Constitutionalism & Law

And What Is Treason?

The Constitution defines ‘Treason’ as follows: “Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.”

Now, to understand fully, we turn to a dictionary of the same period: Webster’s 1828 Dictionary and assess the definition of ‘levy’ — it is as follows:

LEV’Y, verb transitive [Latin levo; Eng. to lift.]

To raise; to collect. To levy troops, is to enlist or to order men into public service. To levy an army, is to collect troops and form an army by enrollment, conscription or other means.

To raise; to collect by assessment; as, to levy taxes, toll tribute, or contributions.

To levy war, is to raise or begin war; to take arms for attack; to attack.

First, note that ordering men into public service is a definition, and the President has announced he is doing just that; also note that the example of “levying war” is used as an example and includes raising/beginning war, and taking up arms for an attack.

Likewise, the definition for ‘war’ is similarly illuminating:

WAR, noun [G., to perplex, embroil, disturb. The primary sense of the root is to strive, struggle, urge, drive, or to turn, to twist.]

A contest between nations or states, carried on by force, either for defense, or for revenging insults and redressing wrongs, for the extension of commerce or acquisition of territory, or for obtaining and establishing the superiority and dominion of one over the other. These objects are accomplished by the slaughter or capture of troops, and the capture and destruction of ships, towns and property. Among rude nations, war is often waged and carried on for plunder. As war is the contest of nations or states, it always implies that such contest is authorized by the monarch or the sovereign power of the nation. When war is commenced by attacking a nation in peace, it si called an offensive war and such attack is aggressive. When war is undertaken to repel invasion or the attacks of an enemy, it is called defensive, and a defensive war is considered as justifiable. Very few of the wars that have desolated nations and deluged the earth with blood, have been justifiable. Happy would it be for mankind, if the prevalence of Christian principles might ultimately extinguish the spirit of war and if the ambition to be great, might yield to the ambition of being good.

and

WAR, verb intransitive
1. To make war; to invade or attack a nation or state with force of arms; to carry on hostilities; or to be in a state of contest by violence.

He teacheth my hands to war 2 Samuel 22:35.

The Declaration of War

Now consider that the threat to remove governors makes it plain and leaves no doubt that the motivation and object of such actions is “obtaining and establishing the superiority and dominion of one over the other” — that is, we have just heard a declaration that the federal government is utterly superior to the States and, implicitly, that the States are not [to be] sovereigns but rather subjects.

The Citizenry Threatened

President Biden also threatened the People directly, and on multiple levels. From things like travel to education, from employment to even children… the pervasiveness of the treats uttered in this speech is astounding.

Those Rejecting Unlawful Claims of Authority

Those who are rejecting these unlawful and tyrannical policies were threatened quite bluntly — “we’ve been patient, but our patience is wearing thin” — which is interesting on several levels:
First, is it not the ever changing list of things that you have to do to show subservience (like masks, or lockdowns), and rights you have to surrender (like attending church, or social gatherings) that should make people hesitant? (In reality, though, ‘defiant’ and ‘rebellious’ are better stances against this lawlessness.)
Second, is it not true that multiple times the reason given for vaccination is to “protect the vaccinated”? (A hidden admission that these vaccines are NOT effective.)
Third, the implicit ‘or else’ — as if those refusing are children, incapable of making their own decisions and dangerously close to getting discipline.

Those Attempting to Go About Their Business

Likewise, the declarations of the intent to use the Transport Safety Administration to molest the citizenry going about their business, to wit “the TSA will double the fines on travelers that refuse to mask” — a blatant declaration of the intent to violate the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition of excessive fines… what’s more, the entirety of response to the pandemic by governments (federal and state, in tandem) is violative of the prohibitions on cruel and unusual punishments: quarantining the healthy, shutting down people’s businesses, prohibiting the normal living of life, and the gathering together to worship.

It seems much of what government has done has increased the pain and suffering, and only just now are Sate governors saying “no more” — and good for them! — but what needs to happen is those enforcing these unlawful policies need to be punished, and more than the “slap on the wrist” punishments many egregious crimes are getting these days. (The truly vindictive sentences seem specially reserved for people like Kyle Rittenhouse who dare to defend themselves against the covertly-sanctioned and -supported ‘riots’.)

Those Who Just Want to do Their Job

And let us not forget the threats to people who just want to do their job, being left alone. It’s too late though: you may not have an interest in politics, but those in politics have and interest in crushing you. — The declaration that all federal employees must get vaccinated (the ‘or tested’ is a lie: a fiction that operates like the mafia’s “or else”), as with everyone who does business with the federal government.

Final thoughts

So, in the end, it looks like aside from the threats, and the declaration of war against the States, is a big game of chicken — who is going to stop him? You? Your company? Your State? — this is an interesting proposition, and it is obvious that it is not Biden but those controlling him making these dares.

I, for one, will not comply with illegal orders — and make no mistake, forcing people to undergo medical treatment against their will is criminal — remember RAMP:

Return fire with aimed fire. Return force with force. You always have the right to repel hostile acts with necessary force.
Anticipate attack. Use force first if, but only if, you see clear indicators of hostile intent.
Measure the amount of force that you use, if time and circumstances permit. Use only the amount of force necessary to protect lives and accomplish the mission.
Protect with deadly force only human life, and property designated by your commander. Stop short of deadly force when protecting other property.

You always have the right to us necessary force, including deadly force, to protect yourself and others.(Link)

Texas, Abortion, Roe V. Wade, and the link to Vaccine Mandates

Finally it should be noted that Texas prohibiting abortion is an interesting development — while I condone, in the strongest possible terms, the Texas lawmakers that enacted it there is cause for caution:

This is NOT pro-life winning the war, this is the first time pro-life gaining ground in the battle.
Roe v. Wade’s USSC decision was such that found a Constitutional right to privacy of medical records, especially from the government.
As current precedent stands, it is unconstitutional on its face for government to demand access to medical record data… including vaccination status.
Therefore, watch challenges to Roe v. Wade, because they might just set up the legal-equivalent of a false-flag to overturn Roe v. Wade, and then surprise everyone with the “now ‘legal’” invasion of medical privacy legitimizing the government demands for vaccination status.