 |
|
|
|||
 |
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
 |
|||
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Judicial Watch: Clinton Secretary of State Appointment Unconstitutional
- Text size
Judicial Watch
January 30, 2009
- A d v e r t i s e m e n t
Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, announced today that it has filed a lawsuit against newly sworn-in Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton on behalf of U.S. Foreign Service Officer and State Department employee David C. Rodearmel, (Rodearmel v. Clinton, et al., (D. District of Columbia)). The lawsuit maintains that Mrs. Clinton is constitutionally ineligible to serve as Secretary of State and that Mr. Rodearmel cannot be forced to serve under the former U.S. Senator, as it would violate the oath he took as a Foreign Service Officer in 1991 to “support and defend” and “bear true faith and allegiance” to the Constitution of the United States.
Under the “Emoluments” or “Ineligibility” clause of the U.S. Constitution, no member of Congress can be appointed to a civilian position within the U.S. government if the “emoluments” of the position, such as the salary or benefits paid to whoever occupies the office, increased during the term for which the Senator or Representative was elected.
Specifically, article I, section 6 of the U.S. Constitution provides, “No Senator or Representative shall, during the Time for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil Office under the Authority of the United States, which shall have been created, or the Emoluments whereof shall have been encreased during such time.” The text of the provision is an absolute prohibition and does not allow for any exceptions.
-
- Social bookmarks
- Email this article
-
- Print this page
- Share on Twitter
January 30th, 2009 at 4:36 pm
I heard this story quite a while ago. I really don’t think anyone will do anything about it though. You would think that such a blatant and open defiance of the Constitution would have been reported by more prominent media figures but of course it hasn’t. They’ve all gone along with this as “business as usual”.
James Reply:
January 30th, 2009 at 6:03 pm
The practice, approved by the Supreme Court, has been, that such Senator will have their pay reduced to the level it was when they voted on the raise while a Senator. This is nothing new and has been in practice for some time. My experience with many of these news stories has been, one will find demons if they go looking for them. There are too many other important issues to focus on if we want to remain free Americans. This isn’t one of them.
happystab Reply:
January 31st, 2009 at 12:45 am
Is it an approved practice to give someone their choice between Vice-President and Secretary of State as Jill Biden said? I couldn’t believe all those Oprah worshipers just laughed when she said that.
Indeed. Reply:
January 31st, 2009 at 1:12 am
That ‘practice’, is also, unconstitutional–and exceeds the authority of the Court.
You ignoramuses just won’t stop with your mealy-mouthed excuses; it makes me sick.
Griz Reply:
January 31st, 2009 at 9:54 am
Of course the mainstream media won’t react to this. Why should they? Ignoring the Constitution has become the common place and even akin to a sport in the Congress, Executive and Judicial branches of our government. Don’t misunderstand, it’s great we’re putting it forward now. But, I bet you can find little to large infringements every month in almost every year since the end of WWII if you dig for them. This has become business as usual.
Homebrew Reply:
January 31st, 2009 at 2:59 pm
“There are too many other important issues to focus on if we want to remain free Americans. This isn’t one of them.”
I Humbly disagree, any infraction of the Constitution should be challenged. The Constitution dose not allow for the salary to be diminished to a previous salry level, it says “No Senator or Representative shall, during the Time for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil Office under the Authority of the United States, which shall have been created, or the Emoluments whereof shall have been encreased during such time.” That means she’s ineligible period, they cant take away the fact the she voted for pay raises for that job 3 times. This is the whole problem we have Oh they found a way around it, it’s a waste of time to bother calling them out on that infraction. Like I said ALL infractions should be questioned no matter how small.
mrmakymkay Reply:
February 2nd, 2009 at 4:59 pm
damn strait ! we have over looked the suspension of habeus corpus, the patriot act( violation of privacy) and many more im sure. still nobody cares. except for thefew that refuse to watch the “boob tube”, and to believe the mainstream media that tells us half truths if any truth at all.
i would like to say that i am tired of living like this. bulls--- needle dicks telling me what i can and cannot do..
all i want in life is to fish, hunt, and cultavate what i wish. and what happens is corrrupt govt tells me u need a license u need a tag u need fish license u need this u need that ect… u need to leave people alone or you are gonna get bit. bunch of fukin DC oxygen theives! stealing air from good people mkay. hehe
Guns won't save the world! Reply:
February 2nd, 2009 at 2:42 am
Yeah well it is common practice for police officers to speed about 10-25 MPH faster than anyone else on the freeway, or a dirt road for that matter, but when they run over a kid, it is no different from when any other human being runs over a kid. And that does not make it okay just cuz they all do it and people like the above who say it is not worth talking about because they always get away with it …welll there are just too many of them on this site lately? HUH? WTF? Where did they all come from anyways, I don’t remember the lights being off all that long but these damn roaches have either gotten over their fear of the light or they are scared to death and going into full overblown overdrive backed into a corner and knowing they are about to burn or serve out a life sentence or drop from a raised platform with a noose around their necks!
I really don’t care whether they burn, hang, or whatever just so long as they are outside and I am inside the gates of the city! But Damn there are alot of trolls and the likes here now!
Idiocracy Reply:
January 30th, 2009 at 10:13 pm
I find it very odd that this article does not make any hint at the fact that this pay raise was removed in December 2008, back to the original 2007 pay rate while Hilary was in office for this very reason.
See this article: http://news.xinhuanet.com/engl.....492721.htm
I find it very odd that this significant fact is not in this article AT ALL. Why would this not be mentioned. There is even a “Related Articles” section here. Is it not related?
Truth welcomes scrutiny. Lets get all the facts before we make decisions.
Indeed. Reply:
January 31st, 2009 at 1:17 am
Here’re some more related scrutinous facts for your belaboured decision-making process to “find very odd”…
We NEED to boot this witch out no matter what it takes!!!
Lal Wynstrom Reply:
January 31st, 2009 at 4:44 am
You may or may not understand, but that blatant violation is the very reason they set the pay raise back to the ‘07 standard. While obviously there is no statement in the Constitution prohibiting this, the real agenda here, we must recognize, is the continual use of the letter of the law to defeat the spirit of the law, and to further destroy our allegiance to and respect for the Constitution and the Rule of Law. This in-our-face reversal once again is meant to show us, in my opinion, that the Rule of Law is dead in this country and that the Illuminati brotherhood will do what it wants, when it wants.
JW is correct to continue the pursuit of this matter even if it will not change the outcome.
Guns won't save the world! Reply:
February 2nd, 2009 at 2:44 am
why do you find it odd? Alex reported on it before they reduced the pay rate, the constitution does not allow for this supposed fix, and a precedence by a court cannot change the constitution anyways so you miss the point, we don’t care if they changed her pay raise back or not, the point is that the law says plainly that she is not eligible to serve and that’ s all that matters buddy, either they follow the laws or they don’t, and when they don’t they don’t deserve to be in office, especially a bitch with her kind of record! Get lost government trollss wothless scum, get off the bottom of my shoe…worse than hot gum!
mrmakymkay Reply:
February 2nd, 2009 at 5:04 pm
they applied that amendment to combat coruption in govt. so if they appoint her to the position you gotta see the coruption right? mkay
Idiocracy Reply:
February 2nd, 2009 at 9:50 pm
What I find odd is that this article was posted (along with all the “relevant” articles) on January 30th, when the pay was reduced in December 2008. (You state Alex reported this before the pay decrease. That is incorrect. Look at the date of the article.) Take a step back and ask why they would post this article. This article is posted as a way to state “Hillary broke the law and our government allowed it.” But that is not true if all the information was provided. She WOULD HAVE broke the law if she received the pay increase she voted for, but she did not. That is probably the most important piece of information we could have relevant to this article. Why was that information not even addressed? (That is not a rhetorical question.) If we are really fighting an Infowar, then lets get all the info… mkay?
I don’t agree with reducing the pay as a workaround any more than you guys do. And that is the point: We should be fighting against the workaround, AND NOT making the false statement that Hilary broke the law. If the law allows for the workaround then it is legal. The post by “AntiHillary” makes a good point that if the Supreme Court has ruled that the workaround is Constitutional, then according to law, it is. You can’t say it is against the law, but you CAN repeal the law, and that is the correct road to take.
Lets not jump to conclusions even if it is to our benefit. It is lazy. Remeber this important thing: People believe what they want to believe. That is the main reason so many cannot see what is going on in our world. Questioning your believe is the first thing you must do to get real truth. So I ask you: What do you want to believe? Do you want to believe that Hillary broke Constitutional law because it supports your other beliefs?
DErAngeD Reply:
January 31st, 2009 at 9:25 am
the media won’t say a thing, THEY are the enemy and only serve to make things worse.
finally it’s been on the airwaves for the last 2 days how the mainstream media has been making things worse.
January 30th, 2009 at 4:48 pm
They don’t care if it’s not constitutional. Even if you mention it to peers, they will just scoff, as they did when I told them about Obamas Oath Of Office…
Jive Mothafacko Reply:
January 31st, 2009 at 8:28 am
The Obama Oath of Office was a stutterring misstep, something that Lord Obama is prone to do when he isn’t reading a memorized script like a parrot of some sort. As far as it being null and void because of it, that’s just silly. The Dark Carnival is HERE! HOLD YOUR HATCHET HIGH!
WAGON! WAGON!
DEAD BODIES DRAGGIN’!
MCL
natalia Reply:
February 1st, 2009 at 2:30 pm
WHOOP WHOOP!
January 30th, 2009 at 4:58 pm
Looks like they are doing all they can to piss on or tear up whats left of the Constitution, our government is in violation of the Constitution, perhaps we the people need to declare our independance once again. As Jefferson said we should have a revolution every 20 years…looks like we are over 170 years overdue…140 if you count the civil war.
mrmakymkay Reply:
February 2nd, 2009 at 5:11 pm
amen brother! if they refuse to respect our freedom i guess we have to implament a respective nature. reminds me of old metallica song called fight fire with fire off the ride the lightening sound track. before they sold out mkay
January 30th, 2009 at 5:03 pm
This administration will surpass the last in unconstitutionality.The repugnance towards our rights disgusts myself and everyone I tell.
January 30th, 2009 at 5:13 pm
great, now we can have another example of how the mainstream will totally ignore real issues. Then all the sheeple can simply pull the gender card. They are just picking on her because she is a women!
How many times do we need to have our collective noses rubbed in this mess before we clean it up?
January 30th, 2009 at 5:17 pm
They put a man in the White House who isn’t even an American citizen, do you really think they give a s--- about Hillary Clinton’s eligibility? They scrapped the Constitution a long time ago.
o come on Reply:
January 31st, 2009 at 12:58 am
actully he is an america nice try though. look it up
I want to look it up. Reply:
January 31st, 2009 at 1:19 am
Where?
INTEGRATOR Reply:
January 31st, 2009 at 11:00 am
OBAMA REFUSES TO ANSWER BIRTH CERTIFICATE LAWSUIT.
HERE: http://www.newsmax.com/politic.....43882.html
INTEGRATOR Reply:
January 31st, 2009 at 11:04 am
OBAMA HAS NOT PROVEN CITIZENSHIP. LOOK THIS UP:
http://www.newsmax.com/politic.....43882.html
January 30th, 2009 at 5:19 pm
they just break law after law and the mainstream media doesnt talk about it .. This whole thing is going to collapse anyway. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jpr2WMusr_A
January 30th, 2009 at 5:30 pm
I think it’s time for Secession of all 50 states from the Federal Union. No more money to the IRS.
Each state can go it alone until we can get our Constitution back in place.
The Bill of Rights was cut into 4″ wide strips and used as toilet paper in Washington D.C.
We got to cut these bastards off!!!!!
happystab Reply:
January 30th, 2009 at 6:23 pm
I think that’s an awesome idea!
January 30th, 2009 at 5:46 pm
Yeah, Judicial Watch is right. Her appointment is in violation of the Constitution, but you know what? The whole f---ing government has been violating and warping the Constitution since the deaths of the founders.
Homebrew Reply:
January 31st, 2009 at 3:32 pm
I agree, and when you get right down to it 98% of our Government and what it’s doing is unConstitutional. They dont understand or dont care that the Bill of Rights are God given rights, they have no power or authorty to take those rights away. They also dont have the right to just change the rules for Government that are stated in the Constitution when they dont like the rules. We do need to re-establish our Constitution, but I ask how are you going to get all of the states to go for Secession when most if not all of the Governors are already in their pockett. When you exercise your rights as a citizen by protesting, petitioning, or recall, they just change the rules or ignore you.
January 30th, 2009 at 5:49 pm
i thought they cut her (official – on paper) pay to avoid this problem??
ScrewyLogic Reply:
January 31st, 2009 at 1:22 am
Does it say “unless that pay is lowered again, or is lowered for the person in question”, or is it stated without exception?!
What if I steal your property, and you acuse me of it, and I immediately hand it back to you. Am I still a thief? — but you didn’t lose anything, so obviously I couldn’t have stolen anything from you, huh?
Homebrew Reply:
January 31st, 2009 at 3:32 pm
Great point ScrewLogic
Idiocracy Reply:
February 2nd, 2009 at 10:07 pm
That is a good point, and I had to think it over for a minute. The problem with your example is that stealing my property is against the law RIGHT NOW. In your example you are breaking the law AND THEN changing it. That is not what occured here. They changed the law FIRST, and then Hillary took the position.
So, using your example, if you intended to steal my property, you could not. It is against the law. Now, if you were able to change the law in some way to allow for you to take my property, and THEN you do, then you did not break the law! See? The problem is in your ability to change the law, not that you actually broke any laws. If I were to accuse you of breaking the law after the law had been changed, then I am the one who looks silly and misinformed.
ScrewyLogic Reply:
February 21st, 2009 at 12:58 am
Yes, you are right.
January 30th, 2009 at 5:50 pm
I will say this, though. The Constitution is just a piece of paper with an idea behind it. It’s not clear thinking to say it shouldn’t be amended.
ScrewyLogic Reply:
January 31st, 2009 at 1:35 am
Eh? Weirdly worded…
How about this:
“The Constitution is not explicit enough, and uses self-aggrandized and overcomplicated language which is subject to vast misinterpretation.”
As an example, how’s this for the 2nd:
“The People should form armed groups to defend their freedom against attacks and tyranny.”
(and)
“The People have the right to own and carry weapons, and that right shall not be violated (, or infringed, abridged, or abrogated — all part of ‘violated’)”
—
Of course, no matter how simple and concise you make it, people will still make up their own s---; to this day we hear people mixing up “freedom of speech” with the made-up word “political speech”, or trying to make exceptions for certain topics or groups, etc…
Uh. Read it again. It don’t say ‘political’, or any of that other stuff, anywhere in there… 1st amendment.
Homebrew Reply:
January 31st, 2009 at 3:38 pm
And it also dosent state anything about free speach zones. The Government has no right to to tell you to go to a certian area to exercise your right to free speech.
January 30th, 2009 at 5:58 pm
This lawsuit is a waste of time. This will simply clog up an already overburdened judicial system. Where was Judicial Watch when the Patriot Act was enacted? Where was Judicial Watch concerning FISA and the illegal wiretapping? Where was Judicial Watch when Bush launced illegal wars against Afghanistan and Iraq? According to the US Consitution only Congress can declare war. Congress never declared war against Afghanistan or Iraq. There are scores of unconstitutional acts commited by each President since Lyndon Johnson. Do something worthwhile and tangible instead of frivilous lawsuits about whether or not HRC can be Sec. of State or whether or not Obama is a “natural born citizen”. Anyway, Obama being the first Black president has been scrutinised more than any other serious Presidential candidate. If he were not born in the US, it would’ve been exposed 2 years ago and his candidacy would’ve been over.
January 30th, 2009 at 6:05 pm
Its about time. I keep getting called a nut because I talk at great lengths to people about Article 1 sec 6. They always respond with “If it wasnt legal they wouldnt have done it.” I say what about all the violations bush made they respond. “well that was bush obama is better.” sick
ScrewyLogic Reply:
January 31st, 2009 at 1:36 am
Yes.
Homebrew Reply:
January 31st, 2009 at 3:40 pm
They will all learn in time that Obama is no better, and maybe far worse than Bush. It’s a matter of what is it going to take for those folks to open their eyes?
January 30th, 2009 at 6:24 pm
Every single one of us as citizens, better hope and support this blatant slap in the face. Stop spending time and energy by criticizing the efforts of others and let’s see what you’re gonna do about it! Ignorance is bliss, but the fact of the matter is you are all gonna wake up some day and find out the old boob tube was the very thing use to pacify and dumb down all those who won’t do their own research!
January 30th, 2009 at 7:07 pm
Now that the world bankers are inconspicuously taking over, the constitution is seen as a detriment to progress. Absolute disregard for the constitution is the new style of the excessive and arrogant powers that be. The poor in this country pretty much have no constitutional rights if there is no enforcement. They plan on rubbing it our faces as they herd us into the s--- puddle of their grand design which is, in itself, a war against human nature. The collectivist hive ran by psychopaths with negative souls knows they have the world by the balls, and they are drunk with arrogance and audacity. They believe that nothing can stop them now. If you look at all the domestic sheep around you, they are probably right.
January 30th, 2009 at 7:12 pm
And notice they wont even show this bitch in the mainstream media about being picked for the position either. Not since they first learned nothing else has been mentioned that’s how the people are supposed to know that something is up I guess…
January 30th, 2009 at 7:43 pm
like they give a f--- about the constitution or anything legal. They do what they want and hope we don’t like it. And we accept this……
January 30th, 2009 at 8:34 pm
Who’s Hillary Clinton? ?
Irrelevant.
They are not our authority. Say no.
WE ARE MANY THEY ARE FEW.
January 30th, 2009 at 8:37 pm
As a matter of fact, f--- the constitution. f--- laws. f--- bills. f--- government. f--- dirty cops, f--- our founding (Freemason) fathers.
We were all born with right and wrong instilled in our DNA. I don’t need ANY piece of paper to tell me that.
WE ARE MANY THEY ARE FEW.
Falling Sky Reply:
January 30th, 2009 at 9:03 pm
Strength in numbers was replaced by technological superiority a long time ago. This is why they blatantly ignore “the will of the people” constantly. They are itching for a fight, and are doing everything to provoke fights both here and abroad. After the Rodney King riots, you think they would have curbed police brutality, but no, they’re going after your cameras. In almost every big city the police are encouraged to be brutal and intimidating to the homeless and mentally disabled. They are getting more confident all the time. The one positive aspect of this is if this new great depression is bad enough the college brat culture will fall into the streets and this will create a much greater resistance to the oppression. However, since these brats act like P.C. Nazis and are trained to go after those who dissent, they will be perfect for the Civilian Security Force (the new style of the draft), and they will do everything they are told, no matter how brutal. It’s a scary thought.
January 30th, 2009 at 10:10 pm
Cheese and crackers!!! How much ineligiblity do we need??? As I see it…3 Holes and a heartbeat goes a long way!!! Yet, swallow she does!!! Sorry everyone, I digress, but, still it’s buLLLs---!!! BTW what else would she do??? I lost my train of thought…ole’ lady!!! Alex, it appears things are approving…wish everyone well!!! “All ‘HAIL’ Thermal Expansion!!!”
January 30th, 2009 at 10:11 pm
I find it very odd that this article does not make any hint at the fact that this pay raise was removed in December 2008, back to the original 2007 pay rate while Hilary was in office for this very reason.
See this article: http://news.xinhuanet.com/engl.....492721.htm
I find it very odd that this significant fact is not in this article AT ALL. Why would this not be mentioned. There is even a “Related Articles” section here. Is it not related?
Truth welcomes scrutiny.
January 30th, 2009 at 10:19 pm
Sorry, I’m meant improving!!! “All ‘HAIL’ Thermal Expansion!!!”
January 30th, 2009 at 10:34 pm
I’d be willing to bet dollars to doughnut holes that this too will go the way of the Obama nationality lawsuit.
January 30th, 2009 at 10:38 pm
hate to say it…the globalist dont care about the constitution..Alex Jones and all the patritioc bunch are fighting a losing battle..just like the birth cert of obama,,,you didnt not achieve nothing,,i have listen to a lot on radio like g.c.n,,,,you guys talk about the problems but nobody does anything ,,,you dont have what it takes to take to the streets,,organize and demand change ,,,its only gonna getting worse ,and worse..time to put your words to action,, i think they know, that all you do is talk, talk talk talk…..,,,nothing is done so they keep taking more and more and more,,until your freedoms are gone,,,gone forever,,cause good people did nothing,,,,,,shut the tv off and get moving and be a force to be reckon with,,,,,,,,from a northern brother,,,,,,,,,,,,,
January 30th, 2009 at 10:58 pm
Could they possibly try and use the defense that the specific language says “he”? This is how it reads: “during the Time for which “HE” was elected, be appointed to any civil.” Although i don’t agree with it (strongly), I think they could use the argument that “he” does not apply to Clinton due the obvious fact that Clinton is in fact a woman (although some i’m sure would argue she is not, for obvious reasons)
January 30th, 2009 at 11:10 pm
I understand everyone’s opinion about it being nothing we can do about it and they will get away with it.
That is true!!
But if you are being raped do you be quiet and cooperative to hurry up and get through it??
No, you fight like hell and scream at top of lungs to make that person think twice about doing it next time.
Articles like this show that at least someone is trying to scream and let others know what bad event is happening.
The Clinton’s have always hidden their illegal expenses and this is unconstitutional but no one can stop them because they have so much power.
Good to see their name smeared and make them fight so their hands get dirty with blood.
January 30th, 2009 at 11:31 pm
Patriots if you keep going around telling yourself we cant do it, then your already defeated in your mind. might as well go quietly to the slaughter because the matrix already has you. For the rest…My hat is off to you. Here’s how a patriot thinks…. “Those who expect to reap the benefits of freedom, must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it.”
and “An army of principles can penetrate where an army of soldiers cannot.”
– Thomas Paine
January 30th, 2009 at 11:41 pm
the US government is above the law(local and international). good luck trying to prosecute her or any other high political official. if you want to change washington we will have to revolt with force
January 31st, 2009 at 1:50 am
Thats a pretty sweet loophole there. Can anyone get more on this whole thing where Obama isn’t a US citizen by birth and block that s---?
January 31st, 2009 at 3:08 am
Jones, how many CNP members do you have on as regulars to your show in a month? How many of them hail that man made Catholic King over at the Vatican? When do you give equal attention to the secret societies who wield powerful controlled opposition to freedoms and knowledge while being manifested on the right side of the false R/L paradigm? The Jesuits can be even more blatantly ham fisted in their arbitration of imposed guidelines and procedures than the CFR and Bilderberg members. What planted infiltrators of the Patriot movement are you aware of who serve as gatekeepers and steam valves for the public’s passive conditioning? Exactly who owns Ted’s network and what various and sundry exploits would that owner be involved with?
January 31st, 2009 at 6:57 am
If that’s the exact wording they’d probably even stoop to pointing out the technicality that Clinton is a ’she’, not a ‘he’!
January 31st, 2009 at 10:54 am
logan act?
January 31st, 2009 at 11:38 am
Can someone point out why the framers did this? Why was this placed in the Constitution. in the first place? I really dont know. Just curious. thanks
January 31st, 2009 at 11:58 am
“We were all born with right and wrong instilled in our DNA. I don’t need ANY piece of paper to tell me that.”
Right on. Statement of the month.
January 31st, 2009 at 2:33 pm
obama collectivsm metaphor warnng**GRAPHIC** http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GWy_LFcy_qI
January 31st, 2009 at 2:51 pm
repent.unite.resist.
January 31st, 2009 at 4:22 pm
In reply to Indeed’s well thought out response to my comment: you wrongly assumed that I agreed with the practice of reducing a Senator’s pay when appointed to a cabinet position in which they voted for a pay raise while serving in the Senate. I did not say I agreed or approved of it, but rather that is the way it is, like it or not. No legal action will stand a chance of being heard because it is now an accepted way around Article I, Section 6, Clause 2. Furthermore, Indeed, your response by name-calling only hurts the legitimacy of the cause of freedom. You put yourself into the beetle-browed, uneducated, unreasoning stereotype that many have against Patriots of every stripe. If you would like to truly educate yourself on the U.S. Constitution, I would refer you to “The Heritage Guide to the Constitution,” Copyright 2005, Published by The Heritage Foundation. It may help in your “education” for the cause of freedom.
Idiocracy Reply:
January 31st, 2009 at 7:31 pm
Thank you James. I was about to post the exact same response. I don’t agree with the practice of lowering the pay to work around this law, BUT it is a workaround nonetheless. This very same thing was done in the past (for one of Regan’s cabinet members I believe).
People, please understand that you are fighting the wrong battle by saying they are breaking constitutional law. They did not break constitutional law. They worked around it. The battle needs to be against the workaround. The Constitution says that she can’t get a pay raise she voted for, and guess what? SHE DIDN’T!
It should be obvious (to anybody giving this some good thought) that this law is in the Constitution so that when someone votes for a pay raise, they are not doing so for their own personal benefit, but because they legitimately believe the position deserves more pay. Hilary CLEARLY did not vote for the pay raise so that SHE could get more pay.
I’m not a Hilary supporter. I think she is just as corrupt as the rest of them, but this doesn’t mean that we have a right to accuse her of breaking Constitutional law without having our facts straight. It makes us look like idiots.
My real concern with this article is that they failed to mention this VERY SIGNIFICANT FACT. The author has misrepresented the story. Frankly this disappoints me because I want to believe this site is a fair and worthy news source. It should make us wonder how many other facts have been withheld from us here (intentionally or not). Just because a fact does not support our belief does not mean the truth can be ignored.
Thanks in advance to all of those here who take the time to inform us of the whole picture. Thanks to those who do not twist the facts to further our cause. Our cause is pure in itself, and does not need trickery. Misrepresentation is a strategy of the MSM, and it is why we cannot trust them. We need to remain trustworthy.
“Truth does not fear scrutiny.”
Idiocracy Reply:
February 1st, 2009 at 3:21 pm
Chit for Brains, How is this a reply to my post? And why the all caps?
LEARNhistory Reply:
February 1st, 2009 at 4:13 pm
CAPS MEANS IM RIGHT DAMNIT!!!!!! DONT ASK QUESTIONS JUST OBEY!!!!!!!
February 1st, 2009 at 6:01 am
you have to do your home work the constitutiononly governs the politicaly empowerd that is why they do what ever they want because we are just slaves and really have no right to even own land so they can take our land if they want
February 1st, 2009 at 2:39 pm
Constitution?!? What dat? Wait a second, I tank dat’ George left me half a roll in da’ crappa’. Anyhow don’t blame me fo’ pickin’ dat’ bitch it wadn’t my idea. I jes’ do as I’s told.
February 1st, 2009 at 4:24 pm
condi already left.
AntiHillary Reply:
February 2nd, 2009 at 3:09 pm
Actually I thought Condi was a but-her-face MILF in a weird sort of way, even if she was in her 40s. I don’t think she was the bulldyke kind of lesbian.
February 1st, 2009 at 4:25 pm
WTF? Did judicial watch just return from their 8 year sabbatical taken in early fall of 2000?
February 1st, 2009 at 8:15 pm
Thanks to David C. Rodearmel for even standing up to the bastards. Even if the pay was reduced.
February 1st, 2009 at 9:41 pm
they have put all of their faith in the idea that U. S. citizens are completely unaware and biligerant, like an unco-operative ligion of drunks who whon’t stop insisting on the same mindless argument. i don’t think it’s going to get that bad. Response: it is that bad, but the economy is skating along buying poisonous cheap food and entertainment instead of helping eachother survive for a long time without Government ushering us to our seats with a perscribed leader on the big screen and gas in the rest rooms.
February 1st, 2009 at 11:44 pm
Hell they don’t even advertise. Their about to take their website down. Well here’s mine! http://www.vtekis.com.
Signed,
The RiceBlacklist,
February 1st, 2009 at 11:59 pm
the money thing is peanuts compaired to selling books nobody reads, or getting paid for talking to audiences. check out Bill Clintons pay off…
February 2nd, 2009 at 1:47 am
Im with the others that have said its time for revolution again, and yes, I think we are about 140 years overdue, so lets stop talkin and start doin…
February 2nd, 2009 at 5:43 am
time to raise hell
February 2nd, 2009 at 7:08 am
First Off Jordan Maxwell is an Awesome Individual who has dedicated his life to extraordinary knowledge about the NWO’s ancient history and their future plans to enslave and destroy humanity to bring in their new beings. Jordan’s intention’s have been to save humanity. Thank Goodness for Mr. Maxwell.
A lot of Jordan’s views about religion and spirituality is wrong. Divine Teachings can use metaphors from Computers, Automobiles and driving, Astronomy and Sex. Jordan tends to focus on sex. Jordan talks s--- about spiritual paths to expand one’s soul because he thinks it’s dirty. Jordan has said over and over again that he doesn’t know what God is, but he’s knows what it is not. Jordan is a wholesome person of God who lives a good clean life.
Jordan Maxwell is wrong about prayer being bad or not working or doing any good. f--- that view. Prayer works wonders and is scientifically proven. C2C AM has had many swell guests proving that fact.
Let us all pray for a man we all Love.
Dear God All Mighty Heavenly Father, Our Son of Mankind, Christ All-One Infinite and eternal Source of all that is Perfect, thank You so much for Jordan Maxwell being happy and having Faith in Good Prevailing (peace of mind).
Thank You for having a Beautiful All Loving Woman in his life, that will appreciate and support his labor of love (research,teachings on the occult, etc). Thank You Lord for your will being done with the upcoming Film Project on his Prolific Research. Thank You All Goodness in Life for that Film playing a crucial role in saving humankind and our souls. With God’s Amazing Grace it is done.
February 2nd, 2009 at 7:14 am
More than 50 people who were in Bill Clinton’s campaign team are now dead. Most of them under very strange circumstances, research that if you will
February 2nd, 2009 at 9:36 am
Somewhat off topic, but I am discouraged that while the better parts of the comment area from PrisonPlanet.com have been untilized here, I believe the NUMBERS BEING TAKEN AWAY is a downgrade. That is alleviated to some degree by having the new “reply” portion added so that to make a comment back to someone else’s comment, distinguishing it by the numbered comment does not really have to be there anymore. Maybe I just became too accustomed to the numerical system, but I feel that it would still be better at a later date to find any one particular comment if need be.
Well, by the way my computer reacts in both places, I can see that Infowars has remained more of a constant on its server while Prison Planet is still in flux. That means that experimentations are still ongoing to get the best possible combination of services and I give Alex Jones credit by far on that as the most important factor.
Rhonda
February 2nd, 2009 at 3:05 pm
I’m against that bitch as much as the next guy, but this is a red herring. The Supreme Court found it constitutional so it does follow the Constitution. Now you could argue that the judges are controlled by the NWO but that would be another issue entirely; in other words, everything done here was technically legal so we can’t use legal defenses to prevent this.
Also, could someone please explain to me what is wrong with taking an office that you voted a pay increase for if you can’t reap the benefits of that increase? She’s going to be a complete anti-Constitutional bitch while she’s in there but we should be condemning her for those actions, not this non-issue. We will pay a very real opportunity cost by wasting our time on this.
February 2nd, 2009 at 5:33 pm
so . . . then they reright the law, just like they are CHANGing every thing else as the go. It’s the Clintons man comon, get with the program.
They ain’t gona do jack about it and we all know it. And if they do, it will be a bigger shock to Hillery than you! Forget the queen, God save the lil guy, and fast . . .