Do You, Mr. Speaker, Intend to Persist in Defying the Law of the Land?

WORLD WAR II VETERAN CALLS FOR A CONVENTION OF STATES

by Col. Thomas E. Davis (Ret), ©2018

(May 4, 2018) — I have Requested, Petitioned and DEMANDED, as politely as possible, that you, as the Speaker of the House, call an Article V Convention of States for proposing amendments to the Constitution. This is and has always been consistent with the wording of the same Constitution you and every member of the 115th Congress has sworn an oath to obey, protect and defend.

Do you intend to drag your feet, defy the Constitution and in all manner and fashion refuse to obey the duty owed We the People? The Article you refuse to obey was the product of minds far superior to yours and mine. Nevertheless, George Mason and James Madison were correctly wary of such despots as you and so many of your contemporaries and predecessors.  If you are intent on defiance, We the People are angered but respectful of the judicial processes which we intend to initiate to bring you to such sense as you may possess and to the penalty to which you may be subjected. Please consider the following:

Ignorance of the law is neither an excuse nor a defense. For your illumination, pertinent facts follow:

Violation of Oath of Office and Walker v Members of Congress

In refusing to obey the law of the Constitution and call an Article V Convention when required to do so, the members of Congress not only violated federal income tax law but their oath of office as well. The Constitution requires that all members of Congress must take an oath of office to support the Constitution before assuming office. In order to comply with the Constitution, Congress has enacted federal laws to execute and enforce this constitutional requirement.

Federal law regulating oath of office by government officials is divided into four parts along with an executive order which further defines the law for purposes of enforcement. 5 U.S.C. 3331, provides the text of the actual oath of office members of Congress are required to take before assuming office. 5 U.S.C. 3333 requires members of Congress sign an affidavit that they have taken the oath of office required by 5 U.S.C. 3331 and have not or will not violate that oath of office during their tenure of office as defined by the third part of the law, 5 U.S.C. 7311 which explicitly makes it a federal criminal offense (and a violation of oath of office) for anyone employed in the United States Government (including members of Congress) to “advocate the overthrow of our constitutional form of government”. The fourth federal law, 18 U.S.C. 1918 provides penalties for violation of oath office described in 5 U.S.C. 7311 which include: (1) removal from office and; (2) confinement or a fine.

The definition of “advocate” is further specified in Executive Order 10450 which for the purposes of enforcement supplements 5 U.S.C. 7311. One provision of Executive Order 10450 specifies it is a violation of 5 U.S.C. 7311  for any person taking the oath of office to advocate “the alteration … of the form of the government of the United States by unconstitutional means.” Our form of government is defined by the Constitution of the United States. It can only be “altered” by constitutional amendment. Thus, according to Executive Order 10450 (and therefore 5 U.S. 7311) any act taken by government officials who have taken the oath of office prescribed by 5 U.S.C. 3331which alters the form of government other by amendment, is a criminal violation of the 5 U.S.C. 7311.

Congress has never altered the Article V Convention clause by constitutional amendment. Hence, the original language written in the law by the Framers and its original intent remains undisturbed and intact. That law specifies a convention call is peremptory on Congress when the states have applied for a convention call and uses the word “shall” to state this. The states have applied. When members of Congress disobey the law of the Constitution and refuse to issue a call for an Article V Convention when peremptorily required to do so by that law, they have asserted a veto power when none exists nor was ever intended to exist in that law. This veto alters the form of our government by removing one of the methods of amendment proposal the law of the Constitution creates. Such alteration without amendment is a criminal violation of 5 U.S.C. 7311 and 18 U.S.C. 1918.

In addition, the members of Congress committed a second criminal violation of their oaths of office regarding an Article V Convention call. 5 U.S.C. 7311 clearly specifies it is a criminal violation for any member of Congress to advocate the overthrow of our constitutional form of government. The definition of the word “advocate” is to: “defend by argument before a tribunal or the public: support or recommend publicly.”

The single intent of the federal lawsuit Walker v Members of Congress (a public record) was to compel Congress to obey the law of the Constitution and call an Article V Convention as peremptorily required by that law, the original intent of which has never altered by constitutional amendment. The lawsuit was brought because Congress has refused to obey the law of the Constitution. Such refusal obviously establishes the objective of the members of Congress to overthrow our form of government by establishing they (the members of Congress) can disobey the law of the Constitution and thus overthrow our constitutional form of government.

The word “peremptory” precludes any objection whatsoever by members of Congress to refuse to call an Article V Convention. This peremptory preclusion certainly includes joining a lawsuit to oppose obeying the law of the Constitution and it may be vetoed by members of Congress. That act not only violates the law of the Constitution but 5 U.S.C. 7311 as well. When the members of Congress joined to oppose Walker v Members of Congress their opposition became part of the court record and therefore a matter of public record.  Thus, regardless of whatever arguments for such opposition were presented by their legal counsel to justify their opposition, the criminal violation of the oath of office occurred because the members of Congress joined the lawsuit to publicly declare their opposition to obeying the law of the Constitution. Comments

——————-

Following your perusal of same, I suggest you immediately upon your return from “District Work,” i.e., campaigning for another round of gorging yourself at the public feed trough, call an Article V COS to be held in the Chambers of the Congress during the month of August 2018. Such call needs to contain at minimum the following or such as may follow from individuals more perspicacious than I. e.g. Attorneys Bill Walker, Michael Farris or Mark Meckler.

  • Each state may send one state legislator plus a number of non-government-official, citizen-voter delegates chosen by lottery, equal to that state’s current congressional representation.
  • The State legislative delegate shall be that state’s spokesman and shall cast that state’s ONE vote on any question presented to their convention as a proposed amendment.
  • Congressional ancillary or support personnel shall be made available to the convention as well as such parliamentarians familiar with congressional procedures who shall act ex-officio in an advisory capacity only.
  • The total delegate body shall serve as the Committee of the Whole to cast one vote per state on any issue subject to a vote.
  • The Committee of the Whole will, by a simple majority vote, elect a Convention President as the Presiding Officer in addition to his/her duties as a delegate.
  • All other guidelines or rules shall be proposed and voted upon at the first meeting of the delegates and at such other times as may become or perceived as necessary.
  • The Convention shall conclude its business at the latest on the final day of the 115th Congress’s absence.
  • The State Legislator heading each State’s delegation shall be responsible for insuring the proposed Amendments are returned or transmitted to the several states for voting to take place by such mechanism as the individual states decide is most appropriate.

Dr. Thomas E. Davis, Colonel, USA (ret)
326 F Nantuckett Lane
Monroe Twp, NJ 08831

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.