My email to Pastor David Whitney of the Institute on the Constitution after his June 9, 2010 appearance on Radio Liberty with Dr. Stan Monteith:
Pastor Whitney,
I heard your very educational presentation of the Fifth Amendment on today’s show with Dr. Stan.
You said that you read an opinion by Justice Scalia, who you say has written many good opinions in keeping with the Constitution, and that in it, he argued that Grand Juries are independent of the three branches of government.
You later said that those Justices who found in favor of the city of New London in Kelo v. New London (2005), finding that private property could be taken for non-public use, should be impeached for violating their oath to uphold the Constitution, specifically the Fifth Amendment in this case. I agree wholeheartedly with you on that.
Now, consider the case of Hamdan v. Rumsfeld (2006), where Justice Scalia upheld President Bush’s denial of the writ of habeas corpus to Mr. Hamdan.
Article I Section 9 of the Constitution includes:
“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.”
Given that:
1) The Constitution grants powers to, and limits powers of, the federal and state governments;
2) The privilege in question makes no mention of applying only to U.S. citizens, nor does the Bill of Rights;
3) There was no rebellion or invasion at the time;
4) Congress didn’t suspend the writ of habeas corpus through that provision;
5) The President takes a constitutional oath to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States”;
6) Justice Scalia is a self-avowed “originalist;”
Do you agree that Justice Scalia should be impeached for his decision in that case, as you argued for those Justices who found in favor of the city of New London?
Regards,
Jason Erb
[...] more on eminent domain, see my articles: 1) The Supreme Court of the United States isn’t interested in protecting liberty or property 2) [...]
IOTC are a bunch of old farts that wouldn’t do anything that might jeopardize that social security check. They love robbing Peter to pay Paul. They love Mr. Ponzi. They are of the most sold out to the “we’ll take care of you, promise” NWO propaganda generation. It’s one thing to fall for a government that would have said it takes care of disabled people in case of emergency, but to fall for a promise that everyone’s going to get a check when they retire? So give us your money now? That’s just sick. How can you truly have a stake in making change when you think you’re going to be magically zapped out of the universe in these “end days”? Serious Biblical misinterpretation. Thank you banker promoted/funded futurist ministries. I hope Whitney reads this.
I would really like to know what he thinks should be done about Scalia’s decision in this particular case. I have others to present, but the Hamdan v. Rumsfeld case is among the most blatant.
Ask him about his opinion on monetary policy. He’ll probably say free credit is communism and we need a gold standard. Meanwhile he’ll endorse a “progressive” tax ’cause “that’s not communism”. Ask him what happens if someone finds a trillion megaton gold nugget? IOTC has been co-opted. They are an option in the subterfuge. I know what communism is for real and this is it. It’s just a matter of time before my philosophy goes viral and is legitimized by the alt-media. Capitalism will triumph. The communist bankers will be exposed for the havoc, suffering and death they have caused. I’m reluctant to use the term “utopia” but….. You can’t improve on liberty. You have it or you don’t. Liberty is capitalism. Liberty is all men follow the same rules that are equal for everyone. No “more” equality or “less” equality.
No response, and I doubt there ever will be one, despite me emailing the IOTC account and his church pastor account.
The reason is that, it seems IOTC is structured for a one-way flow of information. From them to customers who pay for their courses or course materials.
He even managed to make a follow-up appearance the very next day, praising Scalia yet again. It’s at http://radiolibertyarchives.gsradio.net:8080/061010c.mp3
Has he responded and if not, will you post the answer?
No response (yet). I’ll only post his response with permission.
If he’s even read it yet, he was probably surprised by receiving such an email just two hours after his appearance.
He responded today, much to my surprise, since it was nearly two full weeks later.
He provided a very satisfactory response, and I urge anyone who’s interested, to ask him his opinions yourself, and to listen to future appearances.
The host, Dr. Stan Monteith, responded to an email I sent about this, so kudos to him.