The U.S. Constitution Actually Bans Hillary’s Foreign Government Payola

The Federalist

The Washington Post reported last week that the tax-exempt foundation run by Bill and Hillary Clinton accepted money from seven foreign governments while Hillary served as U.S. Secretary of State (it’s unclear how much foreign money the organization accepted while Hillary was a U.S. Senator). Super shady, right? It’s worse than that, though, because Article I, Section 9 of the U.S. Constitution actually bans foreign payola for U.S. officials.

The constitutional ban on foreign cash payments to U.S. officials is known as the Emoluments Clause and originated from Article VI of the Articles of Confederation. The purpose of the clause was to prevent foreign governments from buying influence in the U.S. by paying off U.S. government officials. Here’s the text of the clause:

What Would Happen If Martial Law Was Declared in America?

The Daily Sheeple

In recent weeks, there has been a lot of concern that an upcoming eight week military exercise on U.S. soil known as “Jade Helm” is actually a dress rehearsal for the imposition of martial law in this country. One of the reasons for the high level of concern is that we have seen a dramatic increase in the number of “urban warfare exercises” conducted by the U.S. military in major U.S. cities over the past decade – including exercises where “dissidents” are hunted down, arrested and hauled away.  As our world becomes increasingly unstable, and as our society rapidly decays from within, many believe that it is only a matter of time before the executive branch will have sufficient excuse to use the extensive martial law powers that it has been accumulating since 9/11. When that day arrives, what will our nation look like? What would actually happen if martial law was declared in America?

Obama Was Hand-Picked & NOT a Natural Born Citizen – Congress Knew It & Protected Him

Freedom Outpost

The further I travel down this rabbit hole, the more I feel divorced from the good conservative people that I choose to call my own. I hold some stories back from our readers. My thought is that people have a hard enough time embracing the basic fact that our government is corrupt on both sides of the aisle. If you knew how corrupt I thought these people really were, I feel like you’d rush to the phone and soon bad men would show up to haul me off in a straitjacket.

Do they still do that?

Regardless, today I want to show you something that might leave you questioning everything around you.

Welcome to my world.

In 1975 a representative named Joe Bingham introduced an amendment to remove the “natural born citizen” constitutional requirement to become President.

Why is that important?

Because it was not until almost 30 years later that the issue would be addressed again. And it was not addressed only once, but multiple times. This is all part of congressional record.

Remarkably, it just so happened to coincide with the meteoric rise of a man named Barack Obama who currently sits in the People’s House.

I am about to share with you a brilliant piece of research from the Article II Political Action Committee. After reading it the foremost question on my mind is, “If the natural born citizen definition only requires one citizen parent then why did they seemingly try so hard to change the law for Barack Obama?”

Turner: Let Obama Impeachment Process Of Discovery Begin; Removal And Nullification

Neil Turner, Citizens for the Constitution;

In response to Obama’s recent impeachable offense of publicly announcing his proposed unilateral Executive Action on immigration, I have ‘snail-mailed’ my Representative, Darrell Issa, and my 2 Senators, Barbara Boxer and Diane Feinstein, at both their Washington D.C. and local offices, with the following letter and demand for their proper constitutional action of impeachment.

If you agree with these sentiments, then may I suggest that you submit a similar (or the same) letter to your Representative and Senators as well.

From Watergate to today: Descent into lawlessness

CFP

Forty years ago this week, our country experienced a monumental constitutional crisis that led to the first and only resignation of a sitting president in our nation’s history. Richard M. Nixon resigned from the U.S. Presidency forty years ago this Friday, August 8, 1974 consequential to three Articles of Impeachment that were adopted by the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives on July 27th, 29th and 30th, 1974.

Article One addressed Nixon’s obstruction of justice, Article Two his abuse of power, and Article Three his contempt of Congress. Concluding each article, the following terminology was used to describe the actions of the President:

Shock FedGov Court Ruling: Police Can Kick In Your Door and Seize Guns Without Warrant or Charges

The Daily Sheeple

The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals may have just dealt a serious blow to the U.S. Constitution.

In a unanimous decision earlier this month the Court determined that law enforcement officers are not required to present a warrant or charges before forcibly entering a person’s home, searching it and confiscating their firearms if they believe it is in the individual’s best interests.

The Last Line of Defense: New Organization Aims to Protect Citizen Journalists: “We Will Stand With You”

The Daily Sheeple

In recent years governments and politicians threatened by truth have stepped up their efforts to crush the free flow of information. In the U.S. Congress Senators like Diane Feinstein (CA) hypocritically say they support a free press, yet work behind the scenes to restrict the right to free speech for the vast majority of Americans. Last year, for example, as a new media shield law was being debated on Capitol Hill, Feinstein argued she wouldn’t support a bill that would define an American disseminating information to the public as a “covered journalist” protected by the Constitution because that would mean everyone in the United States would have a “special privilege” as “an entity or service that disseminates news and information.”

In essence, if it were up to Senator Feinstein and her cohorts, only bonafide mainstream journalists or those being paid a salary as reporters would be given the privilege of being protected by the U.S. Constitution.

If you are a blogger or someone who disseminates information via videos, forums or other web media you, apparently, would not protected by the First Amendment and U.S. Constitution if it were up to people like Diane Feinstein. In fact, under the broad proposals currently being debated, everyone’s right to share information online is threatened:

 

The Ugly Face of Tyranny: Feinstein Comes For Your Right To Speak Freely Online

Should you choose to share an opinion in the comments section on this web site or post on your Facebook or Twitter page, you would, just as this author, fall outside of the Constitutional protections of the First Amendment.

Your comments, if critical of government or big business interests, would not be protected by shield laws. You see, you’re not capable of forming an opinion or citing appropriate references for your argument. To do that, you must be licensed by the State or approved by a court.

But The Constitution First Amendment Press Association points out the utter idiocy of such a notion and explains in succinct terms why you, as an American, are a Citizen Journalist not only by law, but by the very fact that your right to disseminate truth and information is inherent at birth.

“The Press” in America is no longer an exclusive club of “professional” journalists. Today, in the age of camera-equipped cellphones, the Internet, blogs, and YouTube, “The Press” now consists of every literate adult who owns a PC, tablet, or smartphone.

The 21st Century is in fact the era of Citizen Journalists. The key requisite qualification to be considered part of “The Press” is simply enfranchisement as a Citizen–thereby assuring you the full protection of the First Amendment.

Whenever you see or hear the words “legitimate journalist” or “qualified journalist”, beware! Those are phrases used by both politicians and guilds with vested interests.

The CFAPA organization founded by well known survivalist, author and liberty proponent James Wesley Rawles of SurvivalBlog.com and his son Robert Rawles aims to ensure that the rights of every Citizen Journalist in America are protected, whether they choose to publicly share their name or remain anonymous, as was the case when Benjamin Franklin submitted his thoughts and grievances under a pseudonym to the New England Courant in 1722.

The Constitution First Amendment Press Association. (CFAPA.org) was founded in March, 2014 to provide credentials and to provide a venue for a mostly anonymous association of independent American Citizen Journalists. We provide press credentials free of charge to any adult American Citizen who accepts the Constitutional Journalist’s Pledge who agrees to CFAPA’s Member Terms and Conditions.

…

The CFAPA is not politically affiliated and has members from a broad range of religious, economic, ethnic, and political backgrounds. Our members all have just two things in common: we love our liberty, and we have a yearning to seek and herald the truth, via Citizen Journalism.

…

The long term goal of CFAPA is to make citizen journalists so ubiquitous that public officials and police officers will stop asking us to see press credentials. But until they do so, we will stand with you, to help confirm your credibility as a citizen journalist.

As the debate over who is or who is not a journalist in America rages on, it should be clear based on our country’s history that the fourth estate – journalists and reporters – are comprised of every single American.

Politicians, however, have a different idea about speech, often suggesting that only some individuals have the right to engage in it.

Thus, we encourage all Americans who want to lend their support to the First Amendment and spread information to all corners of the world to consider the free credentials and support being offered through The Constitution First Amendment Press Association.

In a world where politics and business interests seemingly supersede our Constitution, CFAPA is an idea whose time has come. Fighting the machine as an individual can be a difficult undertaking. With like-minded individuals working together under a single banner within an organization like CFAPA we stand a chance at turning the tables on those who would prefer that our voices be muted.

Website: The Constitution First Amendment Press Association

What It Means to Be a Citizen Journalist: The Constitution Journalist Pledge

Lend Your Support: Donate Today

Image Courtesy of: chrisdorney / Shutterstock.com

What IF Citizens Really Understood the U.S. Constitution?

The Daily Sheeple

By Catherine J. Frompovich

The Internet is rife with all sorts of blogs and sites that talk about cooking, health, politics, and even conspiracy theories, which seem to have become common buzz-words these days. What many Internet surfers apparently may not be aware of is that many sites promote what’s called ‘bum dope’ regarding the interpretation of the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

Mark Dice, a political activist and author, produces sham public opinion polls soliciting signatures on bogus petitions in order to take a read on the pulse of just how little U.S. citizens really know the U.S. Constitution. A classic example of people not knowing what the Constitution and Bill of Rights are about can be seen here.

Immigration, and the Unconstitutional President

CFP

Thanks to the Democrat Party, racial politics has become a full blown weapon.  As deconstructionists who wish to show America as being a racist nation so that they may better be able to put into place their own liberal agenda, the image of Trayvon Martin laying on the ground with a bullet in him has created a racial divide that is doing wonders for the liberal left agenda.

As race hustlers, who have made that case much larger for their own agenda, it is inevitable that the effects of the case will spill over into other issues, such as immigration.

Racial politics is a very destructive weapon, and the opponents of the U.S. Constitution are doing whatever they can to create an environment of rage in relation to race in America.  The “race card” tool is also one that the Left is using in regards to illegal immigration.  The issue of immigration, however, has little to do about immigration with these people as much as it has to do with changing America at its foundation, adding new voters to their cause, and betraying the Constitution of the United States.

Destroying the U.S. Military

Family Security Matters

by ALAN  CARUBA

The author of “1984”, George Orwell, once said, “The quickest way to end a  war is to lose it.”

In the preamble to the U.S. Constitution, among the priorities listed is to  “provide for the common defense” of the nation. After having fought a six-year  war during the Revolution and replaced the failed Articles of Confederation, the  framers of the Constitution, many of whom had fought beside George Washington,  well understood the need for a standing army and navy to protect the new  nation.