The Most important case in US History Happening right NOW !

For Release: December 2nd, 2017


Preface - “No Quorum = No Legislation”


This case proves that the 115th Congress has no quorum in the House of Representatives. As such, NO action taken by the House since January 3rd is yet complete. We, the PEOPLE, are the masters of that HOUSE, and those within it are sent to SERVE - not to RULE.


“Stand for what’s right, or settle for what’s left”- Frederick John LaVergne, Democrat for Congress, New Jersey’s Third Congressional District, 2018.



PRESS RELEASE:


LaVergne v. U.S. House of Representatives:


One of the most important legal cases in American History, so why isn’t everybody talking about it?


Check out the proofs in the Public Docket (PACER® Case No. 1:17-cv-793-CKK-CP-RDM), specifically the pending Summary Judgment Motion, and pay attention in the coming weeks and months to all developments in LaVergne v. U.S. House of Representatives as if your freedom and the future of the United States depends on it. Because it does.


Every year thousands upon thousands of civil lawsuits are filed in the Federal Courts. Since the adoption of the United States Constitution almost 230 years ago there have been millions upon millions of civil cases filed in our Federal Courts. Out of that almost incalculable number, but a scant few have carved out a sustaining place in history and are immediately known to all Judges, Lawyers and Students of Government by their name alone due to the profound and lasting effect each case has had on our history and the way we as a People live: Marbury v. Madison, Brown v. Board of Education, Reynolds v. Simms, New York Times v. Sullivan, Roe v. Wade, Citizen’s United v. Federal Election Commission, to name but a few. And now it appears we can add to that list LaVergne v. U.S. House of Representatives. But if LaVergne v. U.S. House of Representatives is really one of the most important legal case in history, then why isn’t everybody talking about it? Perhaps because few people know or are paying attention. Yet.


In December 2016, in the waning days of President Barak Obama’s Administration, the Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”) published a new proposed Agency Rule in the Federal Register entitled “Protecting the Privacy of Customers of Broadband and Other Telecommunications Services.” This new Agency Rule operated to protect privacy interest of citizens by, among other things, barring Internet Service Providers from collecting and selling or otherwise disseminating a customer’s personal, business and health information to third parties for free or for profit. Boring - but many would argue important - stuff. 

Under the Congressional Review Act, these proposed new FCC Agency Rules aimed at protecting citizen’s privacy interests would automatically become binding Federal Law unless during a statutory specified time period Congress passed and the President signed a “disapproval resolution”. During the operative time period, on January 3, 2015 the new 435 Members of the One Hundred and Fifteenth Congress were sworn in to office. Representative Paul Ryan of Wisconsin was ostensibly elected as Speaker of the House. At noon on January 20, 2017 Donald J. Trump was sworn in as the 45th President of the United States. Thereafter, and during the operative statutory time period for Congress to reject the proposed new FCC Agency Rules, the Senate passed a “disapproval resolution”, and on March 28, 2017 the House of Representatives formally voted in favor of the “disapproval resolution.” On April 3, 2017 the “disapproval resolution”, as passed in the Senate and House, was presented to President Trump for his approval, and on that same date President Trump signed the “disapproval resolution”, now identified as Public Law No. 115-22, thereby permanently blocking the proposed new FCC Agency Rules from becoming Federal Law.


Almost immediately a small group of citizens filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia in Washington D.C. challenging Public Law No. 115-22. Since Public Law No. 115-22 rejected (or “disallowed”) the proposed new FCC Agency Rules, Internet Service Providers were and are now free to sell customer’s private personal, business and health information to third parties. Plaintiffs objected to this as an invasion of their privacy rights which therefore tangibly injured them, and they challenged Public Law No. 115-22 as unconstitutional. What makes this case significant and important is not that the Plaintiffs challenge Public Law No. 115-22 as unconstitutional. Rather, it is the actual basis upon which they claim the law is unconstitutional.


Plaintiffs claim that Article the First, the literal first ever amendment proposed to the United States Constitution by Congress to the States actually was ratified into law some time before 1792 and was lost or hidden in history. The whole story is told in a detailed 600 page book authored by lead Plaintiff Eugene Martin LaVergne entitled How “Less” is “More”: The Real First Amendment to the United States Constitution, published by First Amendment Free Press, Inc., New York, New York (2016). Plaintiffs contend that if they are correct than this lost but fully ratified Constitutional Amendment requires that there be more than 6,200 Representatives in the United States House of Representatives. 

The Constitution requires that a Quorum - 50% +1 of the full membership of the Members of a Legislative Body - be present before any business may be voted on. If Plaintiff’s are correct, then this means that more than 3,100 Representatives must be elected and appear before the House of Representatives may vote on anything. This means that the vote taken in the House on March 28, 2017 on Public Law No. 115-22 was taken in the absence of a Quorum, rendering the law unconstitutional. This also means that Paul Ryan is not legally the Speaker of the House, nor is he in the line of Presidential Succession. Nor may the House vote on Articles of Impeachment until there is a Quorum of more than 3,100 Representatives.


At first glance Plaintiff’s contention that there should be more than 6,200 Representatives in the House all sounds preposterous. The stuff of tin foil hats and rubber rooms. Until you read LaVergne’s book or see the actual proofs on file in the lawsuit. Then it becomes, well, it becomes disturbingly real and more than possible, it becomes down right likely that the Plaintiffs will win. 

No less than United States Court of Appeals Judge Merrick Garland (yes, the guy President Obama nominated for the United States Supreme Court) has Ordered that a special Three Judge Federal District Court be convened to hear the Plaintiffs Claims in Federal Court in Washington. And the Plaintiffs have already filed a Motion for Summary Judgment which remains on the Public Docket for the essential proofs to be reviewed by anyone willing to look. The Court’s consideration of this motion will occur after several procedural issues are argued and decided. Otherwise stated, there is essentially no argument from the Defendants that the Plaintiffs are not 100% historically accurate! 

So, for now the issue is whether the Federal Court will be procedurally allowed to acknowledge historical and legal truth and provide a meaningful remedy. The smart money is that they will. Which will, in one fell swoop, completely restructure one half of the Legislative Branch of our Federal Government, will greatly increase Representation of the People in the United States House of Representatives, and will greatly increase the number of Electoral Votes used to select a President. 

So, wake up, pay attention, and check out the proofs in the Public Docket (PACER® Case No. 1:17-cv-793-CKK-CP-RDM) and pay attention in the coming weeks and months to all developments in LaVergne v. U.S. House of Representatives as if your freedom and the future of the United States depends on it. Because it does.


Press CTRL and left click on your mouse on link below:


https://www.amazon.com/How-Less-More-Amendment-Constitution-ebook/dp/B01N69X1YZ/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1512135999&sr=8-4&keywords=how+less+is+more

Open Letter To VP Pence and All citizens of the United States

This is an open letter to VP Pence, all future and past Presidents of the United States, its citizens, and all elected Representatives of its people and territories.

Standing with Veterans is not just rising from a chair and standing behind a microphone or using media dissemination to make a point. As a 25-year Vet, I stood with Veterans. I stood with them in every military engagement from Vietnam to Iraq and Afghanistan. My standing with them began in signing up for military service, taking an oath, and doing all humanly possible not to break that oath. In standing with them I supported operations that I was not on the ground to be a part of as well of those I was in an expeditionary role. In standing with my fellow service members, my actions and those “standing with” us supported the safe return and honorable dignified commemoration of those compatriots lost to us in service and their civilian counterparts.

This service includes Grenada, Bosnia, Desert Storm I & II, OEF, OIF, Korea, Europe, responding at the Pentagon and disaster relief. In addition to these well-known instances there are countless others the American people are not privy to. This service also includes working in uniform for the Department of The Army Casualty and Mortuary Affairs, and at VA hospitals as a Soldier, and DOD Civilians. Standing with them became standing with us. We are inseparably one. Of this service, I am humbly proud and deeply honored.

I have served knowing the broken promises Veterans face and the deep dedication which we have to each other in service. As emotionally difficult the duty IS to serve those who have lost family in service to OUR nation it is a different kind of emotionally charged duty in comparison to serving those who are injured. Why is that so? It is because the bond between Service Members leaves the survivor feeling they have let their team down and their absence may prevent another brother or sister in arms from coming home safely. The families caring for the member is a service that changes their lives. 

Please be mindful that not all injuries are visible with the naked eye. Many live with wounds sustained in service to this nation. Some are afraid of the perception those they have protected may have of them if these wounds were to be known.  The fear, failure to seek treatment, and just trying to deal with it on their own, is a testament to what they believe is will, strength, dignified pride, and independence because they don’t want pity.

I have the personal experience of trying to convince these valiant, brave, and honorable people that they must focus on their recovery and life outside the military. I have also had to help families deal with the new responsibility of supporting that effort. It is no easy task because of the selflessness our members have. Selflessness and dedication are traits OUR members have as a foundation.

I always look them and their loved ones in the eye to convey our commitment to supporting them.

Support comes in many ways. Prayers, demonstrations, financial support, appropriations, proper equipment, acknowledgment of service, welcome home celebrations, receptions, and keeping promised benefits in place.  Our members are shown who really cares about them in many ways. They also know who is selfishly politically jeopardizing or exploiting these greatly appreciated support efforts.

The next time you or anyone utters the words “I stand with our troops” consider these things. Paying bonuses to those who deny us medical treatment is not standing with us. Reducing our benefits and breaking the terms of our agreements to serve, is not standing with us. Standing behind a podium making speeches about us without sharing our burden, is not standing with us. Not taking care of those who have lost one of us, is not standing with us. Making any disparaging remarks about any of us or our families, is not standing with us. Not protecting those we have sworn to protect, is not standing us. Attacking those who support us, is not standing with us.

To be clear, distractions while in uniform jeopardize every mission. Lives are always in the balance while in uniform. We accept the risk. Our families support us in this monumental decision.  Service members cannot fully focus on our mission when we are worried about home and those we love. Worry is something we and our families face with courage, hope, and faith.

 We understand we represent our nation and do not take the responsibility lightly. Congress, the branches of government, and the White House must understand that it is painting a picture of the US that makes the dutiful service of those who volunteered harder. These entities are also making it harder for the current and next generation of protectors to justify what it is we are protecting, and from who or what protection is legitimate.

You nor anyone can “stand with us” unless you join us. You can, as can everyone else, rise to support us, encourage, strengthen, and love us. Whether one takes a knee as we do in presenting this nation’s flag to the families of the fallen, standing with hand over heart, or meeting us at the airport upon our return, it is gratitude we have earned and sacrificed to obtain.

The odd thing is that less than 1% of our population ever serves in the military at any given time, while 100% enjoys the freedoms we provide. Freedom of speech is not meant to give one the right to be offensive but to express one’s self so that every citizen may be heard. There is a way of saying things that one wants to convey. Even if those things are untruthful, it is how it is said and by whom that makes statements believable or effective.

When it comes to the NFL, any citizen, or organization expressing their position must remember it is us in uniform standing together with the support of a grateful nation ensuring the rights and freedoms of expression. You may exercise, as a private citizen whatever perspective you desire. We who serve do so that your ability remains intact. As a representative of this nation as we are also, please know we would appreciate a deeper allegiance to those we are bound and obligated to serve. As our actions are no longer our own nor our responsibilities relegated to our own agendas. Please continue to support us in accordance with our nations oath of office. It is the oath by which we all swear. It is an additional oath I have also sworn as an elected official in addition to the those to which I am bound by military service and an employee of a government agency.

In closing, our Service Members cannot afford to play politics or be divided on issues highlighted by the media and those with a platform to raise. We are one team. All branches of service work together as a matter of duty. We are resolute in bringing all of us home never leaving those by our side behind. When we ask for support, as we do and will we would also appreciate you knowing what support means. Every citizen has the opportunity to apply to stand with us. Those who do not qualify for military service are told why.  We do not harbor any animosity toward those who choose not to serve. In so saying we will not be disrespected, demeaned, or exploited by those who chose not to stand with us, or used their influence to avoid service.

As I finish this letter I take a knee in prayer for our Service Members in harms way. I also pray for you and all our Representatives. I pray you all will have the fortitude to ensure elections are fair, our military is not squandered for corporate interest, and that those in positions of influence will work to ensure safe water, air, food, livable wages, and equity for all the citizens of this land and those lands our nation is protecting from violence, exploitation and greed. Just because a person makes a law does not make the law fair, right or just. What makes any law just is that it is consistently applied to all.

Have a great day and a better tomorrow.

v/r

Allen J Cannon

US Citizen and Veteran, US Army

All tax payers must focus on what is important.

Hello all, and may this writing find you safe and prosperous.

This maybe the 2nd most important issue of our time.  The first is yet to be revealed. Stay tuned later this month for more details.

This is about something NOT in the news. Here is another perspective on a case in court right now.  It is the DNC Election Fraud Lawsuit.

Fact: DNC owes every state and the Federal Government money back because they rigged the primary.  FED matching funds and the money EVERY state spent on the rigged primary should be the subject of the total fraud committed.  This argument should be based on the motions filed by the DNC in court.

https://www.facebook.com/DNCfraudlawsuit/posts/787111798118297

This link provides rules for public funding:  https://transition.fec.gov/pages/brochures/pubfund.shtml#anchor688095 . 

The money spent by each state did not come from just democrats. Those Billions came from all tax payers in those states, even independents who do not have a primary. It also came from individuals who have not yet registered to vote. It is a FACT that one has to declare party affiliation, thereby removing their ability to participate in the primary of the other party. One could argue that the decision is driven by charters and statements made by the party. The declaration of party affiliation is a written document thereby a contract. If nothing else, it enforces exclusion from other primary voting. The further exclusion by the DNC was committed by purging its roles of Bernie supporters in districts and reducing polling locations thereby creating bottlenecks to discourage voters and overtaxing resources thereby complicating counting efforts by exasperation and physical demands significantly raising the chance of error by fatigue.

Why aren’t the DNC assets frozen?  If this is true: Rep. Ron DeSantis (R., Fla.), an oversight committee member and chair of its national security subcommittee, petitioned Attorney General Jeff Sessions to disclose if federal investigators are moving to freeze recent wire transfers of nearly $300,000 by Imran Awan, a top IT staffer for Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D., Fla.) and scores of other Democrats who was recently arrested on charges of bank fraud. Then why would’t the DNC assets be frozen as well?

The point is, all who are thinking they can change the DNC from the inside are blind to the fact that the decisions made regarding the DNC are above their access level. Without going into all the things wrong and candidates I submit this. If according to gallop poll: http://www.gallup.com/poll/185891/majority-maintain-need-third-major-party.aspx  60% of those polled agree there is a need for a third party. That’s already a majority the two party system cannot win against.

 The issue is, major party status is determined by numbers. I contend, the DNC, by holding onto Bernie supporters will remain viable at least numerically. If you would never support the DNC but love Bernie they will use him up to the last minute for donations and attendance at rallies.

This case is about democracy. It is about whether the DNC gets away with cheating, fraud, violation of the VRA, and forcing you to support who ever they pick. There is no such thing as a half rigged fair race. All Americans must see that the DNC did not just steal money from the Democrat supporters who thought their vote counted and listened to the DNC and main stream media tell the nation it was neutral.

No, they did not just cheat the Democrats, and Independent Voters who changed party affiliation just to participate in the primary. It did not just cheat all those who raised money and spent hours of free time informing the public about Bernie. Just for the record, the DNC did not just cheat Bernie.

There is no single issue more important than this because this is how those who make decisions affecting all of us get seated. It’s how challengers to change the system get cheated. It's how things keep getting worse. No seated member of Congress dares to speak out against DWS or the fact that they could have challenged her being seated… like they did Adam Clayton Powell. http://history.house.gov/HistoricalHighlight/Detail/36843?ret=True

The truth is, they all benefited by the fraud committed by the DNC. The establishment candidates won their primaries with the same rigging that occurred to defeat Bernie. Additionally, I submit at the DNC convention an entirely new type of fraud took place. Ask any Bernie delegate. As elected officials, they witnessed firsthand what happened. Obstruction of their electoral rights were thwarted. Main stream Media, those on stage, and those reporting or failing to report the actual events are complicit.

This video is after the DNC’s second motion to dismiss. It is worth watching: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sz_dRxwEmDM

At the end of the day…. WE are all Americans endowed with inalienable rights. It is not about what party we choose to belong. The point is, we should have the choice to VOTE for what every candidate we choose for what every reason. Just as our tax dollars are not separated by us when we pay them, the dollars we pay are used for primaries. Even those who are independent voters pay and do not get a primary but have had their tax dollars used for rigged primaries.

The DNC's major party existence depends on numbers. We have no way of knowing if they will ever accurately report the number of votes, registered voters, or any information which revokes their major party status. We also have no way of knowing if any other party emerges because there is no third-party primary.  

I am of the opinion that this is the only story voters should be watching daily and those who have an interest in covering it up are complicit. I know I usually dont place links in my posts but in this case it is really important to provide material to substantiate my concerns.

I am Allen J Cannon. I am anti-Corruption.

Have a blessed and positive day. Stay thirsty for truth my friends. Peace.

We the people have a right to fair and proper elections

We The People of the US are in a place never before witnessed in our nation’s history.  The disparity between the rich and the poor has grown to obvious proportions that can be no longer be ignored.  To do so is to decimate the true American dream.  We have gone away from the principle of saving and its accumulation effect and the principle of representation. The time to take a stand is coming. 

The establishment is doing what they always do. Misinforming and buying their way to power. Misinformation is lying. It is that simple. Buying power is bribery. Yes, it is also that simple. Both are in direct conflict to the principles of representation and the sworn Oath of Office.  It does not matter when you realize you have been lied to, in that the lie is still a lie. What matters is when you find out and what you have lost because of it.

The principle of saving embodies the work ethic that created this nation and the tiers of growth leaving us with the tears of discontent. When a person saves even in the smallest amount it grows. Time coupled with patience and discipline produces growth.

Many of us began saving change to get the things that our parents incorporated into our participation of financing the things we wanted.  It was a demonstration of commitment on our part and for many the first example of a contract which we, as partners with our parents began to see how hard work pays off.  That bike, candy, sneakers, or toy we wanted required us to sacrifice and prioritize the importance of our purchases and galvanize our commitment to reaching a goal.  It was our parents who wanted us to reach the goals that fostered the agreement to contribute to whatever we saved toward.

The principle of representation is simple. Not all of us can be in the places where decisions made concerning us become law or action.  We have representatives and advocates of our mutual good to speak on our behalf. In an era where children were seen and not heard our representation was our parents and other adults who took the responsibility seriously.

Now those who are tasked with the sworn oath of representation are no longer committed to us, but to themselves.  While self-preservation is the first law of nature we have lapsed into an environment of singular focus. We have abandoned the philosophy of doing more with more people so that everyone needs less help. Instead we are doing more with less people so individuals don’t feel as though they need anyone.  It is the worse perspective a representative could have. 

While serving in my municipality and while serving this nation I took the principle of representation seriously. Being the representative of a nation is an enormous responsibility In fact, i take it so seriously that I constantly reminded myself that I no longer had a vote.  I surrendered my vote to those I represented. In making their lives better in policy and governance we all benefited.  I am as are we all representatives. We represent, communities, organizations, families and cultures. I embraced the honor and trust placed in me to be voted an elected official.  

I may be over simplifying this concept but it helped me stay focused on the will of the people.  Sometimes the will of the people is flawed.  They should be able to trust their representatives to see the flaws, expose potential detrimental effects, and advise them on the best course available. Even if the people chose to take the risk one must consider their will.  How many times have we been advised by professionals not to pursue a course of action? The advice ranges from family matters, relationships, home additions, assuming debt, and making decisions that will impact our lives for years to come.

We have all been advised to pick our friends carefully, stay away from bad people, and do what is right.  In the end, the difference in following that advise shows in our level of success, happiness, and the strength of our families. One does not have to look far to see we have not applied that philosophy to our elections.  It is one thing to believe a person will represent us, then to see they don’t and continue to allow them to stay in office.  There is no career politician that can be blameless to the level of corruption which currently exists.  My mom used to say, “if they jump off a bridge are you going to jump too?”.  My response was always “No Ma’am”.  So why would I continue to authorize a representative who clearly has forgotten me, their sworn oath, and the constituents they represent.

The time for accepting campaign promises are over. The time for evaluating platforms must be replaced with the critical assessment of the body of work undone.  The excuse of not being able to get things done has reached critical mass.  The nation can no longer bear the load of the excuse.  Corruption flourishes as good people do nothing.  The fact that a person can be a career politician without ever being a public servant should be alarming.  The fact that political parties have boiled down a message of not being as bad as the other party is no longer valid.

Public servants dedicate their lives to helping other lives better. Politicians dedicate their lives to making their lives better by helping themselves. There is a difference. Ever wonder how members of Congress all become millionaires off of their salary?  It’s the influence the sell.  It’s our trust they sell. It is our benefits they sell.  It is their position as our representatives they sell.  It is us they sell out. 

The status quo turns good intentioned people into cogs in a system that will destroy those who represent us.  The target them.  The only way around this is to remove them all.  If any of them are any good they must understand they themselves need an environment that lets them operate according to their Oath of Office.  They should have no problem letting us drain the swap for them.

The best of them who have been hampered, obstructed, and coerced into the corruption should praise us for deliverance.  It is past the time of blindly following party. It is time for a new thing, new method, and a new government.  We should no longer waste our brightest minds and loving hearts on a system that is controlled by the few. WE The People are coming.  We The People need all of us to see our interests defended, supported, and given the opportunity the elite and corrupt have enjoyed for far too long. Our pursuit of happiness and productive lives are a right. We have the right to learn, live, and love in a manner not based on identity politics, corporate greed, and manipulation of law.

Any law that does not apply to all is no law at all.  Crime that goes unprosecuted is still crime, but it makes criminals of those who have the power to prosecute when they do nothing.

The link below is to actual court transcript of one of the most important cases of our time. Please look at it. You don’t have to read the whole thing to get the point, but you will get the point in their own words. 

http://jampac.us/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/042517cw2.pdf 

I am Allen J Cannon, and I am Anti-Corruption.

We The People thank you for your time and attention.

The sanctity of the vote and why Congress is invalid....

As we consider what is real we must know what distractions exist. A distraction is everything that prevents one from seeing what is really important.  Many may call it focus. Some call it awareness. No matter what you call it, paying attention to the wrong thing at the wrong time can cause you loss.

We don’t want people to text and drive, but they do. Many are busy making live postings while driving. The lure to make one’s self important is a distraction. The call to make someone else important can also be a distraction. Pouring our effort into those who would take instead of give at every instance is what many have chosen to do. Is it the fault of the taker or those who give?

When will we see ourselves worthy of each other? When will we see those who are worthy of our support.  Corruption is not a matter of party. It is not a matter of race, creed ,or sexual orientation. It is a matter of greed. Greed has no limits so the greedy have no limits. Greed will and has turned people into those we do not recognize and into those we know all too well.

When we will refuse to offer our time to those who would not defend us although they are sworn by law and oath of office to do so?  There is no need to re-invent the wheel when it comes to any issue such as healthcare, tax reform, or education. There are models that exist that are working for those who have them. Those models exist because they are in the hands of the corrupted. Those who have the best for themselves claim to need to invent something different for the rest of us.

Too many examples of universal healthcare exist.  These examples exist in countries who have less than we do in the US. We should not have to have something that does not cover everyone tweaked for us. We should have the same coverage as Members of Congress has. Their separation from the people should be duly noted as a matter of principle, not party, or reputation. Access to medical care should not be on merely an emergency basis.

How many remember when hospitals were segregated although the Hippocratic Oath existed? How many died just because physicians and the medical community felt the color of ones skin made them worth less or more to society as a whole.  It is not until we ALL see that we are made better by the gifts we share instead of the gifts politicians get to keep the status quo.

There is no law Congress can pass that has merit as long as Debbie Wasserman Schultz  is in office. They are all complicit in Federal Election Fraud as long as she is in their number and voting. The general public must  understand that the vote is vital to our survival. The vote gave us Citizens United, Obamacare, segregation, civil rights and the actual ability to vote.  Why should one such as she have any standing when the vote itself is under question?  Every vote while she remains in office is invalid. It is hypocritical, and undermines the validity of the process. 

It is never the outcome of the votes counted that supersedes the process of counting them.  The process is sacred. The process is the foundation of democracy. The process is how we voice our support or rejection of policy and those who embody the policy with which we disapprove.

The right to disapprove, agree, support, or challenge means nothing to those who are already ignoring the voices of the public. It is at a point where the public does not matter to them. What is painfully obvious is how much the deals they make to stay in office matter.

TThose supporting the corruption of the vote are in office right now. Every day that passes they hope we will forget or be distracted by the fact that none of them are legitimate. They are not legitimate because they have violated the oath of office as it reads as provide by the United States publishing office: Ҥ3331. Oath of office

An individual, except the President, elected or appointed to an office of honor or profit in the civil service or uniformed services, shall take the following oath: “I, AB, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.” This section does not affect other oaths required by law.

(Pub. L. 89–554, Sept. 6, 1966, 80 Stat. 424.)

Historical and Revision Notes
Derivation	U.S. Code	Revised Statutes and Statutes at Large
	5 U.S.C. 16.	R.S. §1757. May 13, 1884, ch. 46, §§2, 3, 23 Stat. 22.

All but the quoted language in R.S. §1757 is omitted as obsolete since R.S. §1757 was originally an alternative oath to the oath prescribed in R.S. §1756 which oath was repealed by the Act of May 13, 1884, ch. 46, §2, 23 Stat. 22. The words “An individual, except the President, . . . in the civil service or uniformed services” are substituted for “any person . . . either in the civil, military, or naval service, except the President of the United States”. The second sentence of former section 16 is changed to read, “This section does not affect other oaths required by law.”.

Standard changes are made to conform with the definitions applicable and the style of this title as outlined in the preface to the report:

It is the Constitution that requires defending. Not our gender, race, political party, or any demographic we decide to divide ourselves into, or be so divided by others. While the masses are engulfed in the distraction of illegality and blaming each other for what we have, they should be looking at what we don’t have. We don’t have a Congress that is defending the most basic right of the vote. We don’t have a Congress who takes that right serious enough to stand against the violators of that right. We don’t have a Congress that has a legitimate legal right to make any law as it has broken the most basic from which all responsibility and power of office depends. It has broken the oath of office. No one can assume office without being given the oath. No one can legally stay in office while breaking it. As long as DWS remains in Congress every law they make is subject to the challenge of law.

I am Anti-Corruption.