Question Posed to Ron Branson: "Do you have a suitable response for this?"
Question Posed to Ron Branson
"Do you have a suitable response for this?
Arnie Rosner wrote:
Do you have a suitable response for this? John Dummett is a candidate for president.
Begin forwarded message:
From: "John A. Dummett" <jdummett@...>
Subject: Re: Mr. Branson, may we call upon you for a simple solution?
Date: May 10, 2012 9:59:11 AM PDT
Cc: Arnie Rosner <arnie@...>
GreetingsIn California we have the initiative process but there is a huge flaw. First the Attorney General must enfoce the people sponsored bill. Proposition Eight was passed by a huge margin but the the AG of California Brown refused to enforce the law. Then the second problem with the initiative process is there is a sunset clause. There is only one way to ensure any law remains and that is by the amendment process. I don't know how other States handle their initiative system.
Ron Branson's Response:
I am well aware of this now manifest alleged flaw within the Initiative Process which became apparent to me years prior to Proposition 8, and I initially wrote within the very first version of the Initiative the remedy. That was in April of 1995.
When the citizens initially sought to pass Prop 22, I sought to inform them that they were approaching this marriage issue in a backward manner. It has to be J.A.I.L. passage prior to Prop 8.
First off, we must lay some ground work. When it comes to an ultimate showdown between the People and their government, who is the last and final authority? Here, your question revisits this issue.
This question was paramount in the minds of our Founding Fathers prior to the writing of our Constitution, and their findings are set forth in their words, "...let facts be submitted to a candid world." Declaration of Independence, July 4th, 1776. It should be noted that their words of this Dec. of Indep. were passed in Congress by an unanimous vote, so that there can be no question as to where they stood.
They proudly penned the words, "governments are institute among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing it powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness."
The People's Initiative Process in our State's Constitution is the manifest power of these very same rights asserted by our Founding Fathers in the establishment of our nation. Now if we cannot settle this point clearly, absolutely, and once and for all, then we face the question here presented to me, "Do you have a suitable response for this?" In my mind, I have no doubt who is in ultimate control, and it is the People! Do we need a debate on this question? I am persuaded that this presents a "suitable response" to issue!
If we have resolved that issue, let us turn to the wording of the Initiative Process within our California Constitution. "All political power is inherent in the People. Government is instituted for their protection, security, and benefit, and they have the right to alter or reform it when the public good may require." Art. II, Sec. 1.
I would love to expound as to the meaning of the words, "All", "political power", "inherent" and "People," but hopefully I can safely assume that that shall not be necessary.
So, what I have thus far established is that the Initiative Process is to the states what the Declaration of Independence is to this nation. Are we all in agreement on that?
The above being true, J.A.I.L.s reasserts this same authority of our Founding Fathers within the J.A.I.L Initiative itself as follows:
"20. Enforcement. No person exercising strict enforcement of the findings of a Special Grand Jury shall be held liable civilly, criminally, or in contempt.
21. Redress. The provisions of this Amendment are in addition to other redress that may exist and are not mutually exclusive.
22. Challenges. No judge under the jurisdiction of the Special Grand Jury, or potentially affected by the outcome of a challenge hereto, shall have any jurisdiction to sit in judgment of such challenge. Such pretended adjudication shall be null and void for all purposes and a complaint for such misconduct may be brought at any time, without charge, before the Special Grand Jury by class action, or by any adversely affected person.
23. Preeminence. Preeminence shall be given to this Amendment in any case of conflicts with statute, case law, common law, or constitutional provision. The foreperson of each Special Grand Jury shall read, or cause to be read, this Amendment to the respective Jurors semi-annually during the first week of business in January and July. Should any part of this Amendment be determined unconstitutional, the remainder shall remain in full force and effect as though no challenge thereto existed.
Copyrighted Library of Congress 9/12/03"
The first mistake with the Prop 8 People was in proceeding with a statutory law, Prop 22, as it was easily overturned by the judges. They learned this belatedly, and then they tried Prop 8, which was a constitutional amendment. Well, they were beginning to wake up, but still was not prepared for what was about to happen. The judges declared this constitutional amendment unconstitutional. Have I draw a clear picture that the issue is the People v. the Judges? Now here is where J.A.I.L. is absolutely necessary. It deals with this issue of the People v. Judges. Had J.A.I.L be in place prior to Prop. 8, then all of the judges within California would be liable under the provisions of J.A.I.L. and could be now serving time in jail because of willfully violating a constitutional provision, not to speak of trying to cover their financial losses from a civil suit from which they could not argue judicial immunity.
I could go on, but I am supposed to go on the air on the east coast in seven minutes, so I hereby rest may case on having an answer to the suppose flaw in the Initiative Process.
On Wednesday, May 9, 2012, wrote:Arnie
You have my VOTE....keep me posted as to how we can follow through on this legislation. Thanks so much. God Bless.
From: "Arnie Rosner" <arnie@...>
To: "David Taylor" <David.Taylor@...>
Cc: "Roland Clark" <rolandclark@...>, "Ron Branson" <VictoryUSA@...>, "Alicia Lutz-Rolow bellsouth.net>Alicia Lutz-rolow" <theplanetruth1@...>
Sent: Wednesday, May 9, 2012 9:46:01 PM
Subject: Fwd: Mr. Branson, may we call upon you for a simple solution?
Begin forwarded message:From: Ron Branson <VictoryUSA@...>
Subject: Re: Mr. Branson, may we call upon you for a simple solution?
Date: May 9, 2012 6:47:19 PM PDT
To: Arnie Rosner <arnie@...>
Yes, Arnie, you have stated a fair representation of J.A.I.L. While I might wish to expand upon your presentation, I will just say that you have well stated my position in few words.
Arnie Rosner wrote:Mr. Branson,Thank you for your efforts in this matter. I am not very knowledgable in this area so please feel free correct me.
In my limited understanding, the significance of your contribution, as in-acted, will help Americans restore our out-of-control judiciary to its proper role. In turn, this is also an important step to enable Americans to restore our republic. Therefore, all Americans should strongly support the passage of your proposed legislation.
Did I get this right?
On May 8, 2012, at 10:44 PM, Ron Branson wrote:
Arnie, my answer to your question is in the affirmative. However, what I have done is placed this same legislation in a state initiative form for each state's legislature to place on their state ballot in which to make it a constitutional amendment. Without it being a constitutional amendment, the judges of each of these particular states may simply declare the legislature's passage by statute to be unconstitutional.
Within the people's initiative states, the people may freely place it on their ballots and vote it into function by constitutional amendment, such as California.
I wish to thank you, Arnie, for you inquiry into this matter.
Arnie Rosner wrote:
Mr. Branson,Thank you for your amazingly simple solution. Since the Congress is obviously beyond the ability to supervise their own activities with any sure degree of integrity, is this proposed legislation something by which the separate states could invoke?On May 7, 2012, at 8:14 PM, Ron Branson wrote:Mr. Branson, may we call upon you
for a simple solution by which we can restore our republic? I suspect most Americans would be eternally grateful!
Arnie Rosner wrote:
My Dear Mr. Branson,
Thank you for sharing this very enlightening revelation with regard to the intentional violation of California State law by those whose job is to enforce the law. It appears in the case of Mr. Servin, there may be a possibility that justice will be served, After all.
But then what explains the lack of justice being served on much more serious matters? Matters like national security? Matters like the violations of the Constitution of the United States of America? Matters like the violations being committed by those very same people entrusted with the responsibility of representing the people of the United States, in making our laws?
Mr. Branson, it is obvious your knowledge of the law is quite evident. In fact, your grasp of the basic legal principles would seem to far surpass, any demonstration of any more sophisticated legal principles displayed by any and all members of any levels of the judiciary...nation-wide.
Perhaps we, as just common, ordinary plain vanilla variety Americans can call on you to propose just how we, the American people can deal with the greatest Constitutional crisis deliberately engineered by our elected officials in Congress, who seem determined to compound their acts of treason with untold measures of treachery.
So Mr. Branson, may we call upon you for a simple solution by which we can restore our republic? I suspect most Americans would be eternally grateful!
Arnie, you must realize that as the days become more evil, everything gets turned Topsy-tervy. That which is important is totally disregarded, and that which is of little relevance is pursued to the fullest extent of the law. Take for instance, the Federal Reserve scam swallows up this entire county, and is obviously unconstitutional, yet its atrocities are ignored by everyone in power. A Mexican hits up a liquor store getting away with only a small pocket money, and the police, in their zeal to come up with a perpetrator, blows away a black man nearby in his garage as he was getting out of his car because "He looked suspicious. Besides, if he didn't do it, he is probably guilty of something." This is a real live example reported in the Los Angeles Times that actually happened. It is too bad this man was not a lawyer in a three-piece suit in Washington, District of Criminals, ripping off millions of dollars from the sucker taxpayers.
Anyway, I wrote, and presented to Congress the below Bill for their consideration at the turn of this century. Were any of them excited? Absolutely not. Dare anyone propose enacting legislation restoring the Constitution and power to the People.
Below is that very propose legislation which is filed in their Library of Congress. Perhaps you can motivate the People to be eternally grateful, telling them that we must absolutely get this legislation passed so that we can get back to the constitutional republic envisioned by our fore Fathers. If the People receive not this Judicial Accountability Bill, neither will they be convinced though another attempted Bill for Judicial Accountability be proposed.
JudicialAccountability & Integrity Legislation
(Judicial Bill Written for Congress)Filed in the Library of Congress
(a) Preamble. The House of Representatives and Senate Assembled find: that an inordinate and ever-growing number of complaints for willful misconduct have been lodged with Congress involving federal judges across this nation; that the current Title 28 U.S.C. §372(c) (Judicial Misconduct and Disability Act) is in many cases inadequate due to conflicts of interest of judges judging themselves; that judicial integrity is of major importance which affects all areas of our American society. Be it therefore resolved that the House of Representatives and Senate Assembled hereby enact the following legislation which shall be known as the "Judicial Accountability and Integrity Legislation."
(b) Definitions. For purposes of this statute: