thewashingtonstandard--2020-01-08--While You’re Distracted By Iran, Senate Committee Passed USMCA – Now Set For Full Floor Vote To Give

While You ’ re Distracted By Iran , Senate Committee Passed USMCA – Now Set For Full Floor Vote To Give Away American Sovereignty While Iran is taking center stage in the news , the US Senate Finance Committee voted to advance the trade treaty , not legislation as it ’ s being touted in the media , known as the US Mexico Canada Agreement by an overwhelming majority to allow for a full vote from the Senate soon .
The U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement moved closer to a final vote in the Senate , with the Senate Finance Committee advancing the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The timing of a vote in the full Senate is uncertain , however .
Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has said a vote will come after an impeachment trial , but House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has not yet sent the two articles of impeachment to the Senate .
Republicans Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania and Bill Cassidy of Louisiana , with Democrat Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island , voted against the updated North American trade deal .
“ This modernized trilateral trade agreement will open new markets for American exporters , create hundreds of thousands @ @ @ @ @ @ @ economy and protect U.S. workers , ” Sen. Chuck Grassley , R-Iowa , said in a statement .
USMCA is expected to create around 176,000 new jobs and inject $ 34 billion into the U.S. auto industry , Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross told FOX Business ’ Maria Bartiromo last month , citing International Trade Commission data .
He added that as many as 589,000 new jobs could be created within five years .
“ This new NAFTA delivers long-overdue upgrades to labor standards , the environment and digital trade , while providing certainty @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hammered in recent years , ” Sen. Ron Wyden , D-Ore. , said .
It requires 75 percent of automobile components be manufactured in the United States , Canada and Mexico in order to avoid tariffs , and that 40 to 45 percent of automobile parts be made by workers who earn at least $ 16 an hour by 2023 .
But at what cost ?
American sovereignty and very specific things outlined in our Constitution .
This is something no one in the media is talking about .
If you have not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the USMCA , constitutional scholar Publius Huldah has outlined exactly how this will begin to set up global government in the Northern Hemisphere .
The USMCA Treaty ( “ Treaty ” ) was negotiated by U.S. Trade Representative , Robert Lighthizer .
He is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations , which works to move the United States into the North American Union ( NAU ) .
1 The Treaty advances the economic and regulatory integration of the three Parties .
It is the precursor to the political integration the globalists @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Summary of objections to the Treaty Our Constitution and Declaration of Independence are the “ organic law ” of our Land .
3 Treaties , like Acts of Congress , hold a lesser status : they are part of “ the supreme Law of the Land ” only when they are authorized by “ organic law ” – our Constitution ( Art .
VI , cl.2 ) .
4 While the United States is clearly authorized by Art .
I , §8 , cl.3 & Art .
II , §2 , cl.2 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with foreign Nations addressing Commerce ; 5 the United States may not lawfully transfer to global or multi-national bodies , powers which “ WE THE PEOPLE ” delegated to our federal government when We ratified our Constitution .
But that is what the Treaty purports to do .
Even worse , the Treaty also purports to delegate to global or multi-national bodies powers which We never delegated to our federal government – but reserved to the States or the people .
The Treaty establishes a bureaucratic multi-national government which is to control all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ United States , Mexico and Canada will be subject .
The Treaty incorporates by reference many other documents .
Its frequent use of new terminology requires one to constantly refer to the various definition sections spread throughout the 34 Chapters .
It engages in the pernicious practice of making a statement , and then qualifying it by phrases such as , “ unless otherwise provided in this Agreement ” and “ unless the Parties decide otherwise ” .
6 • Powers We delegated to our federal government When the People of the United @ @ @ @ @ @ @ created ” the federal government .
Article I created the Legislative Branch and itemized its powers .
Article II created the Executive Branch and itemized its powers .
Article III created the Judicial Branch and itemized its powers .
Each Branch of the federal government is thus a “ creature ” of the Constitution and is completely subject to its terms .
None of the delegated powers may lawfully be re-delegated to global or multi-national bodies .
The Treaty violates the following provisions of our Constitution : • At Art .
I , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all legislative Powers granted by our Constitution .
• At Art .
I , §8 , We granted to Congress the powers o Clause 5 : To coin Money and regulate the Value thereof • At Art .
I , §9 , cl .
1 : Commencing January 1 , 1808 , We granted to Congress the power to control Migration ( immigration ) to the United States .
• At Art .
II , §2 , cl .
2 , We granted to the President the power to make Treaties , provided @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
• At Art .
III , §2 , cl .
1 , We declared that the judicial Power of the United States shall extend o to all Cases arising under Treaties made under the Authority of the United States o to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party • At Art .
IV , §4 , We imposed upon the United States the duties to : o guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government ; and o protect each of the States against Invasion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cl .
2 , We declared that our Constitution , and Acts of Congress and Treaties authorized by the Constitution , is the “ supreme Law of the Land ” .
• In the 10th Amendment , We declared that powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution are reserved to the States or to the people .
Our Constitution delegates to Congress the power to set the amounts of the tariffs on foreign imports .
The Treaty divests Congress of the power to unilaterally determine our tariffs .
USMCA Art @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Unless otherwise provided in this Agreement , no Party shall increase any existing customs duty , or adopt any new customs duty , on an originating good .
• Unless otherwise provided in this Agreement , each Party shall apply a customs duty on an originating good in accordance with its Schedule to Annex 2-B ( Tariff Commitments ) ” .
Art .
I , §8 , cl .
5 – to coin Money and regulate the Value thereof Our Constitution delegates to Congress the power to control our money.8 But with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Congress and Woodrow Wilson unlawfully transferred power over our money to an international cabal of privately owned banks – the “ Federal Reserve ” .
Shortly after WWII , the United States joined the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund ( IMF ) .
9 James Perloff ’ s article , Council On Foreign Relations – Influencing American Government , speaks of how the World Bank and IMF act as “ …a loan-guarantee scheme for multinational banks .
When a loan to a foreign country goes awry , the World Bank and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ensuring that the private banks continue to receive interest payments .
Furthermore , the World Bank and IMF dictate conditions to the countries receiving bailouts , thus giving the bankers a measure of political control over indebted nations.
” The Treaty surrenders the United States ’ power over money and our economy to the IMF .
USMCA Art .
33.1 defines “ Article IV Staff Report ” as the report prepared by the IMF respecting a country ’ s adherence to Art .
IV , Section 3 ( b ) of the IMF @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the IMF shall oversee the compliance of each member with its obligations under Section 1 of Article IV .
Section 1 requires each member to “ direct its economic and financial policies toward the objective of fostering orderly economic growth with reasonable price stability ” , and to foster “ orderly underlying economic and financial conditions and a monetary system that does not tend to produce erratic disruptions ” [ i.e.
, our economy is to be planned by the IMF ] .
Article IV , §3 ( b ) of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ IMF “ shall exercise firm surveillance over the exchange rate policies of members ” , and “ shall adopt specific principles for the guidance of all members with respect to those policies ” .
USMCA Art .
33.4 confirms that the three Countries are “ bound under the IMF Articles of Agreement to avoid manipulating exchange rates or the international monetary system ” ; but private manipulators ( George Soros ) don ’ t seem to be bound by that restriction .
USMCA Art .
33.6 establishes a Macroeconomic Committee which “ shall @ @ @ @ @ @ @ its further elaboration.
” Paragraph 5 of Art .
33.6 empowers the Committee to amend and issue “ interpretations ” of Chapter 33 ; and declares that such interpretations “ shall be deemed to be an interpretation issued pursuant to a decision by consensus of the Commission.
” USMCA Art .
1.4 defines “ Commission ” as “ the Free Trade Commission ” established under USMCA Art .
30.1 .
The purpose of delegating the power to issue Patents and Copyrights to Congress is to “ promote the Progress of Science and useful @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries ” .
The Treaty subordinates these property rights to the collective .
USMCA Art .
20.2 states : “ The protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights should contribute to the promotion of technological innovation and to the transfer and dissemination of technology , to the mutual advantage of producers and users of technological knowledge and in a manner conducive to social and economic welfare , and to a balance of rights and obligations.
” Article 20.3 prohibits the Parties @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with Chapter 20 ; and requires that any measures to protect property rights be “ consistent with the provisions of this Chapter ” .
The Parties are “ to prevent the abuse of intellectual property rights by right holders ” .
Article 20.5 requires each Party to ensure “ that measures to enforce intellectual property rights do not themselves become barriers to legitimate trade ” or “ contravene this Chapter ” .
Article 20.7 requires the Parties to ratify or accede to a long list of international “ agreements ” including the World @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) Patent Law Treaty .
The WIPO is an agency of the United Nations .
The 64 pages of Chapter 20 have nothing to do with protection of property rights in Inventors .
Instead , Chapter 20 subordinates ownership of those rights to the collective ; and establishes the framework for global government of patents and copyrights .
10 Art .
IV , §4 requires the United States to protect each of the States against Invasion ; and Art .
I , §8 , cl .
15 authorizes the use of the Militia @ @ @ @ @ @ @ control over who enters our Country is an essential element of sovereignty .
But the Treaty subordinates the United States ’ sovereign power over immigration to global and multi-national bodies .
USMCA Art .
16.2 declares : “ 3 .
Nothing in this Agreement prevents a Party from applying measures to regulate the entry of natural persons of another Party into , or their temporary stay in , its territory , including those measures necessary to protect the integrity of , and to ensure the orderly movement of natural persons across , its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not applied in a manner as to nullify or impair the benefits accruing to any Party under this Chapter.
” [ italics added ] “ Except for this Chapter , Chapter 1 ( Initial Provisions and General Definitions ) , Chapter 30 ( Administrative and Institutional Provisions ) , Chapter 31 ( Dispute Settlement ) , Chapter 34 ( Final Provisions ) , Article 29.2 ( Publication ) , and Article 29.3 ( Administrative Proceedings ) , this Agreement does not impose an obligation on a Party regarding its immigration measures.
” [ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 23.1 cites the International Labor Organization ’ s ( ILO ) “ Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work ” ( 1998 ) , as guiding the treatment of labor issues under the Treaty .
The ILO is an agency of the United Nations ( UN ) ; and part of the ILO ’ s “ social justice ” agenda is to formulate “ fair migration schemes in regional integration processes ” .
So this is how the UN is to dictate immigration policy for the “ regional integration ” of Canada @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Art .
II , §2 , cl .
2 , grants to the President the power to make Treaties , Chapter 30 of the Treaty establishes the Free Trade Commission .
It is the governing body of the bureaucracy which is created by the Treaty .
Among other powers , the Commission supervises the work of all committees and other subsidiary bodies established under the Treaty ; has the power to merge or dissolve committees and other subsidiary bodies ; and has the power to “ consider ” proposals to amend or modify @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , 2 .
( c ) lists 6 areas where modifications of the Treaty are subject to completion of “ applicable legal procedures by each Party ” , it does not require that other types of modifications of the Treaty be subject to such approval of the Parties .
And while USMCA Art .
34.3 , 1. provides , “ The Parties may agree , in writing , to amend this Agreement ” , it doesn ’ t say that is the exclusive means of amendment .
Accordingly , we must consider Art @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of amendment .
USMCA Article 30.2 , 2 .
( f ) grants to the Commission power to “ issue interpretations ” of the Treaty ; and the footnote thereto says that its interpretations “ are binding for tribunals and panels established under Chapter 14 ( Investment ) and Chapter 31 ( Dispute Settlement ) .
” And since , as noted above , the “ interpretations ” of Ch .
33 issued by the Macroeconomic Committee are considered as “ interpretations ” issued by the Free Trade Commission , the “ interpretations @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be binding on the tribunals deciding disputes between the Parties .
We thus permit the “ creature ” of the Treaty to modify the document under which it holds its existence !
12 Art .
III , §2 , cl .
1 , grants to U.S. Courts the Power to decide all Cases arising under Treaties & all Controversies to which the United States is a Party .
In violation of our Constitution , the Treaty restricts the Parties to the dispute settlement procedures laid out in the Treaty .
Chapter 31 of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ violations of the Treaty or “ interpretations ” of the Treaty issued ( or “ deemed to be issued ” ) by the Free Trade Commission .
Disputes are heard by a panel of five drawn from a roster of up to 30 individuals appointed by the Parties .
The panel is to make findings of fact and determinations and issue a report .
If the disputing Parties don ’ t agree on the report , the complaining Party may suspend various benefits held by the responding Party under the Treaty .
Article @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a forum for dispute resolution to that set forth in the Treaty or in another international trade agreement to which the disputing Parties are signatories .
Article 31.20 permits a Party to intervene in proceedings already pending in a domestic judicial or administrative forum which involve the interpretation or application of the Treaty .
The purpose of such intervention is to inform the domestic tribunal of the “ interpretations ” of the Treaty issued ( or “ deemed to be issued ” ) by the Free Trade Commission .
Thus , the “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the “ creature ” of the Treaty are to be foisted on our domestic courts and administrative law judges !
Art .
31.21 expressly forbids a Party from making a law which grants a right of action against another Party on the ground that a measure of the other Party is inconsistent with the Treaty .
• Powers reserved by the States or the People which the Treaty transfers to global organizations Our Constitution is one of enumerated powers only .
Most of the powers delegated to the federal government over the Country @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I , §8 .
See this Chart .
We did not delegate to our federal government power over labor issues .
However , beginning in the early 1900s , we permitted our federal government to exercise , by usurpation , powers over labor issues.13 As a result , we got the federal Department of Labor , a host of Acts of Congress addressing labor issues , and a plethora of Rules issued by the Department and published in Title 29 of the Code of Federal Regulations .
The Department , its Rules , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as outside the scope of powers delegated .
The Rules are also unconstitutional as in violation of Art .
I , §1 , US Constit .
Chapter 23 of the Treaty transfers those usurped powers to the United Nation ’ s International Labor Organization ( ILO ) .
Article 23.1 defines “ labor laws ” as the statutes and regulations of a Party that are directly related to “ internationally recognized labor rights ” such as the “ right ” to collective bargaining ; and which require Parties to make laws to provide @ @ @ @ @ @ @ profit sharing , bonuses , retirement , and healthcare .
Here are some of the dictates set forth in the Treaty with which US laws and agency rules must comply : • At Art .
23.2 , the Parties affirm their obligations stated in the ILO ’ s Declaration on Rights at Work and Declaration on Social Justice for a Fair Globalization ( 2008 ) .
• Article 23.3 dictates that “ Each Party shall adopt and maintain in its statutes and regulations , and practices thereunder , ” various rights , as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on Rights at Work ; and “ Each Party shall adopt and maintain statutes and regulations , and practices thereunder , governing acceptable conditions of work with respect to minimum wages , hours of work , and occupational safety and health.
” • Article 23.5 requires each Party to “ effectively enforce its labor laws ” .
• Article 23.9 requires each Party to implement policies to protect workers against employment discrimination on the basis of sex , pregnancy , sexual orientation , gender identity , and caregiving responsibilities ; and to provide @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a child and care of family members ; and to protect against wage discrimination.14 The USMCA Treaty is long and complex : see the Table of Contents .
Here are brief comments on some of the other powers reserved by the States or the People which are unlawfully transferred by the Treaty : • Chapter 19 addresses digital trade .
Article 19.5 requires each Party to maintain a legal framework governing electronic transactions consistent with the principles of the UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce 1996 .
That model law is a product @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trade Law .
• Chapter 21 addresses competition policy .
Article 21.1 requires each Party to maintain and enforce “ national competition laws ” which proscribe “ anticompetitive business conduct ” .
The Parties are to apply those laws to “ all commercial activities in its territory.
” Article 21.4 requires each Party to adopt or maintain national consumer protection laws or regulations that proscribe fraudulent and deceptive commercial activities .
RELATED : Judge ’ s Doublespeak : It ’ s Unconstitutional , but Lawful , for President to Order Wiretap without Warrant @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Article 24.3 requires each Party to ensure that its laws provide for high levels of environmental protection .
Article 24.4 requires each Party to enforce its environmental laws .
Article 24.9 requires each Party to control the production and use of substances which deplete or change the ozone layer [ and on & on for 30 pages ] .
• The Death of the Republican Form of Government In a “ ” , the sovereign power is exercised by representatives elected by the People .
Article IV , §4 , US Constit.
, @ @ @ @ @ @ @ every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government .
But the USMCA Treaty , time after time , delegates the exercise of sovereign power to various panels , Committees , Commissions , UN organizations , and others – not one of which is elected by the People .
• Don ’ t fall for the carrot dangled in your face !
The Treaty reportedly contains some tariff benefits to various industries in the United States such as the auto and dairy industries .
Their profits ( at least for a while @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Treaty .
And for that , We are to surrender our sovereignty to the globalists ?
!
• The 1815 Free Trade Treaty between the United States and Great Britain On Dec. 6 , 1815 , President James Madison sent this treaty to the Senate for ratification .
It is two pages long .
Unlike the USMCA Treaty , it doesn ’ t set up a government over the United States and Great Britain—thus proving that trade treaties need not surrender our sovereignty .
And Madison ’ s treaty doesn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dirty tricks to understand what it does .
In Federalist No .
22 ( last para ) , Alexander Hamilton said that one of the problems with the Articles of Confederation ( AOC ) , our first Constitution , was that it was never ratified by the PEOPLE .
Because the only foundation for the AOC was the consent of state legislatures , questions had arisen concerning its validity .
This is why Art .
VII of our second Constitution ( the one we have now ) provides for its ratification by Conventions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In support of the ratification method set forth in Art .
VII , Hamilton wrote : “ …The fabric of American empire ought to rest on the solid basis of THE CONSENT OF THE PEOPLE .
The streams of national power ought to flow immediately from that pure , original fountain of all legitimate authority.
” [ caps are Hamilton ’ s ] .
This is why our Constitution begins with , “ WE THE PEOPLE ” .
WE consented to it .
But the USMCA Treaty sets up global government over the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It is NOT to be submitted to THE PEOPLE for their consent .
The globalists who infest our Legislative and Executive Branches ( the latter of which , as the Perloff article points out , has been dominated by the Council on Foreign Relations for over 70 years ) want the Treaty ratified by a simple majority vote in Congress .
15 The USMCA Treaty is illegitimate ; and the global government it imposes is tyrannical .
America , you are being duped by people who do not have an America First agenda @ @ @ @ @ @ @ American sovereignty .
All you ’ re hearing is economy and jobs , but what you aren ’ t hearing about is what it ’ s going to cost you , your children and your country .
Pay attention and call your senators and demand an end to this betrayal of the American people and the US Constitution .
Article posted with permission from Sons Of Liberty Media

While You’re Distracted By Iran, Senate Committee Passed USMCA – Now Set For Full Floor Vote To Give Away American Sovereignty
While Iran is taking center stage in the news, the US Senate Finance Committee voted to advance the trade treaty, not legislation as it’s being touted in the media, known as the US Mexico Canada Agreement by an overwhelming majority to allow for a full vote from the Senate soon.
Fox News reports:
The U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement moved closer to a final vote in the Senate, with the Senate Finance Committee advancing the legislation Tuesday in a 25-3 vote.
The timing of a vote in the full Senate is uncertain, however. Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has said a vote will come after an impeachment trial, but House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has not yet sent the two articles of impeachment to the Senate.
Republicans Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania and Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, with Democrat Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, voted against the updated North American trade deal.
“This modernized trilateral trade agreement will open new markets for American exporters, create hundreds of thousands of new jobs, grow the national economy and protect U.S. workers,” Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, said in a statement.
USMCA is expected to create around 176,000 new jobs and inject $34 billion into the U.S. auto industry, Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross told FOX Business’ Maria Bartiromo last month, citing International Trade Commission data. He added that as many as 589,000 new jobs could be created within five years.
“This new NAFTA delivers long-overdue upgrades to labor standards, the environment and digital trade, while providing certainty to farmers and manufacturers who have been hammered in recent years,” Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., said.
It requires 75 percent of automobile components be manufactured in the United States, Canada and Mexico in order to avoid tariffs, and that 40 to 45 percent of automobile parts be made by workers who earn at least $16 an hour by 2023.
But at what cost?
American sovereignty and very specific things outlined in our Constitution. This is something no one in the media is talking about.
If you have not taken a look at what is in the USMCA, constitutional scholar Publius Huldah has outlined exactly how this will begin to set up global government in the Northern Hemisphere.
She writes:
The USMCA Treaty (“Treaty”) was negotiated by U.S. Trade Representative, Robert Lighthizer. He is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, which works to move the United States into the North American Union (NAU). 1
The Treaty advances the economic and regulatory integration of the three Parties. It is the precursor to the political integration the globalists seek with the NAU. 2
Summary of objections to the Treaty
Our Constitution and Declaration of Independence are the “organic law” of our Land. 3 Treaties, like Acts of Congress, hold a lesser status: they are part of “the supreme Law of the Land” only when they are authorized by “organic law” – our Constitution (Art. VI, cl.2). 4
While the United States is clearly authorized by Art. I, §8, cl.3 & Art. II, §2, cl.2, US Constit., to enter into Treaties with foreign Nations addressing Commerce; 5 the United States may not lawfully transfer to global or multi-national bodies, powers which “WE THE PEOPLE” delegated to our federal government when We ratified our Constitution. But that is what the Treaty purports to do.
Even worse, the Treaty also purports to delegate to global or multi-national bodies powers which We never delegated to our federal government – but reserved to the States or the people.
The Treaty establishes a bureaucratic multi-national government which is to control all aspects of commerce and to which the United States, Mexico and Canada will be subject.
The Treaty incorporates by reference many other documents. Its frequent use of new terminology requires one to constantly refer to the various definition sections spread throughout the 34 Chapters. It engages in the pernicious practice of making a statement, and then qualifying it by phrases such as, “unless otherwise provided in this Agreement” and “unless the Parties decide otherwise”. 6
Powers We delegated to our federal government
When the People of the United States ratified our Constitution, We “created” the federal government. Article I created the Legislative Branch and itemized its powers. Article II created the Executive Branch and itemized its powers. Article III created the Judicial Branch and itemized its powers. Each Branch of the federal government is thus a “creature” of the Constitution and is completely subject to its terms. None of the delegated powers may lawfully be re-delegated to global or multi-national bodies.
The Treaty violates the following provisions of our Constitution:
At Art. I, §1, We vested in Congress, all legislative Powers granted by our Constitution.
At Art. I, §8, We granted to Congress the powers
o Clause 1: To lay and collect Imposts (import tariffs)
o Clause 3: To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations
o Clause 5: To coin Money and regulate the Value thereof
o Clause 8: To issue Patents and Copyrights
At Art. I, §9, cl. 1: Commencing January 1, 1808, We granted to Congress the power to control Migration (immigration) to the United States.
At Art. II, §2, cl. 2, We granted to the President the power to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur.
At Art. III, §2, cl. 1, We declared that the judicial Power of the United States shall extend
o to all Cases arising under Treaties made under the Authority of the United States
o to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party
At Art. IV, §4, We imposed upon the United States the duties to:
o guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government; and
o protect each of the States against Invasion.
At Art. VI, cl. 2, We declared that our Constitution, and Acts of Congress and Treaties authorized by the Constitution, is the “supreme Law of the Land”.
In the 10th Amendment, We declared that powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution are reserved to the States or to the people.
Art. I, §8, cl. 1 – to “lay and collect Imposts”
Our Constitution delegates to Congress the power to set the amounts of the tariffs on foreign imports.
The Treaty divests Congress of the power to unilaterally determine our tariffs. USMCA Art. 2.4 7 says:
“1. Unless otherwise provided in this Agreement, no Party shall increase any existing customs duty, or adopt any new customs duty, on an originating good.
Unless otherwise provided in this Agreement, each Party shall apply a customs duty on an originating good in accordance with its Schedule to Annex 2-B (Tariff Commitments)”.
Art. I, §8, cl. 5 – to coin Money and regulate the Value thereof
Our Constitution delegates to Congress the power to control our money.8
But with the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, Congress and Woodrow Wilson unlawfully transferred power over our money to an international cabal of privately owned banks – the “Federal Reserve”.
Shortly after WWII, the United States joined the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). 9 James Perloff’s article, Council On Foreign Relations – Influencing American Government, speaks of how the World Bank and IMF act as
“…a loan-guarantee scheme for multinational banks. When a loan to a foreign country goes awry, the World Bank and IMF step in with taxpayer money, ensuring that the private banks continue to receive interest payments. Furthermore, the World Bank and IMF dictate conditions to the countries receiving bailouts, thus giving the bankers a measure of political control over indebted nations.”
The Treaty surrenders the United States’ power over money and our economy to the IMF. USMCA Art. 33.1 defines “Article IV Staff Report” as the report prepared by the IMF respecting a country’s adherence to Art. IV, Section 3 (b) of the IMF Articles of Agreement. Section 3 provides that the IMF shall oversee the compliance of each member with its obligations under Section 1 of Article IV. Section 1 requires each member to “direct its economic and financial policies toward the objective of fostering orderly economic growth with reasonable price stability”, and to foster “orderly underlying economic and financial conditions and a monetary system that does not tend to produce erratic disruptions” [i.e., our economy is to be planned by the IMF].
Article IV, §3 (b) of the IMF Articles of Agreement states that the IMF “shall exercise firm surveillance over the exchange rate policies of members”, and “shall adopt specific principles for the guidance of all members with respect to those policies”. USMCA Art. 33.4 confirms that the three Countries are “bound under the IMF Articles of Agreement to avoid manipulating exchange rates or the international monetary system”; but private manipulators (George Soros) don’t seem to be bound by that restriction.
USMCA Art. 33.6 establishes a Macroeconomic Committee which “shall monitor the implementation of this Chapter and its further elaboration.” Paragraph 5 of Art. 33.6 empowers the Committee to amend and issue “interpretations” of Chapter 33; and declares that such interpretations “shall be deemed to be an interpretation issued pursuant to a decision by consensus of the Commission.” USMCA Art. 1.4 defines “Commission” as “the Free Trade Commission” established under USMCA Art. 30.1.
Art. I, §8, cl. 8 – to issue Patents and Copyrights
The purpose of delegating the power to issue Patents and Copyrights to Congress is to “promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries”.
The Treaty subordinates these property rights to the collective. USMCA Art. 20.2 states:
“The protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights should contribute to the promotion of technological innovation and to the transfer and dissemination of technology, to the mutual advantage of producers and users of technological knowledge and in a manner conducive to social and economic welfare, and to a balance of rights and obligations.”
Article 20.3 prohibits the Parties from making any laws or regulations inconsistent with Chapter 20; and
requires that any measures to protect property rights be “consistent with the provisions of this Chapter”. The Parties are “to prevent the abuse of intellectual property rights by right holders”. Article 20.5 requires each Party to ensure “that measures to enforce intellectual property rights do not themselves become barriers to legitimate trade” or “contravene this Chapter”.
Article 20.7 requires the Parties to ratify or accede to a long list of international “agreements” including the World International Property Organization’s (WIPO) Patent Law Treaty. The WIPO is an agency of the United Nations.
The 64 pages of Chapter 20 have nothing to do with protection of property rights in Inventors. Instead, Chapter 20 subordinates ownership of those rights to the collective; and establishes the framework for global government of patents and copyrights. 10
Art. I, §9, cl.1 grants to Congress power over Migration;
Art. IV, §4 requires the United States to protect each of the States against Invasion;
and Art. I, §8, cl. 15 authorizes the use of the Militia to repel invasions
Our Framers understood that control over who enters our Country is an essential element of sovereignty.
But the Treaty subordinates the United States’ sovereign power over immigration to global and multi-national bodies. USMCA Art. 16.2 declares:
“3. Nothing in this Agreement prevents a Party from applying measures to regulate the entry of natural persons of another Party into, or their temporary stay in, its territory, including those measures necessary to protect the integrity of, and to ensure the orderly movement of natural persons across, its borders, provided that those measures are not applied in a manner as to nullify or impair the benefits accruing to any Party under this Chapter.” [italics added]
Article 16.8 declares:
“Except for this Chapter, Chapter 1 (Initial Provisions and General Definitions), Chapter 30 (Administrative and Institutional Provisions), Chapter 31 (Dispute Settlement), Chapter 34 (Final Provisions), Article 29.2 (Publication), and Article 29.3 (Administrative Proceedings), this Agreement does not impose an obligation on a Party regarding its immigration measures.” [italics added] 11
USMCA Art. 23.1 cites the International Labor Organization’s (ILO) “Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work” (1998), as guiding the treatment of labor issues under the Treaty. The ILO is an agency of the United Nations (UN); and part of the ILO’s “social justice” agenda is to formulate “fair migration schemes in regional integration processes”.
So this is how the UN is to dictate immigration policy for the “regional integration” of Canada, the United States and Mexico.
Art. II, §2, cl. 2, grants to the President the power to make Treaties,
provided two-thirds of the Senators present concur
Chapter 30 of the Treaty establishes the Free Trade Commission. It is the governing body of the bureaucracy which is created by the Treaty. Among other powers, the Commission supervises the work of all committees and other subsidiary bodies established under the Treaty; has the power to merge or dissolve committees and other subsidiary bodies; and has the power to “consider” proposals to amend or modify the Treaty. While Art. 30.2, 2. (c) lists 6 areas where modifications of the Treaty are subject to completion of “applicable legal procedures by each Party”, it does not require that other types of modifications of the Treaty be subject to such approval of the Parties.
And while USMCA Art. 34.3, 1. provides, “The Parties may agree, in writing, to amend this Agreement”, it doesn’t say that is the exclusive means of amendment. Accordingly, we must consider Art. 34.3 as providing an additional means of amendment.
USMCA Article 30.2, 2. (f) grants to the Commission power to “issue interpretations” of the Treaty; and the footnote thereto says that its interpretations “are binding for tribunals and panels established under Chapter 14 (Investment) and Chapter 31 (Dispute Settlement).”
And since, as noted above, the “interpretations” of Ch. 33 issued by the Macroeconomic Committee are considered as “interpretations” issued by the Free Trade Commission, the “interpretations” of the Macroeconomic Committee will also be binding on the tribunals deciding disputes between the Parties.
We thus permit the “creature” of the Treaty to modify the document under which it holds its existence!12
Art. III, §2, cl. 1, grants to U.S. Courts the Power to decide all Cases arising under Treaties &
all Controversies to which the United States is a Party.
In violation of our Constitution, the Treaty restricts the Parties to the dispute settlement procedures laid out in the Treaty.
Chapter 31 of the Treaty addresses resolution of disputes involving violations of the Treaty or “interpretations” of the Treaty issued (or “deemed to be issued”) by the Free Trade Commission. Disputes are heard by a panel of five drawn from a roster of up to 30 individuals appointed by the Parties. The panel is to make findings of fact and determinations and issue a report. If the disputing Parties don’t agree on the report, the complaining Party may suspend various benefits held by the responding Party under the Treaty.
Article 31.3 limits the Parties’ choice of a forum for dispute resolution to that set forth in the Treaty or in another international trade agreement to which the disputing Parties are signatories.
Article 31.20 permits a Party to intervene in proceedings already pending in a domestic judicial or administrative forum which involve the interpretation or application of the Treaty. The purpose of such intervention is to inform the domestic tribunal of the “interpretations” of the Treaty issued (or “deemed to be issued”) by the Free Trade Commission. Thus, the “interpretations” of the Treaty issued by the “creature” of the Treaty are to be foisted on our domestic courts and administrative law judges!
Note that Art. 31.21 expressly forbids a Party from making a law which grants a right of action against another Party on the ground that a measure of the other Party is inconsistent with the Treaty.
Powers reserved by the States or the People which the Treaty transfers to global organizations
Our Constitution is one of enumerated powers only. Most of the powers delegated to the federal government over the Country at large are listed within Art. I, §8. See this Chart.
Labor
We did not delegate to our federal government power over labor issues. However, beginning in the early 1900s, we permitted our federal government to exercise, by usurpation, powers over labor issues.13 As a result, we got the federal Department of Labor, a host of Acts of Congress addressing labor issues, and a plethora of Rules issued by the Department and published in Title 29 of the Code of Federal Regulations. The Department, its Rules, and the Acts of Congress are unconstitutional as outside the scope of powers delegated. The Rules are also unconstitutional as in violation of Art. I, §1, US Constit.
Chapter 23 of the Treaty transfers those usurped powers to the United Nation’s International Labor Organization (ILO).
Article 23.1 defines “labor laws” as the statutes and regulations of a Party that are directly related to “internationally recognized labor rights” such as the “right” to collective bargaining; and which require Parties to make laws to provide wage-related benefits payments for workers such as profit sharing, bonuses, retirement, and healthcare.
Here are some of the dictates set forth in the Treaty with which US laws and agency rules must comply:
At Art. 23.2, the Parties affirm their obligations stated in the ILO’s Declaration on Rights at Work and Declaration on Social Justice for a Fair Globalization (2008).
and (2008). Article 23.3 dictates that “Each Party shall adopt and maintain in its statutes and regulations, and practices thereunder,” various rights, as stated in the ILO’s Declaration on Rights at Work; and “Each Party shall adopt and maintain statutes and regulations, and practices thereunder, governing acceptable conditions of work with respect to minimum wages, hours of work, and occupational safety and health.”
Article 23.5 requires each Party to “effectively enforce its labor laws”.
Article 23.9 requires each Party to implement policies to protect workers against employment discrimination on the basis of sex, pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity, and caregiving responsibilities; and to provide job-protected leave for birth or adoption of a child and care of family members; and to protect against wage discrimination.14
Additional Reserved Powers transferred to global or multi-national bodies
The USMCA Treaty is long and complex: see the Table of Contents. Here are brief comments on some of the other powers reserved by the States or the People which are unlawfully transferred by the Treaty:
Chapter 19 addresses digital trade. Article 19.5 requires each Party to maintain a legal framework governing electronic transactions consistent with the principles of the UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce 1996. That model law is a product of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law.
Chapter 21 addresses competition policy. Article 21.1 requires each Party to maintain and enforce “national competition laws” which proscribe “anticompetitive business conduct”. The Parties are to apply those laws to “all commercial activities in its territory.” Article 21.4 requires each Party to adopt or maintain national consumer protection laws or regulations that proscribe fraudulent and deceptive commercial activities.
RELATED: Judge’s Doublespeak: It’s Unconstitutional, but Lawful, for President to Order Wiretap without Warrant
Chapter 24 addresses environmental laws. Article 24.3 requires each Party to ensure that its laws provide for high levels of environmental protection. Article 24.4 requires each Party to enforce its environmental laws. Article 24.9 requires each Party to control the production and use of substances which deplete or change the ozone layer [and on & on for 30 pages].
The Death of the Republican Form of Government
In a “ republic ”, the sovereign power is exercised by representatives elected by the People.
Article IV, §4, US Constit., requires the United States to guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government.
But the USMCA Treaty, time after time, delegates the exercise of sovereign power to various panels, Committees, Commissions, UN organizations, and others – not one of which is elected by the People.
Don’t fall for the carrot dangled in your face!
The Treaty reportedly contains some tariff benefits to various industries in the United States such as the auto and dairy industries. Their profits (at least for a while) should increase as a result of the Treaty. And for that, We are to surrender our sovereignty to the globalists?!
The 1815 Free Trade Treaty between the United States and Great Britain
On Dec. 6, 1815, President James Madison sent this treaty to the Senate for ratification. It is two pages long. Unlike the USMCA Treaty, it doesn’t set up a government over the United States and Great Britain—thus proving that trade treaties need not surrender our sovereignty. And Madison’s treaty doesn’t require a lawyer skilled in sniffing out dirty tricks to understand what it does.
Conclusion
In Federalist No. 22 (last para), Alexander Hamilton said that one of the problems with the Articles of Confederation (AOC), our first Constitution, was that it was never ratified by the PEOPLE. Because the only foundation for the AOC was the consent of state legislatures, questions had arisen concerning its validity.
This is why Art. VII of our second Constitution (the one we have now) provides for its ratification by Conventions held in each of the States. In support of the ratification method set forth in Art. VII, Hamilton wrote:
“…The fabric of American empire ought to rest on the solid basis of THE CONSENT OF THE PEOPLE. The streams of national power ought to flow immediately from that pure, original fountain of all legitimate authority.” [caps are Hamilton’s].
This is why our Constitution begins with, “WE THE PEOPLE”. WE consented to it.
But the USMCA Treaty sets up global government over the economic issues covered by the Treaty. It is NOT to be submitted to THE PEOPLE for their consent. The globalists who infest our Legislative and Executive Branches (the latter of which, as the Perloff article points out, has been dominated by the Council on Foreign Relations for over 70 years) want the Treaty ratified by a simple majority vote in Congress. 15
The USMCA Treaty is illegitimate; and the global government it imposes is tyrannical.
America, you are being duped by people who do not have an America First agenda, but are advancing a loss of American sovereignty.
All you’re hearing is economy and jobs, but what you aren’t hearing about is what it’s going to cost you, your children and your country.
Pay attention and call your senators and demand an end to this betrayal of the American people and the US Constitution.
Article posted with permission from Sons Of Liberty Media


thewashingtonstandard--2020-01-08--Abortion Workers Leaving Their Jobs… By The Hundreds

In 2008 , Abby Johnson , the manager of the Bryan , Texas , ( 100 miles from Houston ) Planned Parenthood , became that organization ’ s Employee of the Year .
By 2009 , she quit for conscience ’ s sake .
Why ?
That year , for the first time , she saw an ultrasound of an abortion of a 13-week old unborn child in her own clinic .
This was not a blob of tissue , a clump of cells , a non-living being .
This was a baby that was fighting for his life .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ of abortions and thought that she was helping women through her work , seeing that baby fighting for his life caused the scales to fall from her eyes .
Abby says that after she saw that ultrasound , “ I knew that I had been part of a lie .
I had been a part of a corrupt system , a corrupt organization , that really preyed upon women in their vulnerable states , and I knew that I needed to leave.
” She has now written a book ( with Cindy Lambert @ @ @ @ @ @ @ PureFlix ( “ God ’ s Not Dead ” ) has now turned that book into an excellent movie .
Abby Johnson has also started an outreach , And Then There Were None ( ATTWN ) , to help abortion workers leave the field .
I have interviewed Abby before and have previously written about her story .
But here is an update about ATTWN , since I recently interviewed for Christian television two of her assistants at ATTWN .
One of them is Meagan Weber , who told me , “ [ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a worker would pick it up as a skeptic and see the truth , and see themselves through her words , and within three months of her book ’ s release in 2011 , she had 17 abortion workers contact her for help.
” In effect , Abby and those 17 workers became the beginning of her work to help transition abortion clinic workers out of the field .
Her reasoning is simple .
She says on her ATTWN website , abortionworker.com , “ We always say that nobody grows up wanting to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Our vision statement for ‘ And then there were none ’ is ‘ No abortion clinic workers , no abortion clinics , no abortions ’ – it starts with the workers .
We see ourselves as being part of a pro-love movement .
That we want to love these workers out of the clinics .
We want to love them to a path of healing , and we want to love them back into a relationship with Jesus Christ.
” As an abortion worker , Abby Johnson had thought that what she @ @ @ @ @ @ @ women .
But she learned the hard way that the real bottom line of Planned Parenthood was its bottom line .
Weber , who serves as Abby Johnson ’ s assistant , told me , “ They asked her to increase the number of abortions at her facility by half , and so she said , ‘ Don ’ t we tell the media that we want to reduce the number of abortions to make them safe , legal , and rare ?
’ And her supervisor laughed and said , ‘ Well @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we make our money ?
’ And she really was blindsided by that.
” Weber also says , “ Leaving your job in the abortion industry is not like leaving your job in a fast food outlet .
It has the same high turnover rate , but you don ’ t just leave your job , you leave your friends , you leave your ideology … you go from one day championing women ’ s rights and abortion rights to the next day having to humble yourself and say , ‘ I was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ very evil system , ’ and they have to come to terms with that .
So there is a lot of emotional trauma , and there is abandonment.
” I also have spoken with Laura Ricketts of ATTWN for Christian television .
She observed , “ As we walk through the process of healing them , as we meet their practical needs with financial assistance , with resume writing , with jobs search help , as we help them pay their bills , get back on their feet , once their practical needs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ meet their emotion and spiritual needs.
” So far the organization has been able to help hundreds of clinic workers get out of the abortion field .
Meagan states , “ And so here we are seven years later , and we ’ ve helped 550 workers and seven full-time doctors.
” The movie alone helped cause about a hundred abortion clinic workers to respond , to consider coming out .
Ricketts told me , “ I think one of the most exciting things about the movie is the impact it had across @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
We saw hearts changed , abortion clinic workers leaving their jobs.
” Abby Johnson says , “ My story is really an exposé .
It ’ s pulling back the curtain into an industry that has been normalized .
Abortion has been so incredibly normalized in our society , and it ’ s anything but normal .
”

In 2008, Abby Johnson, the manager of the Bryan, Texas, (100 miles from Houston) Planned Parenthood, became that organization’s Employee of the Year.
By 2009, she quit for conscience’s sake. Why?
That year, for the first time, she saw an ultrasound of an abortion of a 13-week old unborn child in her own clinic. This was not a blob of tissue, a clump of cells, a non-living being. This was a baby that was fighting for his life.
Although Abby Johnson was a good salesman of abortions and thought that she was helping women through her work, seeing that baby fighting for his life caused the scales to fall from her eyes.
Abby says that after she saw that ultrasound, “I knew that I had been part of a lie. I had been a part of a corrupt system, a corrupt organization, that really preyed upon women in their vulnerable states, and I knew that I needed to leave.”
She has now written a book (with Cindy Lambert) called “Unplanned,” and PureFlix (“God’s Not Dead”) has now turned that book into an excellent movie.
Abby Johnson has also started an outreach, And Then There Were None (ATTWN), to help abortion workers leave the field. I have interviewed Abby before and have previously written about her story. But here is an update about ATTWN, since I recently interviewed for Christian television two of her assistants at ATTWN.
One of them is Meagan Weber, who told me, “[Abby] wrote her book hoping that a worker would pick it up as a skeptic and see the truth, and see themselves through her words, and within three months of her book’s release in 2011, she had 17 abortion workers contact her for help.”
In effect, Abby and those 17 workers became the beginning of her work to help transition abortion clinic workers out of the field. Her reasoning is simple. She says on her ATTWN website, abortionworker.com, “We always say that nobody grows up wanting to work in the abortion industry. Nobody. Our vision statement for ‘And then there were none’ is ‘No abortion clinic workers, no abortion clinics, no abortions’ – it starts with the workers. We see ourselves as being part of a pro-love movement. That we want to love these workers out of the clinics. We want to love them to a path of healing, and we want to love them back into a relationship with Jesus Christ.”
As an abortion worker, Abby Johnson had thought that what she was doing at Planned Parenthood was helping women. But she learned the hard way that the real bottom line of Planned Parenthood was its bottom line.
Weber, who serves as Abby Johnson’s assistant, told me, “They asked her to increase the number of abortions at her facility by half, and so she said, ‘Don’t we tell the media that we want to reduce the number of abortions to make them safe, legal, and rare?’ And her supervisor laughed and said, ‘Well, Abbey, how do you think we make our money?’ And she really was blindsided by that.”
Weber also says, “Leaving your job in the abortion industry is not like leaving your job in a fast food outlet. It has the same high turnover rate, but you don’t just leave your job, you leave your friends, you leave your ideology … you go from one day championing women’s rights and abortion rights to the next day having to humble yourself and say, ‘I was wrong. I was part of a very evil system,’ and they have to come to terms with that. So there is a lot of emotional trauma, and there is abandonment.”
I also have spoken with Laura Ricketts of ATTWN for Christian television. She observed, “As we walk through the process of healing them, as we meet their practical needs with financial assistance, with resume writing, with jobs search help, as we help them pay their bills, get back on their feet, once their practical needs are met, they are ready to meet their emotion and spiritual needs.”
So far the organization has been able to help hundreds of clinic workers get out of the abortion field. Meagan states, “And so here we are seven years later, and we’ve helped 550 workers and seven full-time doctors.”
The movie alone helped cause about a hundred abortion clinic workers to respond, to consider coming out. Ricketts told me, “I think one of the most exciting things about the movie is the impact it had across the country and now across the world. We saw hearts changed, abortion clinic workers leaving their jobs.”
Abby Johnson says, “My story is really an exposé. It’s pulling back the curtain into an industry that has been normalized. Abortion has been so incredibly normalized in our society, and it’s anything but normal.”
Article posted with permission from Jerry Newcombe


thewashingtonstandard--2020-01-08--Delisted By Google For Free Speech

Delisted By Google For Free Speech

Eugene Vollokh writes on his blog the behemoth Google has delisted articles critical of a legal judgment punishing author Jim Fetzer for daring to write a book questioning the official narrative on Sandy Hook .
Fetzer , a retired university professor , was ordered by the court to pay nearly a half-million dollars to Leonard Pozner , the father of a child allegedly killed at Sandy Hook .
Google received a request under the plaintiff ’ s name “ asking Google to deindex pages that contain copies of the libelous book , and Google has gone along with those requests @ @ @ @ @ @ @ indexes links to material that a court has found to be libelous , so Google searches for such material no longer find it , ” Volokh writes .
I can ’ t think of a more perfect contemporary example of Orwell ’ s truth incinerating Memory Hole , a mechanism for eradicating the off-narrative .
But a week and a half ago , another request came in to Google , and this request also sought to deindex material that simply discussed the case and criticized the court decision , such as various copies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Truth-Seeker : Jim Fetzer ’ s Stalinist-Style Show Trial ” and “ Sandy Hook and the Murder of the First Amendment.
” The court ’ s judgment , of course , didn ’ t find these items ( posted in response to the judgment ) to be libelous , and it offers no basis for Google to deindex them .
I wrote and posted the latter article in October .
In it , I argue the lawsuit judgment against Fetzer represents another attack on an already decimated First Amendment , which is now @ @ @ @ @ @ @ case of writing about Sandy Hook , might as well not exist at all .
“ The Fetzer trial is a big win for the ruling elite , ” I wrote .
“ For years now , it has worked tirelessly to characterize investigative journalism outside limits imposed by the government as criminal—and now , according to the FBI , as terrorism.
” Last week my Twitter account was put in the deep freeze for repeating what Daniel McAdams of the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity said of the Fox News @ @ @ @ @ @ @ used the same selectively-banned pejorative to criticize Hannity the lunkhead teleprompter reader after he justified the murder of a foreign leader in broad daylight .
Not even Mossad is brazen and outrageous as Donald Trump and his Reaper drones bristling with Hellfire missiles .
Israel is notorious for its deception .
Trump is a ham-fisted primitive with a mobile phone and a Twitter account .
Now that war looms—as it has since Donald Trump the promise-breaker took office—we can expect more Orwellian behavior on the part of the government and its media .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ then can it truly trample liberty to the utmost .
You ’ re either with us , or you ’ re with the terrorists .
The severity of the crackdown will depend on the severity of any military conflict between Iran and the US and its coalition of willing neoliberal nation-states , the latter increasingly cold footed as Trump tweets like a Mafia don at a meeting between the families .
It could be more Trump political Kabuki theater .
Kim Jung-un found out just what a used car salesman Trump really is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not only for the average Iranian suffering under the unwarranted onslaught of US economic and now military warfare but also for the average American .
Not simply through the probability of retaliatory terrorism in America responding to US government terrorism ongoing in the Middle East for decades , but also as economic victims as the global petroleum-driven economy collapses .

Eugene Vollokh writes on his blog the behemoth Google has delisted articles critical of a legal judgment punishing author Jim Fetzer for daring to write a book questioning the official narrative on Sandy Hook.
Fetzer, a retired university professor, was ordered by the court to pay nearly a half-million dollars to Leonard Pozner, the father of a child allegedly killed at Sandy Hook.
Google received a request under the plaintiff’s name “asking Google to deindex pages that contain copies of the libelous book, and Google has gone along with those requests. Google generally does remove from its indexes links to material that a court has found to be libelous, so Google searches for such material no longer find it,” Volokh writes.
I can’t think of a more perfect contemporary example of Orwell’s truth incinerating Memory Hole, a mechanism for eradicating the off-narrative.
But a week and a half ago, another request came in to Google, and this request also sought to deindex material that simply discussed the case and criticized the court decision, such as various copies of “The Legal Lynching of a Truth-Seeker: Jim Fetzer’s Stalinist-Style Show Trial” and “Sandy Hook and the Murder of the First Amendment.” The court’s judgment, of course, didn’t find these items (posted in response to the judgment) to be libelous, and it offers no basis for Google to deindex them.
I wrote and posted the latter article in October. In it, I argue the lawsuit judgment against Fetzer represents another attack on an already decimated First Amendment, which is now almost completely irrelevant and, in the case of writing about Sandy Hook, might as well not exist at all.
“The Fetzer trial is a big win for the ruling elite,” I wrote. “For years now, it has worked tirelessly to characterize investigative journalism outside limits imposed by the government as criminal—and now, according to the FBI, as terrorism.”
Last week my Twitter account was put in the deep freeze for repeating what Daniel McAdams of the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity said of the Fox News talk show host Sean Hannity. I used the same selectively-banned pejorative to criticize Hannity the lunkhead teleprompter reader after he justified the murder of a foreign leader in broad daylight.
Not even Mossad is brazen and outrageous as Donald Trump and his Reaper drones bristling with Hellfire missiles. Israel is notorious for its deception. Trump is a ham-fisted primitive with a mobile phone and a Twitter account.
Now that war looms—as it has since Donald Trump the promise-breaker took office—we can expect more Orwellian behavior on the part of the government and its media. The state cherishes war, for only then can it truly trample liberty to the utmost. You’re either with us, or you’re with the terrorists.
The severity of the crackdown will depend on the severity of any military conflict between Iran and the US and its coalition of willing neoliberal nation-states, the latter increasingly cold footed as Trump tweets like a Mafia don at a meeting between the families.
It could be more Trump political Kabuki theater. Kim Jung-un found out just what a used car salesman Trump really is.
Or it could be worse, not only for the average Iranian suffering under the unwarranted onslaught of US economic and now military warfare but also for the average American. Not simply through the probability of retaliatory terrorism in America responding to US government terrorism ongoing in the Middle East for decades, but also as economic victims as the global petroleum-driven economy collapses.
Article posted with permission from Kurt Nimmo


thewashingtonstandard--2020-01-08--The Constitutionality of Long Distance Air Strikes

The recent assassination of Iranian military leader Qasem Soleimani carried out by United States military personnel under orders from President Donald J. Trump has caused much turmoil in America .
From the instant that the details of the deadly mission were announced , critics of the president have been shrill in their condemnation of his actions .
At the same time , supporters of the President are universally outraged that the president ’ s decisive and successful action is being criticized at all .
However , when I listen to the arguments that are put forward to defend and to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I must admit I am very troubled .
You see , I am struggling to find the authority for this termination of life .
Now , don ’ t get me wrong .
Along with many Americans , I am disposed to applaud Mr. Trump ’ s boldness and decisiveness , along with his desire to protect the American people .
But while I appreciate his acting with certainty , I believe it to be the duty of all Americans to make certain that our president is acting within the limits of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and subject to the laws of nature and of Natures ’ God .
Please consider just how important this is for us all .
If we allow our military to engage in deadly force without the benefit of a clear articulation of the lawful authority by which they kill , there is nothing to stop them from killing anyone they may someday , somehow , find convenient .
In Article II , Section 2 , the Constitution provides that the President is the Commander-in-Chief of the Army and Navy .
But the title @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not provide justification to kill anybody .
Just because Bush and Obama did something doesn ’ t make it moral or constitutional .
Just because it is asserted that “ Soleimani is a known terrorist ” or that “ he needed to be taken out ” doesn ’ t make it moral or lawful .
What would make it constitutional would be to comply with Article 1 Section 8 which vests the power in Congress “ to declare war ” on a nation-state , or “ grant letters of marque and reprisal.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ individuals to use force against enemies of the state on its behalf .
This would include a renegade pirate or terrorists who is not a part of a recognized government .
That ’ s relatively simple but Congress hasn ’ t declared war since December 8 , 1941 , following Pearl Harbor .
If Soleimani and his ilk represent the nation-state of Iran then we ought to declare war on Iran and terminate the radicals as a matter of war .
If Soleimani is an individual terrorist killing and terrorizing American citizens then @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Marque from Congress to terminate this man and his forces .
Bypassing the Constitution and their own authority Congress , passed a “ Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution ” of 2002 .
Since then , there have been US Soldiers on the soil of the Middle East that haven ’ t been authorized by Article 1 Sec .
8 .
We clearly have a real conflict that does exist and has for some time , but this conflict has not been declared or defined which is causing an escalation of conflicts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have abandoned what the constitution authorizes .
Again I am very troubled… Schedule an event or learn more about your Constitution with Jake MacAulay and the Institute on the Constitution and receive your free gift .

The recent assassination of Iranian military leader Qasem Soleimani carried out by United States military personnel under orders from President Donald J. Trump has caused much turmoil in America.
From the instant that the details of the deadly mission were announced, critics of the president have been shrill in their condemnation of his actions.
At the same time, supporters of the President are universally outraged that the president’s decisive and successful action is being criticized at all.
However, when I listen to the arguments that are put forward to defend and to justify this long-distance termination of human life I must admit I am very troubled.
It’s a question of authority.
You see, I am struggling to find the authority for this termination of life.
Now, don’t get me wrong. Along with many Americans, I am disposed to applaud Mr. Trump’s boldness and decisiveness, along with his desire to protect the American people.
But while I appreciate his acting with certainty, I believe it to be the duty of all Americans to make certain that our president is acting within the limits of the authority vested in him under the Constitution and subject to the laws of nature and of Natures’ God.
Please consider just how important this is for us all. If we allow our military to engage in deadly force without the benefit of a clear articulation of the lawful authority by which they kill, there is nothing to stop them from killing anyone they may someday, somehow, find convenient.
In Article II, Section 2, the Constitution provides that the President is the Commander-in-Chief of the Army and Navy. But the title “Commander in Chief” alone does not provide justification to kill anybody.
Just because Bush and Obama did something doesn’t make it moral or constitutional.
Just because it is asserted that “Soleimani is a known terrorist” or that “he needed to be taken out” doesn’t make it moral or lawful.
What would make it constitutional would be to comply with Article 1 Section 8 which vests the power in Congress “to declare war” on a nation-state, or “grant letters of marque and reprisal.” These letters are essentially permits for private individuals to use force against enemies of the state on its behalf. This would include a renegade pirate or terrorists who is not a part of a recognized government.
That’s relatively simple but Congress hasn’t declared war since December 8, 1941, following Pearl Harbor.
If Soleimani and his ilk represent the nation-state of Iran then we ought to declare war on Iran and terminate the radicals as a matter of war.
If Soleimani is an individual terrorist killing and terrorizing American citizens then the president ought to request Letters of Marque from Congress to terminate this man and his forces.
Bypassing the Constitution and their own authority Congress, passed a “Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution” of 2002. Since then, there have been US Soldiers on the soil of the Middle East that haven’t been authorized by Article 1 Sec. 8.
We clearly have a real conflict that does exist and has for some time, but this conflict has not been declared or defined which is causing an escalation of conflicts. I believe this is because we have abandoned what the constitution authorizes.
Again I am very troubled…
Schedule an event or learn more about your Constitution with Jake MacAulay and the Institute on the Constitution and receive your free gift.