All I ask is that you read the following before submitting your proof that the Supreme Court Justices are NOT criminals.

The Misunderstood Bill of Rights

Q. I believe we live in a free country with a Bill of Rights that protects our freedoms.

A. What you have is a cleverly-written piece of parchment to go with your chains. You can’t say you’re free when every aspect of your personal and financial life is either outlawed, taxed, regulated, and/or monitored. You most certainly have rights, but the government doesn’t respect any of them. To prove my case, let’s examine each of the so-called Bill of Rights to see if the rhetoric matches the reality.

The First Amendment

The Rhetoric: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

The Reality:

1—The government does respect the establishment of religion whereby the IRS grants tax-exempt status to certain religions: IRS rules govern what constitutes a church and a religion for tax purposes.

2—Obamacare prohibits the free exercise of religion by forcing believers to fund insurance for abortion and birth control. Also banned from the free exercise of religion is political speech in non-profit churches. And under the Covid lockdown scam, worshippers were not allowed to attend church (although liquor stores were allowed to stay open).

3—Freedom of speech is abridged by trumped-up sedition laws (oftentimes prosecuted by means of government perjury or entrapment), by forcing witnesses to testify before a jury, by “hate speech” laws, by forcing taxpayers to “speak” on their tax returns, and by frightening individuals to "speak" their names when demanded by a police officer (who lies that you were seen doing something illegal).

4—Freedom of the press is abridged by censorship laws that criminalize exposure of government wrongdoing (think Julian Assange, Edward Snowden's exposure of NSA spying on Americans). Freedom of the press is also abridged by laws that grant business licenses only to giant media corporations that can afford to follow arbitrary government-mandated rules.

5—The right to peaceably assemble and to petition the government for a redress of grievances is abridged by the “chilling effect” of being labeled a “dissident” and placed on a watch list, or audited by the IRS, or facing a swat-style pretextual raid of your home, or an unknown “sneak-and peek” search without a warrant.

The Second Amendment

The Rhetoric: “A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

The Reality:

Notwithstanding the Supreme Court rulings in District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), the right to keep and bear arms is being infringed by city, state and federal laws. The word “infringe”, by the way, comes from the Latin word infringere—meaning not even the fringe or borders of the right to bear arms can be restricted. Yet we have numerous laws that infringe on the Second Amendment by imposing onerous licensing and regulating schemes few can meet.

In New York City, for instance, it is virtually impossible to obtain a handgun carry-permit to defend your life. Several state laws prohibit the possession of certain types of firearms, such as so-called assault weapons. Some state and local jurisdictions limit magazine capacity and ban outright the possession of high-capacity shotguns, silencers and machineguns. There’s also state and federal laws that prohibit the possession of firearms by felons, as well as for persons who’ve committed certain misdemeanors and other non-violent offenses. These pseudo laws deny you the right to self-preservation--i.e., your fundamental right to life. Watch the best video available on the Second Amendment below or through this link: https://www.bitchute.com/video/r97fASExDww

The Third Amendment

The Rhetoric: “No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of War, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.”

The Reality:

Only Congress can prescribe a law allowing troops in your home in time of war. However, during the War for Southern Independence, Lincoln declared martial law and authorized troops to be quartered in private homes under the assumed powers of “Executive Orders.” Today, under various Executive Orders, the president can likewise put troops in your home, seize your food, and relocate you (in peacetime or war) under regulations prescribed by FEMA—the Federal Emergency and Management Agency.

The Fourth Amendment

The Rhetoric: “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

The Reality:

The courts have watered down the Fourth Amendment protections to the point where it means nothing. They’ve done this by crafting all manner of exceptions to the exclusionary rule: plain view, good faith searches, exigent circumstances, anonymous tips, multiple reentries under one warrant (or piggy-backing a second warrant on the first), Terry Stops, investigative detentions and even unlimited general searches under “pervasive fraud” pretexts.

As if this wasn’t enough, Congress passed the misnamed PATRIOT ACT and other unconstitutional provisions under the guise of a phony “War on Terror.” Now the courts uphold warrantless searches on pure suspicion, secret “sneak-and peek” searches without probable cause or knowledge of the homeowner, and searches without particularly describing “the persons or things to be seized.”

Additionally, the National Security Agency now searches and seizes everyone’s emails, phone calls, and texts “in the cloud.” They can, and do, listen to people’s conversations in homes with voice-activated devices and in vehicles with OnStar tracking (whether you pay the activation fee or not).

The Fifth Amendment

The Rhetoric: “No person shall be held to be held to answer for a capital, or other infamous crime, unless on presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb, nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.”

The Reality:

• The purpose of a Grand Jury Indictment was to protect you from facing the rigors of a trial. But thanks to Supreme Court rulings, that protection has been turned into a rubber stamp for prosecutors. In fact, many critics argue that even a ham sandwich could be indicted. For starters, neither you nor your attorney are allowed to be at the Grand Jury to offer evidence that establishes your innocence. Secondly, prosecutors can use illegally obtained evidence, hearsay, perjury, and withhold favorable evidence that proves your innocence—all without your ability to sue the prosecutor for misconduct.

• The double-jeopardy clause is likewise meaningless. Due to overlapping federal crimes for the same conduct, you can be tried more than once. For example, you can be tried for USC §1956 Money Laundering, then for USC §1957 financial transactions over $10,000, and then for USC 1956(h) for conspiring to launder money—all based on the same conduct. Then, due to the fictional federal/state “dual sovereignty” hoax, you can be tried again in state court for the same money laundering conduct.

Furthermore, at sentencing, you can be punished twice by means of “sentencing enhancements” for prior convictions, arrests without convictions, or even acquittals in criminal trials. The courts have said that “just because a jury didn’t find you guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, that doesn’t mean you were truly innocent.”

Lastly, in addition to all the other double-jeopardy violations, your property can be put on trial in a civil “in rem forfeiture” case—even if you are found not guilty in the criminal case. Under this fictional scenario, the property is guilty of a crime. This is based on Admiralty Law—the so called “law of the seas” that allows seizure and forfeiture of contraband destined for entry into the United States of America. Under this scam, the government recognizes that property within a state is not the United States of America. So, once they grab your property during a search, it is then “transferred” to the jurisdiction of the United States.

• The government can and does compel you in a criminal case to be a witness against yourself. Examples of compelled evidence include: DNA samples, hair samples, voice recordings, handwriting exemplars, fingerprints, photo line ups, and other types of evidence.

Further, and despite Supreme Court dissenters, the majority unconstitutionally “modified” the Fifth Amendment by ruling that the privilege against self-incrimination applies only to compelled verbal testimony. Accordingly, the Supreme Court says you must report your income on a 1040 form—even if your income is derived from criminal activity that incriminates you. The Court has likewise ruled that you must provide your name when a policeman asks for it, upon reasonable suspicion, that you show your driver’s license on request, and that you submit to sobriety tests—again, even if this compelled evidence/testimony incriminates you.

• The due process “protection” is another denied right. Due process simply means whatever the courts say it means. An example is when government agents seize evidence that can prove your innocence and the agents lose that evidence. The Court has ruled that’s not a due process violation unless you can prove the agents deliberately destroyed it.

• Private property IS being taken for public use without compensation. Government agents routinely steal personal property during searches and seizures of homes and businesses. Oftentimes, in drug cases, the police sell the drugs back into the community or plant it on another suspect. In case of non-contraband personal property, government agents routinely lie on the witness stand to make it forfeitable.

Even more common is the theft of property for public use in the form of “property taxes.” This criminal taking is based on the pretense that you actually “own” the property rather than the reality that you merely rent it from the government. In medieval times, under the feudalist system, you rented your land from the warlord for a fee/feif (called infeudation). Like here, you had the “right” to transfer the warlord’s property to another person (called subinfeudation). Today, when you transfer the warlord’s property to another person they call it “selling.” The paper deed (lease) merely transfers the rental obligation for someone else to pay the warlord’s feif/rent).

You can call it “property taxes” all you like, but if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it’s a duck by another name. You are merely a “tenant” of government property. If you truly owned your property you would have what’s called an allodial title, but you don’t. Quoting from Wikipedia:

Allodial title constitutes ownership of real property (land, buildings, and fixtures) that is independent of any superior landlord. Allodial title is related to the concept of land held “in allodium”, or land ownership by occupancy and defense of the land. Historically, much of land was uninhabited and could, therefore, be held “in allodium”.

Most property ownership in common law jurisdictions is fee simple. In the United States, the land is subject to eminent domain by federal, state and local government, and subject to the imposition of taxes by state and/or local governments, and there is thus no true allodial land. Some states within the U.S. (notably, Nevada and Texas) have provisions for considering land allodial under state law, and the term may be used in other circumstances. Land is “held of the Crown” in England and Wales and other jurisdictions in the Commonwealth realms. Some realms (such as Australia and Canada) recognize aboriginal title, a form of allodial title that does not originate from a Crown grant. Some land in the Orkney and Shetland Islands, known as udal land, is held in a manner akin to allodial land in that these titles are not subject to the ultimate ownership of the Crown. (emphasis added)

In essence, all that you think you own belongs to the government (including your labor) because they have a superior claim on it pursuant to their doctrine of "eminent domain." See Kelo v. City of New London, 545 U.S. 469 (2005). You are owned and denied the right to property like black slaves in the in the United States of America, from its founding in 1776 until 1865. The 13th and 14th Amendments didn't truly emancipate black slaves; instead, they "authorized" the federal government to cage and own everyone. Changing masters is not emancipation. See The Star-Spangled Deception for an explanation.

The Sixth Amendment

The Rhetoric: “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed; which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.”

The Reality:

• Prosecutors oftentimes deprive defendants of a speedy trial by jailing them for up to three years in order to force them to confess. This is done when a defendant cannot be pressured into pleading guilty, especially when there’s not enough evidence to convict him. Other reasons for the delay include buying time to threaten and bribe witnesses into lying on a defendant.

• You do not get an impartial jury because jurors are chosen mostly from registered voter lists—i.e., dupes who still believe in the system and imagine they are doing their civic duty by helping the government violate the rights of defendants.

• Another reason you don’t get an impartial jury is because many (if not most) of the jurors and/or their relatives are government employees or they receive a government check. Yet another instance where you are denied an impartial jury is when a defendant gets an all-white or mostly white jury that cannot be truly impartial against a minority race.

• The clause providing trial in “the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed” is another violation. Many times a trial is held in a different state or district than where the crime was committed. Thus, prosecutors can cherry-pick any state of district for trial by charging a “conspiracy” to commit a crime when the conspirators are in different states or districts. When the case involves mail fraud, the prosecutor can hold a trial in any state in which the mail was received by a victim—meaning, any of the 50 states or districts most favorable to convicting you. It’s called “forum shopping.”

• The tyrannical conspiracy laws also allow a prosecutor to violate your right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation. Conspiracy is a vague charge that permits prosecutors to loosely draw an indictment and bring in surprise evidence.

• Your right to confront witnesses against you is likewise meaningless since the courts permit prosecutors to bribe witnesses into lying in exchange for reduced sentences or zero prison time.

• Your right to compulsory process for summoning all witnesses in your favor is denied in full or part if you are indigent or had your assets stolen by law enforcement agents. When you are indigent, the courts decide which witnesses you can have—after you divulge what their testimony will be and after this information has been shared with the prosecutor. (Not surprisingly, courts have ruled that prosecutors are not obliged to tell you in advance what witnesses they intend to call or what the witness testimony will be.) And in conspiracy cases, where everyone you know is charged or threatened with prosecution if they don’t assist the prosecutor, you won’t have any “favorable” witnesses to subpoena.

• The last clause appears to guarantee you assistance of counsel. But if you are indigent or have your assets seized before trial, you’ll get an appointed attorney or public defender. That means you won’t get effective assistance of counsel because appointed attorneys work on a pro bono basis, essentially for free, and do little or nothing for your defense: they have paying clients to take care of. If you get a public defender instead of a court-appointed attorney, you will discover they are so overloaded with dozens of cases that little time will be devoted to you. Meanwhile, the prosecutors have unlimited resources and investigators while you sit in a jail cell without bond because the government seized all the assets you needed to post bail.

The Seventh Amendment

The Rhetoric: “In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury shall be otherwise re examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.”

The Reality:

The trial by jury in civil cases suffers from the same jury “selections” as criminal trials.

The Eighth Amendment

The Rhetoric: “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishment inflicted.”

The Reality:

• Excessive bail is routinely set in amounts up to one million dollars, and courts completely deny bail under the federal Bail Reform Act. Such is not merely excessive bail, it’s an infinite bail.

• Excessive fines are imposed when placed on indigent defendants (but not on wealthy corporations and their executives).

• Cruel and unusual punishments are inflicted on defendants by imprisoning them for decades for victimless statutory crimes, by subjecting them to unhealthy meals, by denying adequate medical care, and by various deprivations of human needs, mental cruelty, harassment, and other humiliations.

The Ninth Amendment

The Rhetoric: “The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”

The Reality:

The federal government does not respect any enumerated rights, let alone unspecified rights.

The Tenth Amendment

The Rhetoric: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

The Reality:

The Supreme Court’s expanded interpretation of the power to tax, to regulate interstate commerce, and to provide for the General Welfare have rendered this amendment null and void.

Q. Okay, you’ve convinced me that the Bill of Rights offers no protection. Are there any other amendments that are meaningless?

A. A few subsequent amendments also pretend to protect us, so let’s review them.

The Thirteenth Amendment

The Rhetoric: “Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude except as punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to its jurisdiction.”

The Reality:

Today, Americans pay 40% of their income in taxes; they don’t start working for themselves until May of each year. Consider that medieval serfs only had to give up 30% of their labor in crops to the warlord, but “free” Americans must surrender 40%. Moreover, most of the federal taxes go toward so-called entitlement programs and to support the military industrial complex. Translation: it is involuntary servitude when you are forced to work for someone else’s benefit.

The Fourteenth Amendment

The Rhetoric: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law, nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

The Reality:

The ostensible purpose of this post-slavery amendment was to ensure that former slaves were treated as equals. It explicitly made them (and everyone else) citizens of the United States in addition to citizens of the state they reside in. Prior to this amendment, people residing in states were not “federal citizens.” In other words, this amendment granted the federal government en personam jurisdiction over everyone by creating a “dual citizenship” status: a citizen of your state, plus a citizen of the United States (the federal enclave called the District of Columbia).

Prior to the War for Southern Independence (aka the deceitfully named Civil War) there was no such thing as dual citizenship. What this amendment did was transform state sovereignty to a new consolidated national government, just as the anti-federalists warned. In effect, everyone became the property of the federal government, and thereby subject to regulation and taxation even if you reside in a foreign country.

Furthermore, the “privileges and Immunities” Clause, as well as “due process” and “equal protection of the law” mean nothing. The infamous 1860 Slaughterhouse case dispensed with them when the Supreme Court upheld a monopoly in Louisiana by a group of seven butchers in New Orleans. Twenty-five other butchers had brought suit due to being barred from their livelihood. They lost the case and this decision has never been repealed. It’s just as George Orwell wrote in Animal Farm: “Some animals are more equal than others.”

The Fifteenth Amendment

The Rhetoric: “The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.”

The Reality:

Both federal and state governments deny and abridge the right of convicted felons to vote. Also, every incarcerated felon is forced into a “condition of servitude”—i.e., to work in prison. Serving a sentence that includes forced labor is involuntary servitude. Furthermore, nothing in the federal Constitution grants Congress the power to deny voting rights to felons. What happened to the claim of “equal protection” in the 14th Amendment and the right to life (self-preservation)?

Although the right to vote in rigged elections is dubious at best, it is currently being denied to over 25 million Americans tagged as felons.

The Nineteenth Amendment

The Rhetoric: “The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied by the United States or by any State on account of sex.”

The Reality:

This suffrage amendment granting women the right to vote but it is almost meaningless: the system is rigged to favor the candidate with the most money and the one backed by the mass media.

The Twenty-Fourth Amendment

The Rhetoric: “The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President of Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.”

The Reality:

The right to vote is denied to certain individuals for failure to pay an “other” tax—e.g., every person who is convicted of tax evasion or tax fraud is ineligible to vote. Again, nothing in the Constitution grants Congress the power to deny voting rights to felons. What happened to no taxation without representation?

The Twenty-Sixth Amendment

The Rhetoric: “The right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of age.”

The Reality:

Same reality described under the Nineteenth Amendment.

If you have read all the foregoing you are eligible to file your proof that the Supreme Court Justices are NOT criminals. Simply fill out the contact form below with your proof.

Copyright 2024 by Ken Pealock. All rights reserved.