvard Prof, there has to be more...so, a 'private set-up to promote WWIII', an attempt to make it look like something it isn't...

and since all things on the planet have 'markers' and since all man-made stuff is made with 'markers', 'they' know where this came from...

'they' know what it's capable of doing and 'they' have the antidote...

if anyone can show any 'evidence' of this occurring, that would resolve the war thing...


We're on Trumps Time and so far, it looks like he don't like direct warfare, etc...
 

ABC123

Gold Chaser
Platinum Bling
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Apr 10, 2010
Messages
3,537
Likes
6,323
hey guys,

was just talking to a canadian dr I know,

confirmed what I have been stating independently, without me coercing him

he said that he has looked at the virus at the atomic level, and stated that it has a long protein chain that is not consistent with a virus or any flu. Stated he is now at the point where this is in fact a man made creation.

then he went on to say, that he can only assume some chump li over there messed up, and it got out into the world and the rest is what we are seeing.

I let him know that it did confirm what I thought, but I cannot speak to accident or other. Then also let him know that it is my current understanding that this thing is mutating real time, and is a bit different than when first released.

sure would be nice to know if anyone else can confirm or deny the existence of that protein chain, and the structure differing from a cold/flu/virus.

we here have been stating for some time that it is not as they are propagandizing it to be. This is but a piece of meat to chew on as we sift thru the misinformation.
Harvard University Professor and Two Chinese Nationals Charged in Three Separate China Related Cases


https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/harv...ationals-charged-three-separate-china-related
 

Malus

Gold Chaser
Platinum Bling
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
3,392
Likes
2,796
Location
In a world gone mad....

Hystckndle

SWEATEQUITYIS$$$
Site Mgr
Midas Supporter ++
GIM Hall Of Fame
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
7,614
Likes
9,139
Location
Central Florida
@ Scorp and all,
The way the thing " explodes" over a 24 hour period,
and freaks out 9 paraphrasing ) even the very experienced and hardy professional level medical workers...
Is very telling to me.
 

Scorpio

Hunter of elusive Beer Virus
Founding Member
Board Elder
Site Mgr
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 25, 2010
Messages
30,829
Likes
42,305
freaks out 9 paraphrasing ) even the very experienced and hardy professional level medical workers
more that just that,

if you remember, I have been chirping away that all persons with knowledge of this thing have flat laid down,

no one is questioning the official narrative in public, no one is pushing back at all,

so here is what happened, they knew full well from the jump what IT is, and again if you remember, they called in CEO's for a brief, congress thieves, etc. They all came out with the same sour faces and with a consistent voice, it is a flu, it is a virus, it is a corona virus, and now covid 19

they kept trial ballooning narratives and adapting as time went on,

to me, there was a solid reason for the constant lies and misrepresentation, a extreme worry about societal disintegration in many areas. Not only chin land, but here and zero land.

for if the truth were known, that it was in fact a biological creation of some type, and they had painted the chins in a corner, just think what would have happened. And of course, we are all aware of .gov lying with impunity supposedly 'for the good of the country'. At least that is what they tell themselves to justify their actions.

they took a calculated risk, control the narrative and prevent the slaves from revolting.

if we accept the above as true, and there is no reason to as well as every reason to, depending on your predisposition, then what is left to argue is intentional or by accident.

you have heard it put out there already, that this is a concerted take down of the chin li economy, similar to the japanese economy back in '90-91. That is one possibility.

another is that the china economy simply blew up, and all the rest of this is smoke screen. This goes back to tramps efforts from day 1 to put a full court press squeeze on the chins until she breaks. It may have done exactly that.

and of course you have the accidental bumbling by chump li, whom chin li is going to be awfully pissed at right about now if he isn't already dead or in the gulag.