Below is an email I received and my answers as usual are in red. The rest is an example of the leadership in the Republic…. You be the judge.
IN CONGRESS, April 12, 2011
To Our Fellow Americans; in Congress Assembled,
First of all, thank you, on behalf of a grateful nation, for all that you have done to carry this work of reinhabiting our lawful government forward. You cannot re-inhabit that which is already inhabited, even if it is inhabited by those in dishonor! As of April 7, 2011 we have been informed that 85% of the documentation required to demonstrate lawful standing, You cannot claim lawful standing just because you want it and even a few thousand people cannot claim to BE the people of this nation in relation to the rest of the population. has been received and reviewed for accuracy and 60% of the free state Republics are able to prove that they are functional and operating governments. It took the founding fathers 20 years to fully seat just 13 colonies. This would be because they took CAREFUL CONSIDERATION FOR ALL POSSIBLE OUTCOMES. We have re-inhabited the governments of the 50 free states in Union that they founded in just 1½ years; Again you haven’t re-inhabited anything. You have done nothing but create a fictitious government which is being and will be seen by the existing government as an organized attempt to overthrow the U.S. Government. which is quite remarkable; It is quite absurd. however, it appears that many of our brothers and sisters have different views of Republic for the united States of America. We believe these different views can cause serious misunderstandings and controversies that are not necessary, and is some cases, are unlawful. Ok, let’s get this straight. You are saying that different views, in some cases are unlawful? Is it possible you haven’t even read the Bill of Rights? The purpose of this Open Letter is to inform and educate everyone about these matters so that we may all see the same thing, the same way, at the same time You mean you want everyone with a different opinion to shut up and fly right? - so that we can all act in Honor, in Truth, in Peace and in Harmony. There are several critical aspects to communication: purpose, context, application and audience, to name a few. For instance, consider the following:
“In Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, We the People ordained and established a Constitution for the united States of America1.”
For those of you that are not familiar with this, it is the Preamble to the Constitution for the united States of America (circa 1789), also referred to as the organic Constitution. It is the highest law of the land. Wrong! The Constitution is a Rule Book for the Federal Government. The states and the people are SUPREME over it and second only to God! To lawfully apply what is written we must look to the purpose and the audience for whom it is written to understand the context. One thing that we need to understand is that We the People have unalienable, unlimited Sovereign Rights, given to us by our Creator. We the People create surrogate power by Constitution. The government is not a living soul, it is a created thing that We vested limited power into for the PURPOSES that are enumerated in the Preamble of the Constitution. Therefore, EVERY aspect of the
Constitution must be understood in the context that the Constitution BINDS, LIMITS, DIRECTS and HOLDS ACCOUNTABLE the federal government and its elected representatives. Additionally, the Constitution for the united States of America applies to nation governance, and with specified limitations to the free states in Union governance. It does not limit the states, it is run, funded and ruled by the states. Each free state also has it own constitution/covenants, as well as each county. The POWER comes from the Creator and flows through the dominion that was given to man. However, when free states come together in Union for the PURPOSES that are enumerated in the Preamble they are unconditionally agreeing to make no laws that interfere with the ORDERS that were issued by the People to EXECUTE the PURPOSES set forth in the Preamble. Drivel. The PURPOSE for us to bring this to your attention is that over the years America was forced off course by nefarious predators and enslaved by those that We the People were led to believe were acting in honor on behalf of the People – a notion that many Americans hold to this day. The remedies have always been at hand, however, We the People suffer for lack of knowledge.
IN CONGRESS, April 12, 2011
In Utah, this past November, the lawful Congress was called into session for the first time since those seats were vacated during the American Civil War. The seats were NEVER VACATED and the ONLY THING THE UTAH EVENT COULD BY OUR FOUNDING DOCUMENTS HAVE BEEN IS A CONTINENTAL CONGRESS… IF SO, WHEN WERE ELECTIONS HELD AFTER THAT? During this session of Congress the Declaration of Sovereign Intent was unanimously adopted and ratified which reads in part: ANY documents you can bring forth are null, void, pointless and unauthorized. “Therefore, We the Congress of the Republic for the united States of America, assembled in the presence of the Almighty Creator, without imposing or endorsing a national religion, do hereby continue the adoption of the accurate "Holy Bible" as divine law and the fundamental basis of law form. We ratify and adopt "The Declaration of Independence" circa 1776, "The Constitution for the united States of America" circa 1789 and "The Bill of Rights" circa 1791 as the basis and form for our laws. That is not a LAW FORM. This law form will be supported by all laws that are passed by Congress and will be upheld and enforced by our Judiciary and Law Enforcement. All interpretations and applications of these laws will be in compliance with the principles of the aforementioned documents that we hold as sacred in our Republic; so help us God2.”
Please note that each document that is cited, is referenced by a footnote so that we can each verify that what is being said is TRUE and VERIFIABLE.
One of the controversies that is affecting our Republic concerns the perception that “national” is a nefarious entity that is acting in opposition to the will and best interest of the People on the free states. Because it is. Another controversy is one of free speech and religion. For the sake of clarity, please note the following:
Article the First, Section 1
All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives3.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances4.
This is not meant to be an exhaustive effort to deal with each controversy but to serve as advice on how to handle the matter lawfully, peacefully and harmoniously. The subject of religion has been a tender subject for many. As referenced above, all legislative Powers are vested in Congress. The reason for this is that the People are represented by the Congress in the House of Representatives. So… if the People are represented by the Congress, and our Congress serves as both state and “national” and all legislation Powers are vested in Congress then “national” IS your free state Republic Congress. The President follows the Orders that are issued to that office by the Congress. So… if any are displeased with what is being done, or how things are handled, the PROPER venue and procedure is determined by the Congress and the FIRST step is to consult with your LOCAL Congress. That is the most convoluted interpretation of the founder’s original intent I have yet to see.
The next thing to keep in mind is that our First Amendment Rights to free speech do not include
slander, libel or defamation of character. To act in Honor, Truth, Peace and Harmony we must
provide PROOF in the form of a sworn affidavit by no less than two witnesses to make
2 Unanimous Declaration of Sovereign Intent; Congress of the Republic for the united States of America (circa 2010) HELLO DIMWITS FREE SPEECH MEANS FREE SPEECH! IT DOES NOT MEAN SPEECH ACCEPTABLE TO YOU! DE FACTO, DE FACTO, DE FACTO!
IN CONGRESS, April 12, 2011
ACCUSATIONS. Freedom of speech ceases to be lawful when someone is ACCUSED of unlawful action without proof. WRONG AGAIN people are accused of unlawful action every time an arrest is made and that person is delivered unto the justice system for trial. It is then up to the prosecution to prove guilt or fail to do so. This has nothing to do with Freedom of Speech.
And finally, with respect, Congress can make no law respecting the establishment of religion.
Therefore, a lawful policy does not exist requiring ANY religion as a requisite to hold an office. IF anyone makes such a statement, it is made without authority of the People as ordained by Constitution and is in error. One way to remedy that is to contact the individual who made the statement and to find out if you understand what they said IN THE RIGHT CONTEXT. Often, issues arise for lack of clarity. It is important to make sure that when an individual makes a statement that you ASK what was meant so that we are all on the same page. If an individual makes an error they should be afforded the opportunity to make it right, which is one of the PURPOSES of this document. If after you discuss it with that individual and find that each individual is clear what the other said and there is a disagreement then one or two more witnesses are brought in so that every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses5. If the individual still refuses to listen, bring the matter to the Assembly. If they refuse to listen even to the Assembly, remove them from the Assembly. Just too ridiculous to address.
“My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge: because thou hast rejected knowledge, I
will also reject thee, that thou shalt be no priest to me: seeing thou hast forgotten the law of
thy God, I will also forget thy children6.”
The purpose for this explanation is not to impose any particular religion, it is to inform and educate folks about the basis for the law form that has been adopted by this Republic. The Holy Bible You already said something else above, make up your mind. is the basis for Common Law and is the foundation of the Law of our Land. As noted above, we are destroyed for lack of knowledge. We believe that our brothers and sisters, when properly trained and who do you propose is all knowing and qualified to properly train to see YOUR POINT OF VIEW? and informed, can and will handle things in Honor, Truth, Peace and Harmony. And those who do not can be treated lawfully and dealt with according to law based on Proof and Truth.
Now then, it has come to the attention of this Congress, proven in the form of emails and official
recordings of committees and open sessions of the various houses of Congress, which is irrefutable proof, that an idea is being presented throughout our Republic that suggests that we are bound by other law forms, such as the Articles of Confederation, and also that we are provisional, which by their explanation means without power or authority to act. You have no authority whatsoever! The whole thing is nothing but a sham and a very dangerous game.
As noted above, the four foundations of our law form were decided upon in Utah during the first
session of the restored Congress. The Articles of Confederation was superseded by the organic
Constitution (circa 1789) because it was inefficacious, which means: not having power to produce the effect desired, or the proper effect; of inadequate power or force7.
Provisional, which means: provided for present need or for the occasion; temporarily established;
temporary; as a provisional government or regulation; a provisional treaty8. You are not any kind of government. In order to be the government of the nation under our Constitutional Republic, you must have the consent of the governed. You do not have it.
These controversies are being presented at the same time because they are originating from the same source (verified by proof and the way the word provisional is being used by these folks is the very reason WHY the Articles of Confederation was superseded – because it did not give the lawful authorities the power to act on certain needful matters as ordered by the People.
5 Matthew 18: 15-20
IN CONGRESS, April 12, 2011
There are other matters, of equal importance, that will be discussed at another time. The concern of the Joint Sub-Committee on Governance Affairs, which consists of members from both the House and Senate Committees on Security and Joint Constitutional and Special Studies, is that these matters are no longer Local to one free state but is a matter for all free states in Union. These controversies have been perpetuated across state lines and also affect the Union, which in both cases makes it a Constitutional matter before the one supreme Court that effects the security of our free states and as free states in Union. Ask Kelby to share the cheese.
The judicial Power of the United States shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office. Hmm where is that money, so far nobody is being compensated and until they are the position is fantasy. A paid position is only a paid position if its paid!
Clause 1. The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this
Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;--to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;--to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;--to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;--to Controversies between two or more States;-- between a State and Citizens of another State,--between Citizens of different States,--between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.
Clause 2. In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.
Clause 2. This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance
thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding (not-with-standing or interest). Highlighting has been added to draw attention to particular verbiage to emphasize and confirm that which has already been previously stated. The Constitution, which is the Law of the Land, Wrong, it’s a rule book to rule the federal level only and applies only to that level and a10 mile square piece of land. has been accepted unanimously by this body as one of four authorities for Law and is the supreme Law. Again only for the national level. No intelligent person will ever agree to be ruled by national.
Therefore, to suggest other law forms is not lawful or Constitutional and is also causing controversies. The definition of controversy: 1828 Definition – Noah Webster’s 1828 American Dictionary
CONTROVERSY, n. [L. See Controvert.]
1. Dispute; debate; agitation of contrary opinions. A dispute is commonly oral, and a
controversy in writing. Dispute is often or generally a debate of short duration, a temporary
debate; a controversy is often oral and sometimes continued in books or in law for months or
years. YOU ARE KIDDING HERE RIGHT?
IN CONGRESS, April 12, 2011
2. A suit in law; a case in which opposing parties contend for their respective claims before a
3. Dispute; opposition carried on.
4. Opposition; resistance.
These ideas of both being provisional and falling under the Articles of Confederation are in error.
They have no basis in Truth or in Law, based upon our Law forms. They are being perpetuated across state lines and between Citizens of different states. The folks perpetrating this are claiming to be from a certain free and independent state. The states ARE free and independent states, when acting alone, when acting in Union they are NOT independent but part of the whole. This is not to say that the states have NO independence, this is merely to point out that the PURPOSE of the Constitution which is an Order from the People to the government to do certain things on their behalf are based upon mutual, not independent, common goals that REQUIRE cooperation and compliance from ALL free states.
Further, the officials of each state and the free states in Union are bound by oath as follows:
Clause 3. The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States. Therefore, not acting in support of the Constitution is a breach of oath of office. This only applies to those powers the state’s agreed to grant the federal level.
Clause 2. Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behaviour, and, with the Concurrence of two thirds, expel a Member.
As noted above, each House is to deal with its own. Therefore, this Joint Sub-Committee on
Governance Affairs has been convened to address the behavior of its membership and to inform and restore ORDER to this Congress. Likewise, as representatives of both the People and the state our advice is intended to serve as a model for dealing with ALL matters at the most LOCAL level possible in order to Remind, Restore and Unite making use of our Law forms as adopted and ratified by unanimous consent. ABSURD, national has no business in ANYTHING LOCAL EVER.
Finally, as previously noted, We the People ORDERED our President and his administration to carry out certain functions that we delegated to him by Constitution. In keeping with the lawful
administration of his office he has come back to the American People with the requirements of the international community, the military and those who have appointed him Trustee to demonstrate that we are a functional government. The good news is that we have nearly accomplished in 1½ years what it took the founding fathers 20 years to do with over three times the amount of states. You haven’t accomplished anything because you have no standing and the people don’t even know who you are, will never follow you so all you have is a large boys and girls club. So we are on the right track. But we are not there yet and all of these controversies are delaying the process. Many have made false accusations, many have questioned motives, many have expressed anger and made threats to withdraw fellowship and so on. And some, without doing even the MINIMUM to act in good faith by completing the paperwork and submitting it so that the President can complete what we ORDERED him to do on our behalf. Perhaps they are as aware as I am what the true purpose of that paperwork is hmmmm?
IN CONGRESS, April 12, 2011
Therefore, as time is of the essence; after careful consideration and review of these matters, the Joint Sub-Committee on Governance Affairs is prepared to offer the following advice:
Step One – Congress votes on time frame and guidelines for compliance and establishing standing
Step Two – Establish Standing – Time Is Of The Essence
• For now, submit all previously requested documentation as written
• For now, no official that has outstanding paperwork is eligible to vote
• For now, no official that has outstanding paperwork will be paid
• For now, a minimum amount of time to comply will be established by vote of this Congress
• For now, failure to comply will result in expulsion from Office BY WHOSE AUTHORITY???
• Once funding and enforcement is secured, all paperwork may be amended; approval for
amendments will not be unreasonably withheld. If you don’t know, ASK, don’t accuse! Don’t make excuses; take responsibility for your OWN actions. The Ambassadors Ambassadors are nothing more than Tim Turners version of Obama’s Czars! BOGUS AND DE FACTO and Governors have ALL been given the documents that need to be completed with detailed instructions on how to fill out the information AND to properly submit it. Further, it is the recommendation of this Committee, based on the policy of our President to practice
forgiveness and allow those who do not have a clear conscience, feel like they have been misled, did not receive full disclosure or other similar sentiments to resign from office in honor without forfeiting any pay that may have been accumulated to date. This is a onetime good faith gesture as a token of gratitude from a grateful nation for taking part in this great work; all the time, expense and courage that has been demonstrated. This will be presented as a separate vote in terms of time to comply to this Congress. Those that do not resign will be expected to fulfill your oaths. Again, if you don’t KNOW, ASK! Don’t accuse, don’t complain to the entire Republic by email. Learn and OBSERVE the proper protocols for taking lawful, peaceful, harmonious action.
It should be noted that if an officer resigns or is expelled for cause, that means that seat is vacant until filled. Likewise, if a free state Republic abandons its offices that does not mean that their state in NOT a part on the free states in Union. We the People of the free states in Union, OWN the entire united States. YOU OWN NOTHING! Those who are in states that are not compliant (i.e. not properly seated, causing controversies) are simply considered abandoned seats, just as they have been since the Civil War. LIES, DRIVEL AND STUPIDITY
If any state congress cannot lawfully settle a controversy within their respective state within the
Time frame that shall be approved of by vote of the national Congress the national congress may
intervene to settle the matter by a two thirds vote of the Congress, or as otherwise agreed. This action is being proposed in order to settle controversies that may arise and support the unity of this Republic.
Step Three – Forgiveness, Repentance and Restitution
Once standing is established, for those who have caused controversy they will be required to retract all controversial information and/or accusations made without proof or that may be contrary to our adopted law forms. Any further controversies will result in removal for cause and will dramatically impact any compensation that may have been accumulated to date. Those that wish to share in the benefits of the Republic MUST act lawfully, honorably and must maintain at all times the minimum standard of professionalism and conduct as established by each House and Constitution/Covenant for each free state and the Constitution for the united States of America. AGAIN NO AUTHORITY WHATSOEVER!
The rest of this idiocy was just too totally irrelevant to take up space with so I deleted it. It’s pretty clear, straighten up and go along with the Dictatorship or be removed by a bunch of pinheaded people who have no authority over you. Yep, that about sums it up.
But the lunacy doesn’t end there….
Jim Wright of Pennsylvania has been subject to the dishonesty from national now and being a reasonable has chosen to deal with it in a reasonable way. He knows fraud when he see it so has issued a demand….
COMMON LAW FOIA
Addressed To: James Timothy Turner
Nathan Joel Peachey
All Cabinet Officers of RuSA
All Supreme Court Justices of RuSA
Please be advised that this a formal request under a common law f.o.i.a. for you to supply all oaths of office of the above named and that of James Robert Wright.
You have five (5) days to respond to this notice and request of which has been emailed to James Timothy Turner and Nathan Joel Peachey and is being put on the internet for NOTICE of same this April 12, 2011. A timely non-response shall be deemed an agreement, that the oaths of office do not exist and have not been supplied via return email to this sender address.
Note that Mr. Wright has every right to make this demand. It doesn’t matter what he calls it and as you will see below, instead of producing the documents, the pinheaded Chief of Security attacks the verbiage and thereby skirts the entire issue. Can we say de facto boys and girls? Mr. Wright has quite effectively done to TT the same thing Trump is doing to Obama. Where’s the beef? Never mind of course that this most certainly NOT A SECURITY ISSUE, IT IS A FRAUD ISSUE. This is an issue which establishes once and for all the legitimacy of national’s claims.
From the Desk of the Chief of Security
Thursday, April 14, 2011
RuSA Security ID #: RP208703080RuSA - Crosscheck Security ID against press section of
Dear Fellow Americans,
Threats of legal lunacy, and confusion of law. One of the most dangerous threats to our security is that state of mind which involves ignorance and flawed thinking. Regarding our Republic, which is especially true concerning what is legal or lawful, and what is not. What wrongly affects the mind then wrongly affects the will and then the deeds on the part of the affected, thereby undermining our security and increasing our division and weakness. Our security requires knowledge, legal soundness of mind, clarity regarding law, and proper distinction of law jurisdiction and form and related procedure. A very clear example of what I believe is legal lunacy (Unsoundness of legal mind)and of confusion of law has been provided by Jim Wright of Pennsylvania. See the attachment.
Our President has been on assembly and other calls in an effort to warn people entertaining the notions that Jim Wright and his doctrine and followers promote. I have heard him explain his reasons regarding his assessment that Jim Wright does not know what he is talking about regarding law and the true state of things regarding the Republic and its lawful nature and its right standing in international law. Identifying the most fundamental flaw, the President has stated that Jim Wright confuses legal with lawful and blurs jurisdiction and law form (e.g. de facto vs. de jure, or common law vs. other law, etc.); and, based on my diligence regarding law, I agree.
The most blatant fallacy evidenced on the face of the attachment, herein also notice, is the notion of a common law FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) request. In this regard, consider the following premises and conclusion—logic/reasoning. [Fact/Premise 1] Though positive law of a de jure state/republic may involve common law principles, common law is non-statutory law and typically unwritten law, its principles often made apparent by custom or by common law court decisions or maxims; [Fact/Premise 2] The Freedom of Information Act is statutory law of the de facto corporation (UNITED STATES), not positive law of any de jure state/republic, and is written law;
[Conclusion] Therefore, FOIA (The Freedom of Information Act) is not common law; and common law is no correct adjective/description of FOIA. 1 of 3
CharlesEugeneWright Vice President
WadeButler Secretary of State
JamesBuchananGeiger Senate Pro Tem
MarkLounsbury Speaker of the House
Press Office Number: (269) 978-5630
Regarding the subject notice, do you see the blurring/mixing and confusion of jurisdiction (common law, admiralty, corporation statutes and regulations, etc.) and law form? What kind of legal mind does that? Is it knowing, or ignorant? Is it a mind employing soundness of thinking, or unsoundness of thinking? Do you know that such evidence as that of the subject notice is the very thing that courts/COURTS use to rightly deny the process and/or claimed state/status/standing of plaintiffs /defendants /claimants /libellants /respondents/etc? Such evidence makes it very clear to the court/COURT that it is dealing with, in a manner of speaking, a legal lunatic who confuses law: an incompetent of unsound mind; and the court/COURT has a legal and lawful and moral obligation to rule as it sees fit to prevent such person(s) from harming themselves or others, perhaps even by making such legal lunatics wards of the COURT/STATE. Often, such delusional persons who believe that which is false to be true and that which is unsound to be sound sit in their cells and wring their hands and scratch their heads and accuse the court/COURT or system/SYSTEM of injustice, doing so without realizing that they likely are worse enemies of themselves than the courts/COURTS. Also, their deluded friends and compatriots likewise are perplexed and accusing, sometimes having the unrighteous urge to commit physical violence.
I thank Jim Wright for what I will call his self-repudiation/nullification; and I thank our Creator for enlightening and saving those who otherwise might have been deceived, led astray, and destroyed by nonsense and flawed doctrine.
Furthermore, I understand that Jim Wright’s doctrine and thinking present notions that the Republic does not exist and that it never existed. Upon examination, do not such notions (mere faulty conclusions?) directly contradict his very own activities/behavior? By special and temporary appointment, he functioned within the scope of a Republic (nation-wide) Grand Jury meeting that occurred in Atlanta, Georgia, which meeting was arranged by Nathan Peachey, Chief Justice of the one Supreme Court of the Republic. If the Republic has never existed and does not now exist (it is impossibleto re-inhabit that which never existed), how could Jim Wright have any authority (of anycapacity) by any/special appointment made/agreed/consented by Republic (national) officials and regarding any process operated/conducted by Republic (national) officials?
How could Jim Wright have any authority regarding any process engaged and operated/conducted by any non-existent officer(s) (if no Republic, there can be no officer thereof or authority of appointment thereof, or authority of assembly thereof, or related agreement of either state or union of states)? By the doctrine that the Republic was never properly established and does not exist, does it not follow that Jim Wright has repudiated his own involvement and rendered the process involving him null and void? Does such contradictory doctrine and behavior evidence good faith or bad faith (fraud); and if neither, what other? 2 of 3
Know that there is a movement and agenda that attack the security of our Republic by attempting to deny the lawful nature of the Republic: the union of the several States of America in republic, and to undo the security of the union and of the people by whose authority the union of states and its law and organs are established.
Any attempt to undo the constitutional union, including the de jure national organs of that union involving even the congress of every one of the several states, is an attack against our security, even our very lives, in the Republic that the Creator has seen fit to restore and to advance for the good of man, of all nations. I strongly suggest that you do not listen to Jim Wright, or to anyone advancing the notion of the states becoming independent nations and not part of the union. United we stand; divided we fall.
We are so close to the greater manifestation of our victory that the enemy is desperate and would have ignorant people destroy what we have re-inhabited and are building to endure. Internationally and locally, we are gaining ground. Dead and diseased wood are being discovered and pruned. Do not be deceived. Do not be in legal lunacy. Do not be in confusion of law. Secure your faith and minds, and stay the course. Preserve your free states, and the union thereof that we call the Republic for the united States of America.
In faith, hope and love,
Timothy Coy Pledger
Chief of Security
The Republic for the united States of America
I don’t think I even need to point out the absurdity above so I leave it up to you. Mr. Pledger makes an idiot of himself and he needs no help from me. This past week on a group call with 12 individuals with other issues, Turner agreed to meet with Mr. Wright and settle all issues by debate on April 31, 2011 in Kansas. Any takers on a bet that he will weasel out of it? Besides he went and made a promise his handlers will never let him keep. Again. Pledger is right about one thing, there is lunacy alright and he is spouting it. The whole scam has become a bunch of lessons in lunacy.