7 Comments

RESURRECT THE REPUBLIC – COLONEL RILEY of O.A.S. AGREES TO ADOPT LAWFUL STAND

It has been with no hesitation and with full admiration that Colonel Harry Riley gave me a full “private” interview under no uncertain terms stated that he , and only “he” was running this operation, a fact that had previously been subject to “understandable and regrettable circumstances”, that he did not support nor did he condone, did occur and words were expressed that support the fact that he extended this exchange as a matter of honor. I respect him for that. We at Resurrect the Republic, and I myself personally, speak for “myself” when I say, that any man willing to put forth the lawful and long overdue argument of the unlawful un-Constitutional 14th Amendment and the proof,”undeniable” that the original 13th Amendment was the Supreme Law of the Land ! This would make the standing in law of the courts forced to reconstruct itself, or be forced by proclamation of TREASON if they did not capitulate. It would make the no victim no crime argument solidly fact and any such violation against it wouldn’t be faced with swift punitive action. No more un-elected positions of police authority. Elections as the County Sheriff does. This is the essential foundation of the guaranteed “Republican form of government” that our founders maintained was inalienable. Therefore by definition it can not be taken by any man, nor corporate body, either. it does in fact provide a “factory reset” that need not be defined by the Constitution itself, as this unlawful form of government emerged out of the other side and “never respected any rule of law”. How do we accept what they surely wont accept? They do work for us if they maintain that this argument is incorrect….then I say …..”put up, or stand down”. As once one has been informed of own research presented, and one can not disprove our theory, then it must be recognized, for doing any such other thing would be treasonous, and in fact by denying any “open and transparent debate” we demand to be heard by Congress. If we are right, and the B.A.R. Association “BRITISH ACCREDITATION REGISTRY”, is unlawful and its members disallowed to hold public office, then I say a “grace period” be acknowledged to allow them to disavow their allegiance to this most unholy of institutions that put into place “administrators” not real Judges. These are men of by and for, the corporation for profit business of the town. And once you realize this fully and it really sinks in, you will see plainly that we also have debtors prisons. You take a man who can not afford the registration, the DL, and also is standing for his inalienable rights infringed by the Federal Government and his state that has been federalized, right down to the smallest town…..all federalized and subsidized with pay off money. And it appears the so called elected have created an entire new monarchical class by the “ruling elite”. This solidifies any of these “outside. It is un-holy. It is despicable to continue on and not expect complete totalitarianism to finally close around us……in fact Operation American Spring has agreed to include in its redress, a lawful and totally peaceful solution and resolution to the out of control federal corporatocracy. Included below is an addition by my brother in the good fight Mr. Bruce Ray Riggs.

FROM CONSTiTUTIONAL TO CORPORATE
HOW THE MODERN AMERICAN SLAVE CAME TO BE
Most Americans don’t know there was a different 13th Amendment. It was proposed just four years before the 13th Amendment, ending Involuntary Slavery in 1865. It would have secured slavery as a State Right (12 Stat. 251, 36th Congress, http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llsl&fileName=012%2Fllsl012.db&recNum=282 This proposed 13th Amendment was called the Corwin Amendment.
On February 28, 1861, the House of Representatives approved the Resolution by a vote of 133-65. On March 2, the United States Senate also adopted the Corwin Amendment with a vote of 24-12.
Since proposed Constitutional Amendment require a 2/3 majority vote, 132 votes were required in the House and 24 in the Senate. As seven Southern States had already decided to succeed from the Union, those states chose not to vote on the Corwin Amendment. Thus, showing a lot of the Northern support for this Pro-Slavery Amendment just before the start of the Civil War.
This Corwin Amendment is an Amendment to the United States Constitution proposed by Congress on March 2, 1861, as House Resolution No. 80. This was originally suggested by President James Buchanan (Mr. President James Buchanan endorsed the Corwin Amendment by taking the unusual step of signing it.). It was then drafted by a committee chaired by Representative Thomas Corwin of Ohio. Its purpose was to persuade states that permitted Slavery that the Federal Government would not interfere with Slavery in places where it already existed. So, pursuant to Article V of the Constitution, consideration of the Corwin Amendment then shifted to the State Legislatures.
On May 13, 1861, the Ohio General Assembly became the first to ratify the Amendment. In January 1862, Maryland General Assembly was next to ratifying the Amendment. Later that year, Illinois approved the Amendment while they were sitting in session as a State Constitutional Convention rather than as a Legislature. Thus, causing some to see this particular ratification as possibly invalid. Note Ohio, Maryland, and Illinois were states that we are taught in history that fought to free the slaves. Plus look at the dates. All three states ratified this evil Amendment after the civil war had started on April 15, 1861. Moreover not one southern state has ever ratified it.
So, if the South had left the Union just because Slavery, then why would the Southern Political Forces that is then not plan to stay within the Union to support proposed Corwin 13th Amendment?
In Abraham Lincoln’s first Inaugural Address, he supported the Corwin Amendment: “Holding such a provision to now be implied Constitutional law, I have no objection to its being made express and irrevocable.”
Then, just weeks prior to the outbreak of the Civil War, Lincoln even pinned a letter to each Governor asking for them to support the Corwin Amendment.
Check out http://www.lib.niu.edu/2006/ih060934.html. Quoted from the site “The discovery of the newly inaugurated President Abraham Lincoln to the governor of Florida has generated renewed interest in Lincoln’s views toward slavery. The letter, found at the Le-high County Historical Society in Allentown, Pennsylvania, is a form letter from Lincoln to Governor Madison S. Perry transmitting “an authenticated copy” of a Joint Resolution to amend the Constitution of the United States On March 16, 1861, Lincoln sent the letter to all of the Governors of the States, supporting the Corwin Amendment including states that had already succeeded from the Union and formed their own Confederate Government.
Technically, the Corwin Amendment is still pending. It would need additional 35 or 36 ratifications, depending on Illinois ratification, in order to become part of the Constitution.
In 1963, a resolution to ratify the Corwin Amendment was introduced in Texas State Legislature. Remember this was proposed a month before Fort Sumter was fired upon. The war could have been avoided if slavery was in fact the only issue. In all reality, here in America no matter what race or religion you might practice, we all have one thing in common: As far as liberty is concerned we’re all in the same boat and its sinking. If We the People don’t learn to become One People in the very near future we may not even have the illusion of being a Constitutionally Free People much longer. Let’s all as one People fix the leak in the ship of Liberty!
In addition to, when did Abraham Lincoln first address freeing the Slaves? It was only when Lincoln was losing the war with the South that he issued the Emancipation Proclamation, September 22, 1862, in the mid of war. Over a year after the Civil War started in April 15, 1861. This is where he established a purpose for the war and proclaimed that Slaves in the Nations of the Confederate States were free.
Mr. Lincoln’s statements of his first Inaugural Address, on March 4, 1861, around 41 days before the start of the Civil War: “I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of Slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so”.
Abraham Lincoln’s letter to Horace Greeley, August 22, 1862, stated in part: “My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union”.
From the 4th Lincoln and Douglas debate, August 21, 1858, Lincoln stated: “I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in anyway the social and political equality of the white and black races – that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of Negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality.
So the 14th amendment didn’t make no one equal. Example After the said ratification of the 14th Amendment . it took women another 50 years to gain a right to vote. It took Black folks 96 years till the civil rights act of 1964 to be said to be equal and end segregation. it took the back folks to stand up for themselves and protest and make the courts interpret the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment to mean equal rights. sense the 14th Amendment all laws courts and government operate under the jurisdiction of the 14th Amendment. That means for the first 96 years the 14th amendment was said ratified. It’s jurisdiction enforced racist laws. And now to teach in school this 14th Amendment made us equal? What a LIE.

The November 14, 1866 Florida House Journals 2d. Sess, 14th, Gen, Ass. makes clear BEFORE Reconstruction Blacks were equal with whites in every area. It’s a shame after Reconstruction and the 14th Amendment it took Black folks 96 years to to once again achieve this level of equality.http://www.dirtyunclesam.com/floridaHouse_Journal.pdf

The 13th Amendment to the United States Constitution that abolished slavery was proposed by Joint Resolution of Congress, (13 Statutes at Large, p. 567) and was approved February 1, 1865 by President Abraham Lincoln, as required by Article I, Section 7 of the United States Constitution. the President’s signature is affixed to the Resolution. The 13th Amendment was ratified by 27 states of he then thirty-six (36) states of the Union, including the Southern States of Virginia, Louisiana, Arkansas, South Carolina, Alabama, North Carolina, and Georgia. This is shown by the Proclamation of the Secretary of State December 18, 1865. (13 Statutes at Large, p. 774.) Without the votes of these seven (7) Southern State Legislatures the 13th Amendment abolishing slavery would have failed. There can be no doubt but that the ratification by these seven (7) Southern States of the 13th Amendment again established the fact that their Legislatures and State governments were duly and lawfully constituted and functioning as such under their States Constitutions a year and half before Reconstruction.
BRIEF HISTORY DIFFERENT CITIZEN (JURISDICTION) CREATED

The original citizen the US Constitution created is found at Article 4 Section 2 (state citizen). Exhibit (A) http://www.dirtyunclesam.com/constitution.pdf

Next, in 1862, Congress redefined the meaning of the word PERSON to include the definition CORPORATION, AMONG OTHER THINGS. Exhibit (B) http://www.dirtyunclesam.com/Person-act.pdf

Then, in 1868, the 14th Amendment created a different citizen making all “PERSONS”, corporations, citizens of the “UNITED STATES” and “SUBJECT TO” the “JURISDICTION” “THEREOF” .
UNITED STATES = Washington D.C. doing business as the United Stated incorporated Feb. 01, 1871. .http://www.dirtyunclesam.com/United_States.pdf

This corporation was given all the powers not inconsistent with the laws and Constitution of the United States, which means consistent or double talk.

A link to Blacks Law Dictionary online 5th Ed. http://www.mindserpent.com/American_History/reference/1979_Black_5/1979_Black_5_index.html

“SUBJECT TO” (Blacks Law dictionary, 5th edition, Page 1278) – “Liable, subordinate, inferior, obedient to, governed or affected by; provided; answerable for
“JURISDICTION – authority

FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT Blacks Law Dictionary 5th Ed. Page 591 (in part) . It became part of the Organic law July 28,1868. It created or at least reckoned for the first time a citizen of the United States as distinct of that of the State(ARTICLE 4 SEC.2 US CONSTITUTION ORIGINAL STATE CITIZEN)

NOTE: If you’re a citizen of the United States, you’re a corporation, says the US Supreme Court. “A corporation is a person within the meaning of the equal protection due process provision of the US Constitution.” Metropolitan Life Ins. v. Ward Ala. 470 U.S. 869, 105 S.Ct. 1676 at 1683, 84 L.Ed. 2d. 751. http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=470&invol=869
” The United States is a federal Corporation”, says US Code title 28 USC 3002 15 (a).http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/3002 .
“All crimes state or federal are commercial crimes”, says Code of Federal Regulation title 27 72.11 http://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/27/72.11

Blacks Law Dictionary 5th Ed. Page 306, Corporate Citizenship – Corporate status in the state of incorporation, through a foreign corporation is not a citizen for purposes of the privilege and Immunities Clause.
U.S. Constitution Article 4 Section 2 “ORIGINAL CONSTITUTIONAL CITIZEN is not a corporation” Bank of Augusta v. Earle 38 U.S. (13 Pet ) 510, 10 L. Ed. 274 http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=38&invol=519

Blacks Law Dictionary 5th Ed. Page 104, Artificial Persons – Persons created and devised by human laws for the purpose of society and government, as distinguished from natural persons. Corporations are examples of artificial persons.

THE UNCONSTITUTIONAL 14 AMENDMENT

The 14th Amendment was not properly ratified. Congress knows this. Every member of
Congress received a copy November 26, 2008. Congressional research service report . Order
Code 98-611 GOV prepared for members and committees of Congress, Exhibit (D) http://www.dirtyunclesam.com/98-611.pdf/

Page 5 of this report which is crs-2, top paragraph, makes clear that Executive Order 6 (Presidential proclamation #11) ordered the 14th Amendment ratified. Exhibit (E) http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llsl&fileName=015%2Fllsl015.db&recNum=739

Executive order #7 (Presidential Proclamation #13) Ordered the 14th Amendment lawful and published. Exhibit (F) http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llsl&fileName=015%2Fllsl015.db&recNum=741

Both E.O. 6 and 7 never had the signature of the President. Only the Secretary of State. So, these
two fake executive orders are booked and paged as Presidential proclamations. As the CRS report makes clear. Proclamation #12 admitting the states under a newly established legislative bodies replaced the Constitutionally elected one. The states were blackmailed into ratifying the said 14th Amendment or be denied representation in Congress and remain under marshal law. Exhibit (G) http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llsl&fileName=015%2Fllsl015.db&recNum=741

Keep in mind the seated president at that time Andrew Johnson was against the 14th
Amendment claiming it created a Unconstitutional de facto government as he pointed out in
his veto address, Exhibit (H) http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llhj&fileName=064%2Fllhj064.db&recNum=562&itemLink=r%3Fammem%2Fhlaw%3A%40field%28DOCID+%40lit%28hj0641%29%29%3A#0640001&linkText=1

De facto government Blacks Law dictionary 5th Ed. Page 375. “one that displays itself by a force against the will of the rightful legal government and is successful at least temporarily in overturning the institutions of the rightful legal government and setting up it’s own in lieu thereof. Wortham v. Walker 133 Tex. 255, 128 S.W.2d 1138,1145.

THE 14TH AMENDMENT WAS NOT CONSTITUTIONALLY ADOPTED
1) The joint resolution proposing said 14th Amendment was not submitted to or adopted by a Constitutional Congress. Article 1 section 3 and Article 5 of the U.S. Constitution
2) The joint resolution was not submitted to the President for his approval. Article 1 section 7.
3) The proposed 14th Amendment was rejected by more than one-fourth of all the States then in the union, and it was never ratified by three-fourths of all the States in the Union. Article 5.

THE UNCONSTITUTIONAL CONGRESS
The U.S. Constitution provides:
Article 1 Section 3. “The Senate shall be composed of two Senators from each state”.
Article 5 provides: “No State without it’s consent, shall be deprived of it’s equal suffrage in the Senate”.
The fact that 23 Senators from northern and southern states had been unlawfully excluded from the U.S. Senate, in order to secure a two-thirds vote for adoption the 14th Amendment.
THE LOUISIANA LEGISLATURE URGING CONGRESS TO DECLARE THE 14th AMENDMENT ILLEGAL. On June 13,1967, A WELL ANNOTATED LAW DRIVEN BRIEF ON THE UNCONSTITUTIONALITY OF THE 14th AMENDMENT and how its an act of treason against our Constitution and how it over threw our Constitution, prepared by Judge Leander H. Perez, of Louisiana, was memorialized on the House floor. Memorization page number 15641- 15646 of this LAW DRIVEN Congressional Record, thus, showing how several Unconstitutional acts were done in-order to claim the said 2/3 votes needed for ratification, including 23 senators from northern and southern states were also unlawfully excluded from the US Senate in order to secure this 2/3 vote. All this also included replacing 10 lawful state governments for rejecting the 14th Amendment as Unconstitutional, for the loss of state rights, and how the federal courts will not hear an argument on the invalidity of the 14th Amendment. http://www.dirtyunclesam.com/Non_Ratification_14th_Amendment.pdf

NOTE: The US Supreme court in COLEMAN v- MILLER 307 US433 (1939) makes clear not only were state governments replaced with new ones for rejecting and not ratifying the 14th Amendment the supreme court never decided on the Constitutionally of the 14th Amendment saying it was political question and never addressed the merits of the 14th Amendment being Constitutional or not. www.dirtyunclesam.com/colemanmiller.pdf
But Dyett v Turner, (1968) 439 P2d 266, 267 STATE SUPREME COURT OF UTAH STRUCK DOWN THE 14TH AMENDMENT AS UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND IS NOT A REAL AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION. Also see 267; State v Phillips, (1975) 540 P 2d 936; as well as 28 Tulane Law Review, 22; 11 South Carolina Law Quarterly 484;

The Utah Supreme Court in Dyett v. Turner STATED THE LAWFUL SOLUTION is public awareness followed by a Constitutional Convention Per Article 5 to do a investigation on the 14th Amendment being Constitutional or not. .
QUESTION, Is it not Unconstitutional to replace state governments the voters elected with new one’s for not voting a certain way? Is it not Unconstitutional for 23 senators from northern and southern states to be unlawfully excluded from the US Senate in order to secure this 2/3 vote? Don’t it violate the SUPREMACY CLAUSE of The U.S. Constitution which holds the Constitution to be SUPREME LAW of the land, to create a different citizen, “subject to” a different jurisdiction and a different form of government that the Constitution originally created??

A Century of Lawmaking for a New Nation: U.S. Congressional Documents and Debates, 1774 – 1875
memory.loc.govRESURRECT THE REPUBLIC PROMO NIGHT VISION

Support us by sharing and "liking' our posts.

About T.R.Lacovara-Stewart

I believe in the Constitution of the United States, that was BOUND by the ORIGINAL BILL of RIGHTS. Those have been attacked and undermined and either another "Secret Constitution" slid in front of the eyes of the people, or a Corporate reproduction after unauthorized editing by an unlawful un-Constitutional act of absolute out and out TREASON !!! This must be realized by the people, and history needs to be understood has been from the government manipulated curriculim in schools that teach a version of history that certainly is HIS STORY, but whose story is it, and how strong are our views of matters based on historical context that we recieved as the product of psychological operations and programming of the generations to white wash history.....WE HAVE DOCUMENTS TO PROVE THAT THE JURISDICTION CREATED BY AN ACT OF LEGISLATION IN 1868 WAS NOT ONLY UN-CONSTITUTIONAL, BUT IT CREATED A DE-FACTO GOVERNMENT THAT INCLUDES A COMMERCIAL FEDERAL JURISDICTION THAT EMPOWERS THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO IN ESSENCE SWALLOW STATES RIGHTS AND COMPLETELY USURP ITS JURISDICTION !!!! FACT!!!!

7 comments on “RESURRECT THE REPUBLIC – COLONEL RILEY of O.A.S. AGREES TO ADOPT LAWFUL STAND

  1. Wow that was odd. I just wrote an really long comment but after I
    clicked submit my comment didn’t appear. Grrrr… well I’m not writing all that over again.
    Anyhow, just wanted to say superb blog!

  2. Good blog post. I definitely appreciate this site. Keep it up!

  3. I was suggested this website by way of my cousin.
    I’m no longer certain whether or not this publish is written via him as no one
    else understand such exact approximately my difficulty.
    You are wonderful! Thanks!

  4. I RESPONDED SIR…..WILL TRY AGAIN.

  5. I am requesting that you email me right away. I do not use Linkedin. I use email. You need to email me as soon as possible.

    eliasalias2@yahoo.com

    Thank you.
    Salute!
    Elias Alias

  6. Well said/written. and May I add in order to restore our Constitutional Law ALL JUDGES AND PROSECUTORS should be made an example of due to the FACT is they KNEW and were willingly ignoring the laws & limits of the Constitution and the peoples rights..they are guilty of WILLFUL TREASON, for the sake of Revenue collection . THEY knew from their training as a Court Officer about the rules of CORPUS DELICTI and the 3 elements involved in a cause of action and they WILLFULLY IGNORE THESE RULES TO ENFORCE LESSER LAWS THAT ARE INVALID LAWS,, and they do not insists on the police being trained to know the difference between a constitutional laws or order vs. a un- constitutional law or order..

Leave a Reply