Are you looking for Solutions for America in Distress

You are in the right place to find out about what is really going on behind the scenes in the patriot movement in America, including solutions from Oathkeepers, Anna Von Reitz, Constitutional Sheriffs, Richard Mack, and many more people who are leading the charge to restore America to freedom and peace. Please search on the right for over 3300 articles.
You will find some conflicting views from some of these authors. You will also find that all the authors are deeply concerned about the future of America. What they write is their own opinion, just as what I write is my own. If you have an opinion on a particular article, please comment by clicking the title of the article and scrolling to the box at the bottom on that page. Please keep the discussion about the issues, and keep it civil. The administrator reserves the right to remove unwarranted personal attacks. Use the golden rule; "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." Do not attempt to comment using the handle "Unknown" or "Anonymous". Your comment will be summarily deleted. Additionally we do not allow comments with advertising links in them for your products.

Thursday, September 27, 2018

Which "Supreme Court"?


By Anna Von Reitz

The thing calling itself the "Supreme Court" and squatting like a corpulent spider in the middle of Washington, DC, is self-evidently not our Supreme Court and everyone who has been reading my articles should know that by now, but let's review.

The way the judicial system was set up was this:

One Supreme Court for the States. This Court was called: The Supreme Court of The United States of America. It functioned entirely in international jurisdiction and decided cases in that jurisdiction for the States of the Union.

This Court was established at Philadelphia, having retained all powers in all jurisdictions of the Law --- air, land, and sea -- as the final Arbiter of all questions that could arise among the States. This was meant to truly be a Supreme Court for the States to iron out their differences and decide issues in international jurisdiction affecting all of them.

The Other Side of The Law


By Anna Von Reitz

There has to be hard, logical, provable evidence present to back a conviction. 

People are tried in courts of law, not in the tabloids. 

Responsible members of society stand for these and other basic principles that help to guarantee justice for everyone. 

We do not marginalize actual rape victims by calling groping without penetration "rape". 

We don't hold witnesses to real crimes guiltless when they fail to report. 

People who don't report crimes at the time they happen are accomplices to them. 

Anyone who admits to willingly and repeatedly going to ten rape parties is either a willing participant or an accomplice -- and either way, I in no way, shape or form consider such people "victims". 

I consider them accomplice criminals and perverters of justice who grossly failed their most basic social responsibility to report crime--if any crime actually exists.  And if it doesn't, what are we wasting time for?