Impeachment: Who Really Runs America?
by Mary W Maxwell, LLB
We hear rumors all the time as to who runs the government of the United States. Some candidates are: the oil industry, Zionists, the media, the mafia, the UN, the Bank of England, and Satanists.
Wrong. None of those run the political entity known as the United States of America. I know for sure who is the boss, the real boss, of that country and will tell you now -- but first, please grab your smelling salts.
The real boss of the US is the American people.
Perhaps I should limit that to "American citizens," as there are many people in the US who have never bothered to take up citizenship, therefore they can't vote.
Voting does come into the story as "the people" rule via their representatives in Congress. You may have heard that elections are rigged, the vote-count at the polls is done by tricky machines, and so forth. I believe that is true and needs to be corrected. The boss can correct it via the law.
Today's Impeachment Inquiry
Some members of the House of Representatives have now set up an Impeachment Inquiry regarding President Trump. The issue is that he allegedly misused the office of president by asking the head of a foreign nation (Ukraine) to do him a "personal" favor. Namely, to cough up some information about naughty activity by the son of Joe Biden who may be running against Trump in 2020.
We can dissect that some other day. For now, I am extolling the power of the people, which, in the present set-up is synonymous with the power of "Capitol Hill."
Which Branch Is Tops in the Constitution?
There are famously five power-holders in the Constitution: the three branches of the federal government (see Articles I, II, and III); the states (Article IV); and the people (mainly via the Bill of Rights).
Don't be fooled by all that pluralism. The top branch is Congress. How can we know that? Because the Constitution, as written in 1787, gives Congress the power to get rid of any member of the other two branches via impeachment.
Isn't there a lot of cross-checking, a la Montesquieu's 1748 balance of power theory? Yes. For example, bad members of Congress can be nabbed by the US Prosecutors. Oh, what branch be that -- is it judicial? No. It's rather confusing but prosecutors are in the executive branch, per Article II.
That Article of the Constitution says of the president "He [or any day now, she ] shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed." That means a wrongdoer -- including Senator X or Representative Y -- can be brought to book.
How so? The president and the prosecutors can't do it. Contrary to some wishful thinking , "the White House" can't pick off US citizens via military tribunals. No, they have to use the courts.
That is, the Third Branch. But the Third Branch refers only to the federal court involving federal law. We are not talking about removing a member of Congress for a parking ticket or even for murder. Of all the federal laws, the easiest one to use would be the law of treason.
An aside: I am trying to make the case that Congress is powerful and yet show how it can be disciplined. I have just said that the Second Branch (Executive) and Third Branch (Judiciary) have the means to gang up on a bad congressperson to "remove" that person from office. Sorry, I was being loose with my pen. Even a conviction for treason does not, as such, remove an elected rep or senator. Only a visit to the polls can do that. Also, each house of Congress can kick out a member, though they almost never do.
Impeachment Is Not Judicial, Doesn't Require Justice
Today, all in a 24-hour period, Congress could send a president packing, and could send any or all Supreme Court justices packing. Many others, too. Think of it this way: if it's a job that the Senate had to confirm in the first place, such as a Navy Admiral, a US Attorney, or a Cabinet member, that person is impeachable.
What can such office holders be impeached for? The Framers of the Constitution carefully wrote that a president can be impeached for "High crimes and misdemeanors." Their inclusion of the phrase "or misdemeanors" alerts us to the Framers expectation that "anything goes." I believe President Ford was correct when he said the sins of the president are whatever Congress says they are.
To be exact, Ford's words were: "An impeachable offense is whatever a majority of the House of Representatives considers it to be at a given moment in history."
This is borne out by the fact that once the impeachment is agreed to by the House, and sent to the Senate for a "trial," that trial is not judicial. It is political. Does the President get due process? No. She shouldn't even ask for it.
I repeat: impeachment is not judicial. I hear you say "Lots of defendants these days don't get due process." Yeah, I know but that needs fixing and can be fixed. I myself labor in that field with sweaty brow, etc, etc.
Hold on, doesn't the Constitution say that the Chief Justice of the United States -- at the moment, John Roberts -- will preside over the trial? Yes, but only when it is a President being tried. That does not mean the Chief Justice brings any legal paraphernalia over to the Senate with him.
If you feel a need to doubt me, please see the trial of President Clinton who was impeached in 1998. That is the only time in living memory when there was such a trial. The House did impeach Clinton; the Senate tried him with Chief Justice William Rehnquist sitting there. The vote was tight, but Clinton did not get convicted.
Rehnquist said in 1999:
"I underwent the sort of culture shock that naturally occurs when one moves from the very structured environment of the Supreme Court to what I shall call, for want of a better phrase, the more freeform environment of the Senate."
What's the Most, and Least, Punishment?
By the way, if Clinton had been convicted, that would not have brought him any punishment other than dethronement. This question is causing a bit of excitement at the moment as to whether Donald Trump, if convicted and thrown out of office, could run for president again in future.
The exact words in Article I, Section 3, go like this:
Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.
Note the phrase "shall not extend further than...." Apparently, although it has not been tested, this could mean that the Senate could convict Trump and yet he could be elected again.
What about Those Other Contenders for Boss of America?
I am trying to knock the reader over with my claim that the people of the US are the ultimate boss. We need to hear this. It will be our way out of a terrible mess.
So, I bet you are thinking "Wow, is Mary so thick she doesn't know that other entities are more powerful than Congress, and even more powerful than all three branches combined?"
Hang on, I do know that all the ones I mentioned -- the oil industry, Zionists, the media, the mafia, the UN, the Bank of England, and Satanists -- are in fact exerting a stranglehold over governments and the people, both worldwide, and here in the Great Republic.
Still, short of nuclear bombs being dropped on us, we should have no trouble controlling, or terminating, those entities. Let me dispose of them in my naive, idealistic way, as follows:
**Congress can control the Bank of England's power in US by repealing the Federal Reserve Act of 1913. There's no such thing as a federal law that the legislature can't change its mind about.
**The oil industry and the mass media (a well as other
"combinations" such as Big Pharma, Big Weapons manufacturers) can be brought to heel right this minute by the ever clever Sherman Anti Trust Act of 1890 which is still in force. Its proper title is: An act to protect trade and commerce against unlawful restraints and monopolies. Senator John Sherman (1823-1900) proposed it.
In a 1993 ruling the US Supreme Court wrote:
"The purpose of the [Sherman] Act is not to protect businesses from the working of the market; it is to protect the public from the failure of the market. The law directs itself not against conduct which is competitive, even severely so, but against conduct which unfairly tends to destroy competition itself."
[Spectrum Sports v McQuliian],
When you see cases like that you can assume it was a matter of two corporations litigating against each other. That is one way the Sherman Anti-trust Act can be employed, but there is also the provision for prosecution. May I quote the Act in full?
Section 1: Every contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, is declared to be illegal.
Section 2: Every person who shall monopolize, ... or conspire with any other person or persons, to monopolize any part of the trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, shall be deemed guilty of a felony.
(Good morning, Rupert Murdoch.)
A whole division of the US Department of Justice is tasked with enforcing Sherman's Act. It doesn't do so, however, kowtowing instead to the aforementioned powerful who have got a stranglehold on us. But I insist it could be done. We have handcuffs, we have jails, don't we?
All it would take is a bit of citizenship muscle and away we go!
**Zionists. Many people complain that the Congress is supine to an Israeli PAC (Political Action Committee). It's true. In fact, the US legislature recently passed an horrendous law (illegitimate as it offends the First Amendment) forbidding people to side with the BDS item. (Look it up. See for yourself.)
Anyway, I have said this so many times I hate to say it again: If Zionists control the US government, whose fault is that? Clearly it is the fault of the US government, not the fault of Israel, Zionists, Jews, or the 9-11 "hijackers."
Thus, it is ultimately the American people's fault. See my article, linked below, on the sinking of the USS Liberty. Heads need to roll and they are not Israeli heads.
**The UN. This organization, which I take to be Rockefeller-created, does not have any legal power over the US. We have signed some multilateral treaties offered by the UN, but we can withdraw from them. I like to modify the old saying "Pacta sun servanda". -- treaties are meant to be kept, into "Pacta sunt numquam servanda" -- treaties are sometimes to be kept, namely when we feel like it.
As there is no enforcement possible (so far) for international law, any nation can do whatever it can physically get away with. By the way, Congress, in 1945, passed the United Nations Participation Act. It is purely domestic law, to make sure the UN does not encroach on the Constitution. It says:
"Section 6. The President is authorized to negotiate a special agreement or agreements with the Security Council which shall be subject to the approval of the Congress by appropriate Act or joint resolution providing for the numbers and types of armed forces, their degree of readiness and general location, and the nature of facilities and assistance, including rights of passage, to be made available to the Security Council on its call for the purpose of maintaining international peace and security in accordance with article 43 of said Charter." [Emphasis added]
That Act also gave the President the power to enforce sanctions mandated by the UN Security Council without going to Congress for permission. Note: If today's Congress is unhappy with that, all they have to do is amend their 1945 legislation. Note: the same Act talks about our Immigration commitments, but we won't deal with that here.
**Finally, to the mafia and Satanists. Hmm. Did I not claim that the boss of America is the people? By George, they are not in charge today thanks to the fact that citizens willingly put up with secret criminal forces. The mafia is the best known such force. And it needs to be said that mafia bosses have many secret deals with government officials.
Could those deals be undone? I think so. But reflect again on the media. Televsion shows and movies largely determine what gets labelled as good stuff and bad stuff in society. Thanks to the image of The Godfather, a movie from Mario Puzo's 1969 novel, many people think the mafia is OK. I say the media need a quick left hook from Senator Sherman,
The Satanists? At the moment I am too ignorant of their membership and their methods to be able to know how much power they have. But from what we have seen in Australia of the child-stealing courts, and what we saw, over decades, of the unbelievably cruel MK-Ultra program in the US, I suspect that truly the Satanists are king.
Don't hafta be, though.
