So, Ford has admitted to underage drinking. So has Kavanaugh. Just issue them a couple of "Minors Under the Influence" citations and let's be done with the whole shit-show, as those are the only infractions that have been established, or that can be witness-corroborated.
Well, now it seems Ford is not a licensed psychologist at all; not in Calif nor in any other State. So it seems she started right off in her intro of herself, by being misleading. But neither do I sense any favor for Kav. If he passes on thru, I hold my breath to see if he turns out to be another jeff sessions turncoat type.
I have to take issue with this video and here's why and I hope this is a 'DUH' for people who read my comments! KAVANAUGH IS ABSOLUTELY RIGHT IN HIS CONSTITUTIONAL ASSESSMENT OF THE BILL OF RIGHTS...HE IS SPOT ON! HERE'S WHY: U.S. CITIZENS HAVE NO UNALIENABLE (PREAMBLE RIGHTS) OR SECURED (BILL OF RIGHTS) RIGHTS. The only thing U.S. Citizens have is CIVIL (equity/roman) LAW RIGHTS. Those rights have absolutely nothing to do with the 4th amendment BILL OF RIGHTS. Most of the People claim they are U.S. CITIZENS and have U.S. CITIZENSHIP. OK! The the court has to rule pursuant to the ROMAN CIVIL LAW IN CASES/CONTROVERSIES INVOLVING THESE CITIZENS. Such citizens are not governed by the BILL OF RIGHTS. They have no legal standing to those rights under the law. The records show the majority of people have claimed on and for the record they are U.S. CITIZENS....CITIZENS OF ROMAN CIVIL LAW. Where in the Constitution is the ROMAN CIVIL LAW? WHERE? Nowhere...that's where! The ROMAN CIVIL CITIZEN was not even created until the 14th amendment. AFTER THAT CONGRESS BEGAN CREATING LAWS to govern those citizens. Citizens and the PEOPLE are not the same thing. So what Kavanaugh has ruled is spot on. CITIZENS HAVE NO UNALIENABLE OR SECURED RIGHTS. Citizens have no bill of rights (1ST THROUGH THE 10TH AMENDMENT). The Supreme Court made the distinction in Miranda vs. Arizona. And Congress made the distinction in US title 8. See my comment below about Miranda vs Arizona.
WHAT THE COURT RULED IN MIRANDA VS ARIZONA: "WHERE [get that...where is a mega word in this ruling] RIGHTS [rights now, get that]...[now here's the biggie:] are SECURED [secure: 1-10 amendment, the Bill of Rights] there can be no legislation or rule making to abrogate them!" Did the Supreme Court outlaw legislation, regulations or rules with that ruling? ABSOLUTELY NOT! NO WAY! What they did is isolate a group of People who have SECURED RIGHTS from the legislated, regulated and ruled persons. A simple sentence in an ARTICLE 3 court ruling IS SO EXTREMELY POWERFUL. THEY WERE RULING ON TWO SEPARATE AND DISTINCT CLASSES OF INDIVIDUALS. Those classes are these: those with secure rights and those without! You must understand SECURED RIGHTS must follow the absolute letter/word in the law...to the last jot and tittle. Civil rights can be changed by Congress anytime Congress takes a whim to do so. Civil rights are not guaranteed or protected or secure or unalienable. Civil rights are nothing more than tokens from the govt. to their subject/slaves, to keep the ignorant masses [U.S.CITIZENS] from totally revolting and overthrowing them. This same thing happened in ROE VS. WADE. The court ruled a U.S.CITIZEN could abort her UNBORN (unnatural, without womb) FETUS. They did not call the FETUS a baby, because they can not override natural law (God's law) with their unnatural law. So they renamed [created a legal term] baby to FETUS. Now, they had a thing they could governor, that was not a natural baby. Then they ruled the U.S. CITIZEN (an unnatural thing) could kill the FETUS (an unnatural thing). But, what they could not do, is make that law mandatory in the several States. Why? Because of the RIGHTS OF THE PEOPLE (pre-amble). The People have the right to natural law, not unnatural. The People are in the several States. They can not force unnatural law on the People and the several States. They cannot use their unnatural law, to override the natural common law of men, women and babies, because common law is the Supreme Law of the Land. They have to continue to allow the consent of the People who are the People of the several States (non-U.S.CITIZENS), BUT THEY DENY THE U.S. CITIZEN SUBJECT/SLAVE. That is exactly what they did in ROE VS. WADE and this is why ROE VS. WADE will never be overturned in federal courts. The Federals have the right to rule U.S.CITIZENS (UNNATURAL BORN) by federal acts, regs and rules.
Place your comment. The moderator will review it after it is published. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason.