Summary
âž¡ The text discusses the controversy surrounding the eligibility of Donald Trump to run for president again, based on the 14th Amendment, Section 3. It argues that this section, which disqualifies anyone who has engaged in insurrection from holding office, does not apply to the president. The text also suggests that accusations of insurrection against Trump are unfounded as he was never convicted. Lastly, it touches on the topic of militias, their history, and their portrayal in the media.
âž¡ The text discusses the historical role of militias and sheriffs in protecting communities, tracing back to old Britain. It highlights their importance in the Revolutionary War and their continued relevance today. The text also touches on the controversy surrounding modern militia groups and their alleged involvement in recent political events. Lastly, it delves into the relationship between local and federal law enforcement, questioning the constitutionality of federal agencies’ involvement in local matters.
âž¡ The text discusses the role of the militia in the United States, arguing that it should be used more frequently and that it primarily belongs to the state, not the federal government. It suggests that the militia should be used to enforce domestic federal laws, suppress insurrections, and repel invasions. The text also mentions that the militia should be well-regulated, meaning well-trained and well-equipped, and that this regulation should be provided by Congress. However, the authority over the militia, including the appointment of officers and the actual training, should be at the state level.
âž¡ The discussion revolves around the role of FEMA during emergencies, the constitutional rules regarding the deployment of the National Guard, and the federal government’s ownership of land. It highlights that FEMA can only intervene in a state during emergencies if invited by the state’s governor, as seen during Hurricane Katrina. The conversation also explains that the National Guard, while deployable by the president, can only be federalized by Congress. Lastly, it questions the legality of the federal government’s vast land ownership, especially in the west, as the constitution stipulates such land should be purchased with state legislature consent and used for needful buildings.
âž¡ The text discusses the complexities of the U.S. Constitution, focusing on the concept of implied powers and the Roe v. Wade case. It suggests that the federal government sometimes oversteps its boundaries, such as by establishing abortion clinics in states that reject abortion. The text also debates potential solutions to these issues, including a slow, generational rollback of certain amendments or a complete collapse and reset of the system. The author expresses concern about the future, advising people to prepare for potential difficulties.
âž¡ The speaker discusses various topics including a video on the Articles of Confederation, a radio show called Power Hour, and his upcoming books. He also mentions his blog and encourages listeners to support his work. He ends by thanking his audience and saying goodbye.
Transcript
So. But I took a couple phone calls and one question was, could the Democrats replace Kamala Harris at this late in the game? And my answer was no, because the party at the convention already put her on the ballot and they said, well, what happened if she died or what happened if she was incapacitated in some way? What would be this situation? How would that work? What would happen before the election? That’s up to a Democrat party rules. I don’t know if their rules are on that. After the election. Let’s say if she was elected and then she died, then Tim Walls would automatically become president presently.
Okay, so it’s a party thing. It’s not a. Before the election, it’s a party thing. Copy that. Okay. And then I. What was the other question? I think they were just asking if they could just replace her outright, but. Well, they probably could according to their rules, but there’s a bunch of states that probably wouldn’t do agree to it and allow them to replace her placer on their ballots in their states. Is the party. Just like you got the, just like you got the rock. The Kennedy deal right now where they’re, you know, he’s still. How much balance.
And it’s, you know, the states, you know, they still control their ballots. The does. So is the political party in the states their own entity? Yes and no. Each, each state has a separate party entity, but they are. What’s, what’s the right word? Beholden to the national Party? They’re not, but they are like a satellite or not satellite. What’s the right word? Just a subservient little subsidiary. Yeah. Subsidiary. Thank you. No problem. Yeah. And then you got your county parties and once again, they’re part of the state party, but they’re also their own individual entity. So, you know, and so there’s, it depends on the, I don’t know, all the rules of the parties.
I’ll say that outright national party may have some things that are required all the way down, but when it comes to local stuff, the national party is going to stay out of it, and it’s up to the local parties. Gotcha. Okay. Well, I kind of covers, I think that covers the questions that were asked, but I, but I think I’m missing one. But whatever the. If they come into the chat today, because I did say, listen, I do a constitution class every Tuesday, you guys. These are, these are questions that really be appropriate for, for Doug.
So I tell you a question I’ve been getting a lot, and if you, if you don’t mind visiting it just for a second. And I’m getting it a lot. Matter of fact, on Sunday night, I was on a show called for the Republic, and this was in the chat room, is, can the Democrats refuse to certify the election if Trump was elected there? They accuse Trump’s supporters of trying to stop the certification back on January 6, 2021. So can they do the same? Can they stop the certification? And it’s kind of a tricky question because that is not a certification.
The certification constitution constitutionally is by the electors. All that happens in that joint session of Congress where the president of the Senate, or in this case, if she were to pull it off, it would be the speaker. To do this is count the electoral votes before a joint session of Congress. That’s what it’s for. The actual certification or any decertification would belong to the states. How do I know this? The word certification appears twice in the Constitution, article two and the 12th amendment, both times referencing the electors. The electors are the ones that certify it. That it’s true, it’s correct, and it’s sent to Congress, and then it is opened and then counted.
As for decertification, the word decertification does not appear anywhere in the constitution. Since it does not, that means there is no federal authority to decertify. Then the attempt amendment comes in play, and it’s up to the states and the people if there needs to be a decertification of any electoral votes. And then when states try to do that after 2020, courts said, oh, you can’t do that. Absolutely. 10th amendment. I’m trying to find where that guy Raskin, uh, let’s see here. Yeah, I know exactly the quote. Yeah, he, uh, he basically let the cat out of the back.
If they think that it wasn’t legitimate in their eyes, they were refused to allow him to see, and they don’t have that authority. I have the video, but it’s, there’s no, it doesn’t have a. Oh, there it is. There’s a transcript. Okay. Because I want to find where in the transcript where he says 14th amendment. A real special Ed actually has a really good question in the chat. If you read it and read it and answer while I’m looking for this. All right, so a real special ed in the chat room. And by the way, hello, everybody.
Douglas v. Gibbs. Mister Constitution, good to see you. So, so real special ed says, can the. Or asks, can the electoral college vote for who they want instead of voting what they’re supposed to. What he’s saying is this. We have in today’s electoral college, the people vote, and then elector is supposed to vote the way the people voted. Can the elector vote differently? It depends on the state law, but in most cases, yes, 98% of the time, the electors vote the way the popular vote was in their state, but they can change your vote. Now, here’s the thing.
Here’s why they can change their vote, because the people aren’t supposed to be voting in the first place. Originally, the way the electoral college was set up is the people didn’t vote for president. They voted for their elector, and two of the electors were chosen by each of the legislative houses of the state legislature. So you have. Because remember, you have, the number of electors is the same as the number of representatives and senators. So the ones that are there for the representatives, the people would vote for in each congressional district, and then that’ll. They would vote for their elector and then the electoral for president based on way they wanted to vote.
You voted for the elector you believe would vote the way you wanted the presidential election to go. So that electoral represents that district, but they vote the way they want to vote. And. And then the elector is chosen by each house of the state legislature. Same thing. They’re going to pick the person they believe is going to vote the way they want. But in the end, it’s up to the elector on how to vote. And then also, originally, it wasn’t a winner take all. The electoral votes went how the electors voted. So if you had, you know, hypothetically, let’s say you got California, which has 52 electoral votes, and let’s say 40 go to Kamala and ten go to Trump and to go to Kennedy, then 40 would go one place, ten would go the other, and the two would go the other.
They wouldn’t be winner take all, right? And to this day, you still have two states that split up their electoral votes. The state could do their electoral votes any way they want. They can do where each one goes where they voted, or they could do it in districts like Nebraska, Maine does, or the rest of the four other 48 states have a winner take all. But originally, it was not winner take all. And originally, the people did not directly vote for the president. They voted for their elector, and then the electors voted for president. And then after they voted for president, each state, they would collect those votes, certify it, put it in an envelope, send it to Washington, and those envelopes would be opened during a joint session of Congress and counted before that joint session of Congress by the president of the Senate.
And that is how the elections went. This was an attempt to avoid a direct democracy, or, as I like to say, to protect us from the excesses of democracy, because if you were to go straight democratic national popular vote with the presidency, your four or five biggest cities would vote for president. Nobody else’s vote would matter. But because of this system, because of the way it’s set up, where those extra two electoral votes give the. Make sure that the smaller states have a little bit more voice, and because the electors, the way they vote, it would eliminate chances of fraud in.
At the ballot box, because it’s electors. So it’s a different type of animal. That that’s. That was to avoid the problems we have. We have the problems we have because we’re not following that original system. Right. That makes sense here. I’m going to share this just because I think it’s important, actually, to discuss it here. Let’s see. And, yes, Gardner Sd. Gardner. The Brunson case does have a legitimate argument. All right, here we go. I’m gonna. I’m gonna hit play on this and just let it go for. Just for a minute. It worries me a lot about what we’re going to see on election day.
Congressman, five words. Gentlemen’s time has expired. Well, last night, I was most worried about the Supreme Court’s prospective imminent abdication of its very clear duty to disqualify Donald Trump from the ballot under section three of the 14th Amendment. And what that might mean if their decision says that it’s really up to Congress on January 5 or January 6, 2025, to disqualify him at the counting of the electoral college votes, which really could lead to something akin to civil war, if that’s what the suggestion is, which is what I think I heard when I went to the oral argument that they themselves were unwilling to rule whether or not the Colorado Supreme Court was correct in finding that he had engaged in insurrection on January 6, 2021.
But that was just last night’s worry. Well, let’s take some questions. Don’t think that was the one. Well, yeah, no, but he says something very important. That is what. The important part, basically, what he’s saying is, if Trump committed insurrection, he’s not eligible, according to 14th Amendment section three. And it’s up to Congress to determine that. And so they’ll just refuse to see him if they believe he’s guilty of insurrection. First of all, to be guilty of something, you need to be convicted of it. He was never convicted of insurrection, so he can’t be guilty of it, number one.
Number two, if you read 14th Amendment section three, it’s very interesting when you read it, and I think you and I have gone over this before, but we’ll do it again. What it says is that if you have engaged in insurrection, or you have given aid or comfort to an insurrection, you can never hold office again. And the only way to get rid of that disability is for two thirds of each house of Congress to do away with that disability. Now, here’s the key, though. In the beginning, when it goes through the list of everybody that is falls under this, the president is not mentioned.
It says, no person shall be a senator or representative in Congress or elector, a president or vice president, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States or under any state, having previously taken oath as a member of Congress or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any state legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any state, to support the constitution. United States. So president, United States is not there. The third section of the 14th Amendment doesn’t apply in the United States. The president of the United States.
Why? Because the president of the United States, the head of the government, and so to commit insurrection would be to essentially commit insurrection against himself, first of all, which is stupid. Number two, in article two, where. Article two, section three, I believe it is me. Let me just verify, because I’ll be kicking myself. I get it wrong. Yeah, very, very. End. Or the second to last clause in article two, section three, it says that he shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed. What that means is the president’s job is to make sure all laws are faithfully executed.
And if there’s a problem or a violation, or the laws are not being executed in the manner that they were intended, as the person in charge of making sure they’re faithfully executed, it’s his job to do something about it, look into it, to call, you know, you know, basically call it out. And that’s what he did. Election law is their laws. His job is to execute the laws. If the election laws are not being executed properly, it’s his job to cry foul, basically. And what he should have done is he should have immediately had a team start an investigation after the election.
That’s what he should have done. But nonetheless, they were trying to accuse him of insurrection for doing his job as the executive, and then they’re saying he shouldn’t be qualified, be allowed to take office because he violated article or section three of 14th amendment, which does not apply to the president, United States. Right. Everybody else, but after the present. So Raskin, basically, and I know we already knew this before we heard this, but he’s. That guy’s an absolute douche. So there you go. Hopefully, hopefully that could clears a lot up for a lot of you. Yeah, I don’t.
I don’t. I don’t like. I’ll just say I don’t like his heritage. I’ll just leave it at that. So I’m just gonna. I’m gonna leave it there. Yeah. You and I don’t necessarily march exactly to the same. No, we don’t. And that’s okay. Yeah. That’s okay. The enemy within the gates. The Trojan horse. Oh, no. The enemy is within the gates. But, yeah, I don’t put certain. Yeah, I’m just saying how. I just, you know, this is a very delicate topic with you, because I know you. I know you subscribe to the whole dispensational thing, and we disagree on that.
But, you know, how can. How can 1% basically be in control of everything? And I’m not saying that every single person is bad. I’m just saying it’s. It’s. You cannot deny the statistics. So, anyway, on that note, moving on, see how skilled he is there. Still gets that word in. He’s. He’s good. I’m a wordsmith, brother. I’m a wordsmith. But. But anyway, I feel like maybe next week, or maybe even the next couple of weeks, we maybe put the constitution, the article one and stuff, and just. And just do some. Maybe some. Some hard hitting lessons from a constitutional perspective on the presidential election, because I think.
Because we are approaching that, and I think that would be very apropos. So just maybe like a. Just kind of like a sidestep and just focus. Well, won’t be next week and not let me. And I hadn’t told you this yet. See, October 31 is Halloween. That’s Thursday next week. Halloween’s my wife’s birthday. Okay. And she has convinced me to take her out someplace during the week. We. Matter of fact, we just made the final decision yesterday. So I will not be unavailable next Tuesday because I will be spending my wife’s birthday week with her birthday just next week.
Just. Just, you know, Halloween week, because I don’t celebrate Halloween, but I do celebrate my wife’s birthday, you know, and I’m. I refuse to celebrate that. I don’t. I don’t like it. I don’t want anything to do with it. I want nothing to do with that day. It’s my wife’s birthday, which is great, because I get that. But I. But, I mean, the evil that is. Oh, yeah. The evil that’s pushed out about that day. And, you know, I know people that. They think it’s harmless, but, man, there’s so much stuff that goes on around that.
That’s just. It’s so diabolical. And I just. I just. I have. I have such a difficult time with that. And, you know, what’s. Well, what’s great about it, though, is, see, since my wife’s birthday is October 31, I take her out to dinner. I’ve got my choice, man, because everybody’s out doing stuff. The restaurants are empty. It’s great. But anyway, all right, where we left off last week, now that we’re about 15 minutes in or so, is we are in article one, section eight, and we are a little bit past halfway. And what we’re talking about today, what we’re gonna open with, are militias.
And we don’t seem to understand what militias are. And the term militia has been maligned in such a way. I mean, look what they did. You know, January 6, you know, those militias, those. Both keepers and those. Can I just. Can I just say this? Yeah. Can I just say this? If there would have been a real insurrection. Oh, yeah. On January 6, it would not have turned out the way that it did. No, no. I said this last Sunday on my for the republic program. We’re a. But we’re a bunch of people who believe in liberty, support this idea that there was a revolution, and we’re Second Amendment guys.
If we wanted to commit insurrection, trust me, you would know it was an insurrection. In fact, you would not only know, you would no longer be there. Right. If we were half as dangerous as they make us out to be, in the sense of what we’re capable of, they’d be gone. Correct? So, yeah. Oh, absolutely. Now, that said militias were something that goes all the way back to old Britain prior, back to the Saxons. And what was happening is whenever the ruling class got a little too ruler friendly, decided that they were the dictatorship. You had the sheriffs and militias there to protect the communities against the tyranny of the royal class.
And so the sheriff and the militias go hand in hand all the way back to old Britain and the Saxons. So in the colonies, due to tradition, partly these militias and sheriffs evolved along with the colonies. They were part of it. Now, that said, part of the reason why the militias were important was also because you got to realize, I mean, not all of us, but a lot of us live in suburban areas or something like that. And the city next door is right next door. When you cross the city line, if you didn’t see the sign that says welcome to such and such city, you might not know, because it just kind of keeps on going, right? Especially in southern California.
It’s amazing. But back then, each community, they were separate. They were by themselves. There was forest between them and the next community, or plains or hills or whatever. And so a militia was required for each communities, township or whatever to protect it against, you know, whatever you want to fill in the blank with, including the militias of other townships. They. The militias became important because when british tyranny began to reach its crescendo, the militias were there to protect the communities against that. And when the revolutionary war began, we didn’t have an organized armed force. We had the militias, and it was the militias, which are voluntary community members with their own guns, looking out for their community, protecting their livelihood, and so on and so forth.
That’s the militias. So. And they’re. They’re trying to outlaw them right now, aren’t they? Well, yeah. That gets back to my thing about the. Those three groups, Oath keepers, proud, proud boys and three percenters. They’ve basically been disbanded because they were accused of being a part of that insurrection. The leaders of these groups are in jail because they encourage people to be there on January 6. I have. I have two hats with a three percenter logo on the side. I wear them proudly. But I knew. And I knew Stuart Rhodes pretty well, so. And he’s not a bad guy.
He was. He was a former. He was a former member of the 101st Airborne. And the whole reason he started Oath Keepers was because when. When Katrina came through and they actually deputized local law enforcement, be federal law enforcement, they were going around and they were disarming people down in the. In the hurricane zone in. In New Orleans. And they were. And they were like, there was a lot of people that were really uncomfortable with that. And that was the whole port, the whole purpose of Oath Keepers, right? I did not know Stuart Rhodes personally, but I was.
I spoke to a lot of oath Keeper groups. They were right groups. Three percenters did not. Never got in touch with the pro boys, but very good groups. They were all about this. They invited me to come up to Coeur d’Alene, Idaho, back in, like, 2011, I think. And I literally drove from where I was in Phoenix all the way up to Coeur d’Alene and hung out with them up there. It was a lot of fun. It was really cool. And I, you know, and I’ve talked to stewart multiple times on the phone. It’s been, you know, probably years since I’ve done that.
But he was. He was a. I mean, he loved this country. Now, that. That all said, the founders understood the importance of the militias. They also had a fear of a standing army being used against the people. The militia needed to stay intact, partly to protect the communities and partly to stand against the standing army, should that be a problem. And so the militias were important, but at the same time, they also recognized that the militias were an important component when it came to the revolutionary war. While the continental army was eventually fully formed, the militia still provided a role.
They were the ones that did a lot of the scouting, a lot of the, you know, flanks and stuff like that. That was the militias. Right. And so the militias were very valuable, not only to the communities, but also could be to this new government, this new federal government in certain situations. Also because there was a fear of standing armies when it came to executing the laws of the union. Federal law. A majority of which were not to be domestic. But if there were domestic federal laws to be carried out, executed, the founding fathers did not.
Now, listen carefully. I’m getting ready to say, because this is going to be very interesting. Did not want the federal government to have a law enforcement arm. I know. The militias were chosen. That’s right. Because why? Why the bushes execute the laws of union? Because if they. They knew it was a bunch of B’s, they’d say, stick it. We’re not doing it. Mm hmm. Okay. And it’s. It’s. It’s interesting because we’re seeing a modern day. We’re. We’re seeing something modern day where the sheriffs are standing up to the federal government in. In North Carolina and telling them, get the hell out.
Yeah. And, you know, um. You know, the. When one thing that’s really important that people need to understand. Did you ever see the movie sicario? Yeah. Okay. Do you remember in the movie when, you know, she’s like, why am I here? Why am I here? Why am I here? And she was asking that question the entire time. I just want to know what’s going on. Well, towards the tail end, when that, right when they were getting ready to go into the tunnels, they were sit, they were getting, they were getting geared up in their hotel room or that hotel room.
So why am I here? And this is because the CIA can’t operate without an attached agency. And so she’s like. And then right that moment, she realized that she’d been, it. Like the CIA couldn’t do anything domestically without being attached to a federal agency like the FBI, which is what she was, or the same permission of the states to operate, by the way. And, and the same thing holds true for the federal government at the local level. They cannot do anything at the local level without the approval of the, of the local jurisdictions, namely the, the municipal police departments or the sheriff’s department.
And I think to a certain degree, the state, the state police, which in California is highway patrol. But, you know, Arizona has their own state troopers. I mean, almost every state has a, has a federal law enforcement agency. Well, after 911, they created the fusion centers, and the fusion centers were where all these law enforcement entities came together into one location. And that was the federal government’s way of wiggling their way into the law enforcement, local law enforcement. And that they have been wanting, that’s their wet dream. They’ve been wanting to do that since the beginning of time, and they finally got their wish after the Patriot act.
And what now we have our. Hold on a second. I’m going to let you talk. I’ve got to take this call. Okay, so what we now have is a standing army through those law, federal law agencies. All right, Gus, I’m going to respond to your doug looks a lot like John Goodman comment. See, when I was younger and still kind of today because he’s gaining weight, I’ve always been compared to Russell Crowe. You know, you take the glasses off and everybody says, I look just like him. Gerard Butler. Sometimes in certain lights, as I’ve gotten older and heavier, then suddenly the John Goodman’s thing started popping up.
I said, you know, it’s rough when you go from looking like Russell Crowe to looking like John Goodman. That’s rough, Mandy. So I want to get back to the rest of chrome, but anyway. All right, so how does the FBI have authorities as a law enforcement agency? For example, the assassination attempt on Trump in Florida. So the FBI is an federal investigative agency. However, in order to operate inside a state, they have to have a permission of the state and inside a county, permission of the sheriff. Now, there has been laws passed and agreements made where it’s basically, you don’t have to ask each time.
It’s just assumed because of. But I like John Goodman. Thanks, Gus. But I like them, too. But yeah, I’d rather look like the newer John Goodman than the older, fatter one. But anyway. Or younger fatter one, should I say? All right, but anyway, so the FBI’s are authorities as a law enforcement. They don’t constitutionally ask. Most people staff that authority. But, but in the way it’s today, they have to, they have to get the state’s permission. And that is kind of within the constitution. But I’m going to reread something that’s going to blow that all up.
I’m going to read something, the constitution to tell you that they’re not even supposed to exist. Are you ready for it? No, I know it wasn’t an insult. Thanks, Gus. I. What, what? Do I have it highlighted correctly? We’re going to get there, so let’s read what you’ve got. But then when we get where I’m getting ready to get to. So, so first of all, if there was a lot of debate on whether or not federal government should even be allowed to call up the moshe. All right, and so here’s what it says. And this, and that’s actually ties directly into what I’m getting ready to say.
Congress have the power to provide for, calling forth the militia, to execute the laws of the union, FDA, ATF, all of those agencies that execute the law. No, it’s supposed to be the militia. If there’s any federal, domestic federal law, all these agencies are unconstitutional. Think about that for a second. In order for an domestic federal law to be executed, it’s supposed to go through the local militia. Now, the local militia, I’m not just talking the unorganized militia, meaning all of us. I’m talking the organized militia. I’m talking about the militia that exists at properly funded, it’s organized, it’s uniformed, falls under the sheriff.
That militia, which basically doesn’t exist anymore. I mean, 24 states still have state militias, but not in the form that they’re supposed to be in. California still does. Yeah, California still does. It’s one of the 24 states. Yeah. Which is surprising. Well, the even more surprising part about the California state militia is it’s the only state militia in the country that, that trains with live ammunition. Ammunition, right. It’s really weird. I’ve got a couple friends or members of state militia there in California. I’m not sure if Oregon does. I still have to look it up, but I’m gonna assume they do.
But I don’t know yet. I haven’t looked it up. So then it says, or suppress insurrections and repel invasions. What’s an insurrection? An insurrection needs to be suppressed by a militia. So then an insurrection would be what? A violent, military type action that requires a militia to suppress it. So now let’s go back to January 6. That ain’t no. That ain’t no insurrection, man. Don’t look like one, don’t smell like one, don’t sound like one. Now, if you go to the 14th amendment, if it doesn’t look like a duck, and it doesn’t walk like a duck, and it doesn’t quack like a duck, then it’s probably not a duck.
Or as doctor, or as that. Like Doctor Douglas Frank says about the election anomalies and all that. That ain’t natural, man. But, but so our militias are there to not only protect the communities, but when it comes to the federal use of it, Congress has the ability to call forth the militia. Now, if Congress has a power to call forth the militia, that also kills. Another idea. Well, you know, the president approved if a militia be not up to the president to call forth the militia. The president deploys the militia once the militia is called forth.
But the calling forth of the militia is Congress. Congress should have the power to call forth the militia, to execute the laws, suppress insurrections, repel invasions. No other reasons. Those are the three reasons they’re allowed to call up the militia. No other reasons. How often is the federal government call up, say, the national Guard or state militias for things other than execute the laws, unions, press insurrections, repel invasion. Someone might say, well, gosh, then what good is the militia then? Well, the militia belongs to the state. The state can call them up for all kinds of stuff, like protecting communities, keeping illegal aliens from coming into their state, throwing sandbags after a natural disaster.
But for the federal government, that Congress to call up a militia and put it into the actual service of the United States, execute the laws, suppress insurrections, repel invasions. That’s it then it says. And this explains how it’s up to the. To regulate the militia, but it still belongs to the states. What would regulate the militia? What do you mean by that, Doug? Well, you’ve heard it, right? A well regulated militia. Second Amendment. This ties to that and the Second Amendment hadn’t even been written yet. Okay. To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the militia and governing.
And for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states. Remember, they belong to the state first, respectively. The appointment of the officers and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress. Congress can make regulate. In other words, put the militia in a good order. That’s what a well regulated militia is. Go back to Second Amendment, is it is a. In other words, a well trained, well equipped militia that’s got, you know, it’s got its proper firearms, got proper man munition, uniforms, equipment, whatever.
And it’s for Congress to provide that and the training on how. What to train. How to train. But the actual training, the actual appointment of the officers, the actual authority over the militia is at the state level, put in good order. Thank you. Yep. It’s well regulated. Militia is a militia that’s in good order. This is from the 1828 Webster’s dictionary. Regulated. Part of simple passive, adjust by rule, method or forms, put in good order, subject to rules or restrictions, but. And notice they’re in order of commonality of usage. Right. And so adjust by rule or to, or method or forms.
Like when you regulate the flow of water from your hose, you’re regulating that, you’re adjusting it. Bye. Method, for example, that was the most common usage, was regulating that. Then the next one, when it came to the politics, is put in good order. A well regulated militia is a militia that’s in good order. Well, it’s well armed, it’s well equipped, well trained, so on and so forth. And that’s what this section is basically saying, that it’s up to Congress to provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the militia and providing the training methods. What. Put it in writing.
This is what you guys are to follow as an organized militia. Now, you’re not talking about the rest of us, the unorganized militia. We’re talking about the organized militia. And that’s why they don’t teach the constitution of schools anymore. Well, yeah, because so tackle Berry says, so Biden can’t go after states that use their militia how they see fit within the respective states. Correct. There. They belong to states first. It’s none of his business. The federalized militia. No, no. It’s. It belongs to state first. Can’t say. Well, no, no, no, you can’t use your user militia, however they want.
The only federal authority over the militia is if they’re called up by Congress and then has to be for the purpose of executing laws of unions, pressing insurrections, repelling invasions. Repelling invasions. You know, like at the border. Just saying. So. So what examples of who would be an officer, an officer of the United States would be someone like, this is not. Not a happy campers. They’re going back to the 14th amendment, section three. They’re still trying to wrap their mind because I said present doesn’t count on that list. Officers would be like the secretary of state, the assistant to the assistant of the secretary of state.
You know, all those types of offices. Those are the officers. Judges also receive a commission, just like officers. Military officers could be included in that. But what they’re referring to specifically are offices. The holders of offices such as secretary of state, things like that. But does not list the president. President would be listed by name if he was on there. Hit the like button, you history buffs. Thank you, Avery. All right, so because we need. We need all the likes we can get, and then what you do is you tell other people, say, hey, man, I saw this episode that said this.
This whole. Where can I find it? Here’s the link. Right? But anyway, all right, so let’s get back on target here. So now, notice that the militia, though, at the end of that clause, once again, it goes back to the states. The states are in charge of the authority of training the militia, the authority of appointing the officers, and so on and so forth. They belong to states first. All right, now, yeah, you know, the militias are supposed to be utilized much more than they are. Every state should have one. And the missiles should be used to help kick the federal government out of these states, unless they request federal presence, for example.
Let’s use an example. FEMA, since it’s been in the news so much lately. FEMA is a federal agency. They cannot operate in a state unless they’re requested, unless it’s for the purpose of. And there’s. There’s a list somewhere, I think it’s article four, where it talks about how they can come in with their agencies. But anyway, ultimately, though, FEMA, in order to operate in a state emergency management. Right? That’s what FEMA is. Federal emergency management Agency, uh, cannot operate in the state of the state. Doesn’t invite them. Well, that’s why. Isn’t that why they require. They declare an emergency? Right? That’s what.
That’s what. A declaration of an emergency by the state or emergency declaration, I guess what they call it. So go back to Katrina and remember they were given Bush a hard time. I’m not gonna say good or bad about Bush. I’m telling you the situation. Okay, I’ll say all the bad about you. Say the best stuff about him later, but I just want to talk about this situation. And believe it or not, Bush was following the constitution. He knew his FEMA couldn’t go in without authority from the state. So the Fo FemA was holding back. He got accused of waiting too long.
But Governor Blanco of Louisiana saying, no, we’re not going to do an emergency decoration. We don’t want Bush’s fema here. But then when all the help broke loose. Oh, look, FEMA took too long. What was. Was. It was Blanco there? I thought it was Blanco. Um, I thought it was. I thought the governor there was, um, the indian guy. No, not that point. No. Okay, now, yeah, yeah, I know you’re talking about. I can’t remember his name, but it’s on my tongue. I know who it is, too. I don’t know why. I can’t think of it either.
But. But it was Blanco at the time, right? With a j, I think. But whatever. I mean, I’m. I knew a couple people who lived in Louisiana, and they said he was actually a pretty good governor and that he had. He had aspirations to run for president, but he wasn’t a natural born citizen. Right. Well, and Bobby Jindal. Jindal. Thank you. I knew he started the J. Bobby Jindal. And, yeah, he’s not a natural born citizen, so he’s technically eligible for the presidency. But no, Blanco was governor at the time, and then trying to remember who the name of the mayor was, but anyway.
And neither one of them declared a state of emergency, so FEMA couldn’t come in. But there are times you do want the federal government come into your state because they have resources, they have things available that you might not. So, yeah, by virtue. By virtue of this, of the Federal reserve. That’s part of it. And so, like, for example, with Helene and. And Milton, the two hurricanes, Helene specifically going up, you know, through western North Carolina, where did. It’s a. And so on and so forth. And the states are like, hey, we need help. Now. The federal agency can go in now.
The government is expected to come in with its resources, but until there’s a declaration of emergency. Declaration. Until the state says, we want your help, they’re not supposed to operate in the state. Hmm. The president cannot federalize the National Guard, Melvin. The Congress has to call up the National Guard, which is considered a part of the militia. According to the Militia act of 1902, I think it is, which is part of the Dick act. So funny that it’s the Dick act. That was the last name of the. I know. Legislator that I get it. I just saying if fitting, you know, I always get giggles when I talk about the Dick Act.
I don’t know why. But anyway, so, but no, the president can deploy the National Guard, cannot federalize it, but can deploy it once it is called up. National Guard being a part of the militia that Congress has to call up the militias and the National Guards part of it. National Guard is not. It belongs to states first. It’s not supposed to operate federally until Congress calls it. Once it’s called into the actual service, then the president can deploy. Or at least that’s the way it’s supposed to be. Courtney, the Constitution. All right, we’ll talk to you.
I talk a little bit about Washington DC, folks. I don’t know if anybody really wants to talk about Washington DC unless we’re talking about it like being like turned into like glass, glass parking lot. Wow. John Adams could not stand Washington DC, the very, very, very tail end of his presidency. They moved to Washington DC and it was the president’s mansion, I think it was called the time wasn’t called the White House yet. And he hated Washington DC. John Adams called it a, what we call it a sinking marsh filled with bloodsuckers. He met the mosquitoes.
Washington DC, the museum, I don’t know about if it’s a museum, you know, I’m sure that there’s some interesting things that are in the muse in museum. I like going to Washington DC, DC. It’s a lot of fun because I’m a history buff. Well, I, if I’m going to go to, if I was going to do history stuff and give me, I’ll say I’ll go to Philadelphia first. Real special is be politically correct. Call it the Richard act. Oh, you’re great. Uh, SD gardener. I worked at DC for 15 years. I got so sick of it, I moved out of the country safer from, with the cartels.
All right, well, it’s soft land there. And some I’ve heard, I’ve never been, I’ve never gone out of my way to confirm this, but I’ve heard a couple times that geologists claim that because the ground so soft that Washington DC is actually sinking, it really is a swampy cesspool. But anyway, well, what, I mean, that one, one of the areas where, well, the area where they have the State department is called foggy. Bottom. Yeah, I see. And I thought that was a reference to Pelosi, so. Yeah. Okay. This show’s gone off the rails. Yeah, it’s gone.
All right. So the next clause. Congress shall have the power to exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever over such district. District of Columbia, Washington DC. The seat of government part, not the city that exists around it, which was created by the Organic act of 1871, but to exercise exclusive legislation over the district not exceeding 10 miles square. They actually, from what I understand, they decreased it a little bit at one point, as may by session of other state of particular states, Maryland and Virginia giving up some land and the acceptance of Congress become the seat of government of the United States.
The seat of government means no residences, only government buildings and maybe a commercial center per se, but it’s not supposed to have residences, residencies in Ithoodae. Okay. And then it says, and this is where it gets fun. Well, let me back up. Alright. So what it’s saying is Congress is in charge of all law regarding the District of Columbia. So from a constitutional standpoint within that square, it really does take an act of Congress to put in a stop sign, literally. Then it says, to exercise like authority, in other words, all authority, congressional authority over these things, over all places purchased by the consent of the legislature of the state, which the same shall be for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards and other needful buildings.
This is domestic federal property. That’s what they’re talking about here. In other words, what it’s saying is this, in order for the federal government to own property outside the Washington DC, within the United States, it has to be. It’s required in order for the federal government to have this property, it has to be purchased. Money has to be paid by the. By the consent of the legislature of the state. The state legislature has to okay it. And that has to be for the purposes of needful buildings. It gives you some examples here, but what it means by needful buildings are buildings that fall within the authority of the federal government in the sense of the powers granted and vested in them through the Constitution, if they cannot operate in a manner outside those authorities on that federal property.
Now there’s a few issues that comes up here. One, we have to ask ourselves how much of the federal properties that are owned within the United States were gained through the purchase and consent of the legislatures and for needful buildings, all three being applied. How many? Nevada is like close to 90% owned by the federal government. It’s federal property. Did they purchase that property? No. Was it by the consent of a legislature. No, legislature didn’t exist yet. Oh, you want to become a state, huh? We own all this property. We don’t give you statehood. That’s what happened.
It was more blackmail than anything. How about this? National parks? How about national monuments? Did the state say, okay? Yeah. Here, give us some money. You got. We give you. Okay. No, they took it. How about that? Yeah, that’s scary. Federal public land. And there and, and in the west. Notice all that, Red. The federal government owns more property west of the Mississippi than the entire United States size. The United States east of the Mississippi. And, and, and look at the federal land in Alaska. And Alaska is basically the size of, basically this right here. It’s like half the United States size.
Close to it. Yeah. So, I mean, you look at California, all the land east of base east, basically east of the mountains. All of Nevada, probably 80% of Arizona, a good 60% of New Mexico, 50% of Colorado, maybe 70% of Wyoming, a good 80% to 90% of Idaho. I mean, it’s just, that’s disgusting. And now when we look at all of that, then we ask ourselves, remember when Dobbs v. Jackson in 2021, Supreme Court said, oh, invalidate Roe v. Wade, another federal government’s business. It goes back to the states. And what did the, how did the Biden administration respond? Oh, well, I’ll tell you what then.
In those states that reject abortion, we’ll put abortion clinics on the federal land in those states. No needful buildings. Man needs to be authorized. It’s not an off. Abortion is not a power authorized. The United states government. You can’t put legally abortion clinics on federal land in a state that says, we don’t want abortion in our state because you don’t have the authority over that issue. Now we have a candidate, Kamala Harris, or Kamala Harris, however you pronounce that stupid name, camel toe Harris, who is saying, oh, well, we gotta, you know, get legislation to, you know, codify Roe v.
Wade. If they don’t have authority in the first place, how can you pass legislation? The, um. Let’s, let’s, let’s, let’s finish this last little part of article eight or one section eight. Yeah, one section eight. Let’s finish this last little part because I want to get into something that was brought up last night on the show. Last part. This is the necessary and proper clause. It is the excuse used for implied powers, according to implied powers. The idea of the doctrine of implied powers. There are powers in the constitution that are not the constitution. Well, it’s sort of right.
Here’s what it says. Congress have the power to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers and all other powers vested this constitution in the government of the United States or in any department or officer thereof. In other words, there are, there is a specific list. We just went through it. Article one, section eight of powers given to the federal government. But they, in order to carry out those powers, sometimes there’s things the federal government needs to do that might not be listed the constitution. But if they are necessary in order to carry out the power that is in the constitution, then they can do it.
For example, federal government’s going to establish a post office, but there’s no specific authority in the Constitution for them to purchase the equipment for the post office to carry out its duties or to hire the construction team to build that building. But it’s necessary and proper in order to carry out the power of establishing a post office. Therefore, even though those powers are not listed, they are a power. But the problem is, implied powers takes that to a whole new level. Basically says, well, if it has anything to do with the power that exists, it implies that they have the power.
So based on that idea, since the federal government’s job is to establish a post office, then it implies that they can regulate the hell out of FedEx and ups and all those other agency or companies that carry basically packages. Because. Because it’s just like the post office. Therefore, it implies that they can regulate the hell out of them. But is it necessary and proper for the post office to be established and be run? No. Then it’s not an authority. Implied powers and necessary and proper are two different things. Okay, so here was the question that I know I got last night, and I don’t know if this person is in this chat or not, but I’m still going to ask it.
Okay, how do we unwind all of this shit? I mean, is it, is it, would it be as simple as just saying, okay, we’re going to go back and we’re going to, we’re going to go back and retroactively. Everything that was passed after the 13th amendment is basically null and void because it’s all based on bullshit and we’re going to go back to that point in time and then start, start from over. Are we going to, or do we have to go back to a. We have to erase the constitution, rewrite it, and then start a brand new government? I mean, what’s, what’s the, what’s the remedy here, what do we, what remedy do we have? Well, not all of it.
I like the 25th amendment, but anyway, notice I could only come up with one out of all of them. But anyway, I like the original 13th Amendment. Yeah, I like that. I don’t mind the 27th amendment too bad. But anyway. Which was actually a part of the original bill of rights. But anyway, how do we unwind all this shit? I mean, I’m gonna give you. That’s a loaded question. Yes. And I’m gonna give you. I’m gonna give you two answers. Okay. I’m gonna give you my audience friendly answer. And then what I really think. All right, all right.
My audience friendly answer, which I do believe is possible, is we do we, we start using mechanisms, start rolling stuff back. Here’s the thing. We have to stay on it. And our children and their children, their children, it’s a process that cannot be led up on. And we would have to a. Get rid of, you know, reverse Reynolds v. Sims, get rid of the 17th amendment. Those would be the two first. In other words, become more of a republic, less of a democracy. Then once you get those in place, then you change the income tax back.
You know, you just piece by piece, bit by bit, you’ve got to get back to what it was originally. You’re not going to be able to, in one fill, sweep, flip us light switch, boom, you’re there. It’s going to. It’s a process. It would take time. It took us 240 years to get here. It’ll probably take us over 200 years to get back. If that was the method that was followed. However, what I really think is, because I know history, and when you look back in history and everything goes sour, you know what fixes it? Collapse.
Well, economic collapses. It falls apart. And then you, and then you start on day one or as, or I guess as Hillary would say, hit the reset button. Yeah, that was easy. That was the old don’t. Don’t you remember the old staples button? That was easy. Yeah, I remember. But, but no, ultimately, my fear is to do it right. And the way I was talking about first, you’re right tackle bear. It would take generations. And I don’t know if we have the testicular fortitude or if the american people are equipped with the ability and the education and all that, or the patience.
I don’t know if I. That. But that’s, that’s the proper. I think patient is running extraordinarily thin. Well, let me say this. I believe it’s going to get a lot worse before it ever gets better. I hope I’m wrong. I don’t think, I don’t think you’re wrong at all. In fact, I think you’re, I think you’re way more right than you realize. And I said, and I, here’s what I said on Sunday night on for the republic. I’m not saying it’s gonna happen, but I believe this is what’s in their arrogant little minds. We are going to make sure we get our person.
Trump’s not going to get the presidency. Our person is going to be in there whether they like it or nothing. Cheat. We do whatever we can. If somehow Trump still wins, we will refuse to seat him. And if that doesn’t work, we will kill him. And then after all of that, if they really keep pushing it, then we’ll resort to violence. We’ll drag people out into their front lawns if we have to put a bullet in their head. That’s what they’re thinking deep down in their heads. Now, that said, and I hope I’m wrong, I do believe it’s going to get really nasty.
And that’s one of the main motivators for me moving out of southern California. I didn’t want to be anywhere near any population center. I am eight hour drive from San Francisco, eight hour drive from Portland. I am as far on the west coast. I am as far as I can get from any population center. And that’s because I believe it’s going to get nasty. All I’ve got to say is, if you’re not one that believe in preparing, you might want to change that attitude. And amen to that. Amen to that. Well, on that note there, Mister Gibbs, where can people find you, sir? Doctor speaks.com and, and a matter of fact, tomorrow on the power hour, I’m hosting the power hour.
Well, either tomorrow Thursday, but 90% I’m doing it tomorrow. So if you’re not familiar with the power hour, definitely check it out tomorrow. I’m also here on Tuesdays, won’t be here next Tuesday, wife’s birthday, but then we’ll be back after that. I’m on KMET 1490 AM, and on Saturdays from one to three Pacific and on two San Diego stations, KCBQ and KPRZ. On Saturday evenings, KCBQ. The answer, San Diego at 08:00 p.m. pacific and KPRC K praise at 09:00 p.m. pacific. And I’m also been doing a lot of videos with the Warhammer rumble.com slash Warhammer want to do videos with me for some reason? I guess.
I don’t know. I’ll stay out of all that. I. All I know is he said, hey, man, we got to talk about. We did a video on the articles of Confederation this morning. The. How did your video. No, I didn’t feel the earthquake yesterday, Gardner. But then again, I sleep through earthquakes. Yeah. If Doug is asleep, good luck getting him up. Or it was actually safira that asked me that. Sd Gardner asked me, how do we find the power hour? A power hour radio. Um, you know, I’ll, uh. Hang on a second. I’ll tell you the link because I don’t have the chat room, um, up at the moment.
Uh, power hour.com. and it’s a nationally syndicate. Nope, that’s not right. That is wrong. They changed their website. Hang on a second. Let me find it. The power. The power hour. So you got put in. No, that’s saying it’s not working. I don’t know because I had it up last week. Well, hang on. Let’s do it this way. Let me find it for sure because I have it. Power hour. Yeah. It’s an amazing thing because I don’t know if you remember the power hour from long ago. I’m trying to remember the woman who used to host it, Janice or Joyce Riley.
Back check. Yep. Joyce Reilly and Dave von Kleist. And I actually had. I’ve had Dave von Kleist on a couple of times because he did the. He did the documentary 911 in plain sight plan, and that was the. That’s the documentary that woke me up. That red pilled me. So. Good guy. Well, now there are shows. In matter of fact, you can find me. I was on power hour October 9 with alan, but I’ll be doing this one on my own. You can go to deezer.com, deezer.com and look up the power hour. And all of their podcasts are there to listen live.
I’m not sure. I was looking for just a while ago, they sent me the link. I don’t have it, but I love doing these programs. I will be also on KMET. This Saturday will be my last show for a while because I’m being preempted by football like, three Saturdays in a row. But the San Diego stations, Cape praise and KCBQ every week, so. Yeah, but. Douglas v. Gibbs.com guy questions Douglas v. Gibbs.com. if you want to go straight to my blog, politicalpistachio.com, that’s the way to find me. And. And what I do I’ve got advertisers for two thirds of what I do.
So you know what that means, right? The other third, it’s my listeners. So if you want to become a. If you want to become a donor or if you want to become a patron, $9 a month. Hit the join link in my website. It really helps. All right. And new books, I mean, on the Verge, you get new books out. I’ve got ten of them out there. I’m on the verge of two more books and been working my butt off. Got a little bit more time now up here. And I’ve got two of them that are close.
Part two of my history book and then a fiction novel, my first published fiction novel. I’ve been a fiction writer my whole life, but finally decided, let’s put this baby out there. So I’m doing a lot of work on it. So there you go. Very good. Well, thank you there, Mister Gibbs. And I love coming here, folks. So. So Ron’s show, the station here, the Untold Doug, is just a little raw because the angels haven’t made the World Series since 2000. What? Or something like that. No, no, see, baseball season. Baseball season. Dodgers are getting ready to play for the title and I’ve never heard of that team.
What? But here’s the thing. It’s been a rough sports life for me. Yeah. Well, the Raiders and the Razorbacks both got their butts kicked over the weekend. So, you know, it’s, it’s a rough sports life for me right now between the Angels and the Razorbacks. And, and then Oregon State’s doing okay. They’re four and two. Well, yeah. And what, in the pack two? Yeah, it’s a pack two. Hey, you gotta love their loyalty to geography, I guess. Well, there, there’s like six teams, I think, from the mountain west, the beginning. Join the pack. The B division.
San Diego State. Yeah. Well, as well, see, Oregon State was one of the b teams before. Now it’s gonna be one of the eight teams because all the teams that are smaller schools, smaller than them. But anyway, no, it’s always a pleasure. I love being on this show. Definitely give Ron the love to, you know, check out his other shows. Keep coming to this page, but especially come when you see that thing at the top. It says, learn the constitution. Yeah. And there was a couple people in here said, hey, we’ve, we shared it out and nobody’s really interested.
So it’s like, you know, we do what we can to make it interesting. But I mean, it is. I recognize that it’s it can be a little dry because it is what it is. But, you know, we talk about. I’m talking about. I understand. Look, you and I. You and I are. You and I love this kind of stuff, but most people who, you know, never had civics, they don’t understand government. It wasn’t ever taught, you know, and that’s all by design. It’s this. It’s done that way for you not to know how things work. And if you don’t know how things work, it’s like if you sat down and tried to play monopoly and you didn’t know the rules of the game, how would you put.
How could you win? You can’t because you don’t know the rules of the game. And basically what has happened is that the powers that be have essentially hidden the rulebook from us, not taught it to us, so that we don’t know when we’ve been duped. Right. So that onus is on us to. To make that happen for people. So. And, you know, it’s. It’s. That’s why we do this class weekly. Well, not weekly, because there are those moments like when Doug wants to take his wife out for a birthday. But aside from that, we’re here. Exactly.
So, on that note, guys, um, uh, y’all have a wonderful evening. I will be back here in about 20 minutes with Jim Willey. Gonna do Jim Willie live for I don’t know how long. Depends on how, on the stamina is of his voice, but I’ll be back here at about 20. And apparently, Nino is airing my show that I did with him and ghost from the other day. It’s airing right now on YouTube, so I’m gonna go over there and be in the chat there for a couple minutes, and then I’ll be back to do the live with Jim Willie.
Heredithe and 20, so hope everybody tunes in. Look forward to seeing you then. And until then, peace out, and happy birthday to your wife. Absolutely. Thank you all. Absolutely. Love you, audience. So, thank you for being here. Appreciate you. I’ll see you in two weeks. Thanks, guys. Good night. Bye.
[tr:tra].
Author
