1/12/2011

ARTICLES OF - ARTICLES OF - BABY STEPS?

Filed under: — @jphoganorg @ 11:08 am

Remembering November elections of 2010 and as a revolt against giant steps effected and attempted by lead Democrats and as more to a foward march of an ideology than a timely and clear "representation" of a nation as a whole, or just to a majority:

Article I - Section 9 - second paragraph…:

     "The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.

     No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.

     No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken.

     No Tax or Duty shall be laid on Articles exported from any State.

     No Preference shall be given by any Regulation of Commerce or Revenue to the Ports of one State over those of another: nor shall Vessels bound to, or from, one State, be obliged to enter, clear, or pay Duties in another.

     No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement of Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time.

     No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State."

Remembering especially this last paragraph in Article I Section 9 how can we not ask or consider ourselves to such a proposition that a former President still "holds" an "Office" and well funded "expectation" of such to Posterity such that maybe all contributions to Clinton Global Initiative for it of an "active" even without the seeming "conflict" existing loud and present with Madam Secretary of State Mrs. William Jefferson Clinton so "official" and "intimate"?

Remembering the Clintons are "lovable" for the "corruption" and how they swim this current daily in a keeping to paddled "loyalty" to Kennedy’s as American Royalty in "Camelot"?

Well?  You are remembering and considering it so, still, yes?

How much of "contributions" and pledges of "commitments" made to keep Clinton "two-fer" active post Presidency dip too deep into our Constitution purposes and protections prescribed towards a prudent prevention?

Again:  "The size of the attempted cover-up" can quite suggest to the size and scope of past crimes - High Crimes or Misdemeanors.

Again:  Thinking a Constitution cannot have a later "law" passed to contravene such, and maybe partly poorly parsed so in such a saying I still to thinking our Constitution needs and "Amending" or reconstituting for a inferior Congression Act of Legislation to trump or supercede or contravene.

Again:  The "foundation" of much of the past decade of problems and structural deficits were so formed within much of the Clinton "two-fer" jury rigging of a better system to fit their ideology more than a reasoned will of the majority in democracy.

And, more personally and still historical is such an understanding of Nixon and his "cover-up" that such was effected more as "damage control" for others, others mere citizens, than as an contravening to "cover-up" just for himself.  Mark Felt may have records to such effect - I really do wonder, and wonder all those years I stayed quiet about knowing his historical role while he stayed quiet.  I knew it had been a FBI operator of highest duties involved after Watergate more in "damage control" than in a "cover-up."  See, Nixon did have J. Edgar Hoover afraid to do duties for him that he had supposedly done willingly for earlier Democrat Exec Officers and of such reportedly of concern for their "liberal lawyers." (From a book on history of FBI.) Nixon had wanted the FBI to officially snoop upon Dem HQ for investigative not simply "political" purposes and then had to outsource some.  See I remember the "you messed up the investigation" - "it is on you" - no one else a mere citizen deserves to have their lives turned upside down and inside out and to an "especially" such about my father as "another mere citizen" deserving protections for his "American Dream."  Yes, I remember Mark Felt and him insisting on a nick-name and "quickly" that got him to a case duty with a offered "deep throat" monicure.  It was never really about what nation took it to be about - and so that what it was maybe about maybe enough to have kept Hillary from her pride in and with an "impeachment."

Bill, it wasn’t about B~~~ J~~~s but about political oppression and threats by a minor playing with family power that had close ties to Dem HQ, that needing a looking into for a proper and measured checking for greater or intentional malice, beyond a forgiveable act of a minor with big talk.

Bill, it was of a minor threatening as a hooked up Democrat "political ruin" to a neighbor but in a spirit of a wondering as to possible bullying future potential, and not expecting such to one as well hooked up with law and Republicans within a thought Democrat family. 

Bill, you are not a King.  Hillary you are not worthy of "Queen."

And so it was written and so it became and was effected until…?