The General Accounting Office released a report a while
back revealing that federal prisons are now at 56 percent
above capacity. The GAO also pointed out that federal prison
populations have doubled since 1980. Look at the industry
they have created . . . people warehouses.
The immediate past Attorney General of the United States
announces there will be indictments for fraud in the oper-
ation of the Chicago Commodity markets. They've already had
their sacrificial flesh from the New York markets. This is
an absolute scam!
The federal government is the perpetrator of tremendous
hoax. The one we're concerned with here is the federal
criminal justice system. They have NO constitutional
authority to define any criminal activity! When investigat-
ing fraud, these people are truly experts.
What is a 'federal crime'? There are only four listed
in the document. (1) counterfeiting of securities and
current coin, (2) piracy and felonies committed on the high
seas, (3) offenses against the law of nations and (4)
This is the limit of federal criminal jurisdiction and
of their authority to ask a Grand Jury to issue any indict-
ment. The only exception would be criminal activity on
property owned by the federal government. There are much
more severe restrictions on property ownership by the feds
than what we see today. They have exceeded their authority
there too. (Check The Traitor Within the Gate Volume 1)
Article IV of our Constitution clearly shows that the
determination and prosecution of other crimes are functions
of state governments. Period. Nevertheless, we read about
indictments, prosecutions and convictions by the federales
every day. For authority, they rely on Title 18 of the
United States Code (Criminal Code) which lists over 100
'crimes' and penalties. Other sections of the US Code also
contain what they call 'crimes'.
How the hell did this come about? Simply put . . .
people control. This has been high on the agenda of the
movers and shakers behind government for many years. The
greatest push to define and punish crime on the federal level
occurred in the 1930s. Under the reign of His Majesty
Franklin Roosevelt, Congress and Washington honchos eagerly
expanded federal criminal jurisdiction. I mean it was during
the great depression and after all, many lawyers were hungry.
This was a pathetic period in our history when they
foisted an array socialistic programs on Americans. It's
obvious from daily news broadcasts that a basic tenet of
socialism is people control. Being able to throw a dissenter
in jail is the most vicious and very effective. Five or ten
years in the slammer will quiet the most vocal thorn in their
Hundreds of millions of our dollars support this scheme
annually. A top heavy federal judiciary would be twiddling
their thumbs if proper restraints limited their jurisdiction.
US attorneys are stumbling over each other, each eager to get
their face in front of a TV camera. There is a network of
mindless faces in the parole/probation system.
The prison system spreads over the entire country and
complaints about overcrowding are common place. Latest
figures from the GAO say it will cost over $51,000 per bed to
build new prisons. The cost of real estate and buildings to
support this menagerie today is astronomical. ALL unlawful
spending. How much less would your tax bite be if they
stopped unconstitutional spending?
People are always appalled at the mention of slave labor
in China and elsewhere. We have a very efficient slave labor
system in this country today also. In federal prisons they
have built factories where the slaves work for perhaps a
dollar an hour and manufacture all sorts of items for the
profit of huge corporations. Never heard of it? Ask your
congressman to explain the slave labor system of federal
prisons. It's happening.
Entrapment and use of informants are normal procedure.
To justify their jobs, employees of criminal 'justice' go
through fantastic schemes to set-up and get people to break
their 'laws'. Federal promotions depend on convictions so
the more you get into the system, the higher your proficiency
rating and the more frequent your promotions. It's self
perpetuating and we are the jerks who pay for it.
A good example of this witless entrapment was a farmer
in the midwest who the postal agents enticed for two years
into ordering what they called child pornographic literature.
The Supreme Court threw it out, surprisingly. There must
have been gross violations in that case. The Supreme Court
doesn't usually overturn entrapment cases. And speaking of
pornographic material, where do they find the authority to
When they can't catch or trap violators of their 'law',
they ask our help via Crime Stop numbers or TV most wanted
programs. Roadside billboards proclaim that people who call
crime stop numbers are heroes. This is really sick! Recent
history shows the result of neighbor watch neighbor programs.
This has always been a favorite tool of tyrants and dic-
Let's check out some historical writings. The Federal-
ist Papers were written during the period when our country
was considering the acceptance of our new Constitution.
James Madison, Alexander Hamilton and John Jay, as authors,
argued and clearly defined the limitation of powers sur-
rendered to the new national government.
James Madison, father of our Constitution, wrote that
punishment for counterfeiting belonged to the federal
government since, under the new Constitution, they were the
only level of government allowed to coin money. (Not a word
about printing money.) They included the power to punish
piracies, felonies committed on the high seas and offenses
against the law of nations to show a national definition of
these crimes. He also remarked that the provision on the
subject of piracies and felonies extends no further than to
set up courts for the trials of these crimes. (Paper No.
"As treason may be committed against the United States,
the authority of the United States ought to be able to punish
it." Madison continued. "But as new-fangled and artificial
treasons have been the great engines by which violent
factions, the natural off-spring of free government, have
usually wreaked their alternate malignity on each other, the
convention have, [sic] with great judgment, opposed a barrier
to this peculiar danger, by inserting a constitutional
definition of the crime, fixing proof necessary for the
conviction of it, and restraining the Congress, even in
punishing it, from extending the consequences beyond the
person of its author." (Paper No. 43).
"The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to
the federal government are few and defined. Those which are
to remain in the State governments are numerous and in-
definite. The powers reserved to the several States will
extend to all objects which, in the ordinary course of
affairs, concern the lives, liberties and properties of the
people, and the internal order, improvement and prosperity of
the State." (Madison, Paper No. 45).
Hamilton was also clear on the issue of criminal
jurisdiction. He said "There is one transcendent advantage
belonging to the province of the State governments, which
alone suffices to place the matter in a clear and satisfac-
tory light -- I mean the ordinary administration of criminal
and civil justice." Paper no. 17.
John Marshall was a Chief Justice of the Supreme Court
for many years. He was on friendly terms with many of the
men who helped draw up the Constitution and knew the limit
and substance of powers given under the document. In an 1821
decision, Marshall said, "It is clear that Congress cannot
punish felonies generally." (Cohen vs Virginia, 6 Wheat
264). In the same case, he stressed the importance of using
the Federalist Papers to determine the power allowed to the
From the beginning, there was no intention for the new
federal government to exercise jurisdiction over crime or
criminal behavior. Other than the basic four, there is
nothing in the document which allows for its existence.
Continued usage and enforcement of any unconstitutional law
does not magically give it respectability nor does it become
legal. Being illegal when it started, it's still illegal.
If this isn't clear from the basic document, let's check
out the Tenth Amendment once more:
"The powers not delegated to the United States
by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the
States, are reserved to the States respectively,
or to the People."
If we didn't grant the authority, there is no power to
function. Plain and simple. Somewhere in the document it
would have to say: Congress has the authority to define and
prosecute federal crimes. IT SAYS NO SUCH THING . . . there
is no power to prosecute new federal crimes . . . period.
This seizure of powers would be no problem if our Grand
Juries realized they are completely independent bodies, under
the control of no judge or federal attorney. Their duty is
to first determine if the law under which the US attorney
wants an indictment is constitutional. If the Constitution
actually allows for the law, then their investigation has to
evolve around the innocence or guilt of the individual the US
is charging with criminal conduct.
The problem with that today is Grand Juries no longer
know they are independent. Most believe the judge or the
federal attorney can decide their actions. This is simply
not true. They are independent and their investigations have
to be independent also.
Regular juries at criminal trials also have the duty to
try the law. These are called petit juries and it's
imperative that they believe that the accused is innocent.
This is not the case any longer. The judge won't tell them
that their duty is to try the law even though he would have
to admit that it is true. If they are shown in the trial or
otherwise that the law is not constitutional, they have an
honest duty to throw out the law and declare the accused to
be innocent. These are the protections that the American
jury system are supposed to perform!
The Fifth Amendment guarantees that our Government
cannot take life, liberty or property from any person without
due process of law. Due process begins with the Consti-
tution. Once the commands in the document are ignored, due
process vanishes. Claims that the 'necessary and proper'
clause of the constitution gives the federales the right to
prosecute all crime is gobbledegook. The clause applies only
to powers granted in the document and is verified by Hamil-
ton. (Paper no. 33.)
What's the answer? We have to demand Congress end this
nonsense. They are the creeps who passed this legislation
and have to be the ones we must go after. We have the right
to honest government and it doesn't take an intellectual
giant to see how dishonest it is today! We must make a hell
of a lot of noise. They are putting our citizens IN PRISON
illegally. Our form of government is only a ghost of it's
former self. We hear much talk about constitutional rights
and guarantees. They claim they have certain 'constitutional
duties' which in fact are not duties at all. They are
getting far out in left field now impressing us with their
constitutional knowledge. So certain are they that no one
will check the document to see if they are telling the
truth, they invent 'duties'!
On the flip side, under the Internal Revenue Service,
you are guilty and have to prove your innocence. Another
crock. What happened to constitutional rule? The only way
their mode of operation can change is through the amendment
process. This requires our consent. We have never invoked
the process to enlarge criminal jurisdiction.
They have perfected a new wrinkle now. The feds have
become experts at using public opinion polls. Their first
step is to create a problem. Americans are convinced to
clamor for a solution no matter what has to be done. When
opinion poll responses are at the proper level, bureaucrats
do what they want as an answer and in defiance of their
authority. Public opinion polls are no substitute for
constitutional authority! If the public wants change, amend
Another wrinkle today is the catch phrase . . . civil
rights. These are diversionary tactics to keep us off
balance so we'll pay no attention to what is really going on.
They were given no authority to pass 'civil rights' legisla-
tion. The most important thing we can do is make them obey
the Constitution so we still have our constitutional rights
which will guarantee our civil rights. How many billions of
our tax dollars have they wasted on this phrase?
The United States Attorney gets on a TV talk show after
the LA riots. Talking about the display of violence there,
he tells us the "Rule of law is the glue which holds the
country together." This is true. But we must impress them
the basis for this rule of law is our Constitution. These
people must be made to obey the basic document.
The drivel about cigarette smoking is a good example.
The Congress passed laws banning advertisements about
cigarettes. Where do they find the right for that? Can you
imagine what the inhabitants of the original thirteen
colonies would have done on that issue back in 1789? Why is
it any different today?
The Chief Justice on the US Supreme Court says, "A lot
of water has gone under the bridge since then." Isn't that
brilliant? What a clever mind thought that up! But when did
government authority change? IT HASN'T! We've just sat by
and allowed for these changes in their operation while
assuming we had honest men in government.
Taking the issue through federal courts is not the
answer. Judges are a part of the problem and belong to the
same bureaucracy. Their whole intent is the protection
afforded each other and perpetuation of the power mad
Many of us were in the service. Remember your oath? To
"protect and defend the Constitution against all enemies,
foreign or domestic." It's clear we now have domestic
What we need in this country is a little of that spirit
of freedom which is overwhelming eastern Europe. How long
will you wait before you help rope in the power mad govern-
ment? Until you or one of your friends becomes a pawn in the
numbers game? It'll be too late then. The time to stop them
is RIGHT NOW!
Controlling people isn't new. It's been going on for a
long time. Look what Cornelius Tacitus, a Roman senator and
historian, (A.D. c.56-c.115), said as he warned his country-
men just before the collapse of Rome: "The more corrupt the
state, the more numerous the laws." Is this the United
Someone once said that the best way for evil to succeed
is for good people to do nothing.
SUPPORT THE SHAREWARE CONCEPT ....
REGISTER WITH THE AUTHOR ....