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 8400 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 any comment for any reason by anyone. Use the golden rule; "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." Additionally we do not allow comments with advertising links in them for your products. When you post a comment, it is in the public domain. You have no copyright that can be enforced against any other individual who comments here! Do not attempt to copyright your comments. If that is not to your liking please do not comment. Any attempt to copyright a comment will be deleted. Copyright is a legal term that means the creator of original content. This does not include ideas. You are not an author of articles on this blog. Your comments are deemed donated to the public domain. They will be considered "fair use" on this blog. People donate to this blog because of what Anna writes and what Paul writes, not what the people commenting write. We are not using your comments. You are putting them in the public domain when you comment. What you write in the comments is your opinion only. This comment section is not a court of law. Do not attempt to publish any kind of "affidavit" in the comments. Any such attempt will also be summarily deleted. Comments containing foul language will be deleted no matter what is said in the comment.

Sunday, March 10, 2019

Virtually All Arguments Based On or About The Constitutions

By Anna Von Reitz

The Constitutions set up the Federal Government and barely mention us. 
We have a bit role in the Preamble as the creators of an Express National Trust. We pop up to restrict Bills of Attainder and arrest and similar abuses in Article IV. We make a reappearance in Amendment X. And there is a glancing one-step-removed nod to us and our States of America Confederacy in Article 6 where it references the fact that the debts of the original Confederacy (formed 1781) will remain its responsibility--- that is, won't be shared or transferred to the new British Territorial or Holy Roman Empire Municipal Government contractors.

In fact, so little is specifically said about us that as an after-thought and to place more explicit controls on the Federal Government concerning us, the Framers went back and added the Bill of Rights.

People are so egocentric that they assume that the Constitutions have to be about us, but they aren't. They are primarily about the Federal Government and about Federal Citizens.

Look at Amendment VII -- the important words are in parenthesis with numbers that correlate with the explanation below:

Amendment VII. In suits (at)[1] common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no (fact)[2] tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of (the)[3] United States, than according to the (rules)[4] of the common law.

1. It says "at". If this were referring to us, it would say "in" common law.
2. It says "fact". None of the courts of the United States judge the law or the facts.
3. It says "the" United States". This is referring to the Municipal Government.
4. It says "rules" of the common law. This is referring to military common law, not our version of "common law", which does not have "rules". 
This is basically saying that when and if a Federal Citizen comes to jury trial in one of our courts ("at" common law from their perspective), our court's decision will not be reviewed by their courts except in the case of martial (common) law where soldiers and sailors are involved.

Look at Article VI:

“The judicial power of the United States, shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.”

This is again talking about "the" United States --- the Municipal Government thereof, created under Article I, Section 8, Clause 17.

This is basically saying that the judicial power belonging to the Municipal Government will be vested in their own Supreme Court (which is no surprise, as it is a foreign government) and whatever inferior [Municipal] courts that the members of the [Municipal] Congress may ordain....

This is all talking about Municipal United States Government operations and says nothing whatsoever about our American courts at all. 
The tragic mistake that so many people continue to make is to think that the Constitutions are talking about us when in fact the Constitutions are 99% about the US Federal Government and its Branches --- Federal, Territorial, and Municipal---that are being established by the Constitutions. 
Think about what the Constitutions are designed to do--- they are setting up the parameters of a new (back then) power-sharing split, re-delegating and splitting up powers and duties originally all performed by the States of America Confederation, with some of the powers being retained by the American-owned States of America and some powers being delegated to British service providers and some to Holy Roman Empire service providers.

All of the "delegated powers" actually belong to the States, which are subcontracting for services from: (1) the Confederate States of States, (2) the British Territorial Government, and (3) the Municipal United States. 
The entire context of the Constitutions has little or nothing to do with us, the American States and People. 

Our States agree to receive the stipulated services and agree to pay for them and agree to step aside and let the hired help do the jobs agreed upon. The rest is about the service providers and how they are supposed to function and what limits we placed upon them.

The Constitutions are fundamentally about our Service Providers and not about us at all, so we make a grievous error when we look to the Constitutions as our source of information about our own non-Federal American Government. We fall into the trap of mistaking "them" for us, and vice-versa.


See this article and over 1600 others on Anna's website here:

To support this work look for the PayPal button on this website.


  1. The facts you state in this article if read, comprehended, and acted on by Americans would impel a great wave of re-appraisal and clear comprehension of the mirage like effect the federal Constitutions have successfully laid over our mental landscapes to see the "us versus them paradox". The Constitutions say very very little about American State Nationals, and one searches in vain for guidance about our proper State National government within these Constitutions. We must look to our original State Constitutions, American Common Law, and to actual Public Law for this information.

    Remember that the Articles of Confederation is what was to be revised at the Philadelphia Constitutional convention, where guards prevented Americans from witnessing the proceedings. At its conclusion upon ratification of the Constitution of 1787 in the claim that the Articles of Confederation were replaced by the 1879 Constitution was made. Yet the Articles are still good law according to Title One, United States Code Introduction.

  2. Right, Joel! -

    It is necessary that "Americans" at least conceptually reconnect with the four Organic Laws as one whole and complete set so the light of true American Law can be shed on the "Constitution of September 17, 1787" by (under)standing the preceding three Organic Laws.