Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Abraham Lincoln’

With word that Trump has revoked the press credentials of the Washington Post for appearing in an official capacity at any of his events, and criticism of that from the usual quarters, I couldn’t help but recall what I learned perhaps only about five to six years ago, about “America’s greatest President,” Abraham Lincoln, arresting critical newspaper editors.

In fact, here’s Lincoln’s official Executive Order on the matter (emphasis mine):

Whereas there has been wickedly and traitorously printed and published this morning in the New York World and New York Journal of Commerce, newspapers printed and published in the city of New York, a false and spurious proclamation purporting to be signed by the President and to be countersigned by the Secretary of State, which publication is of a treasonable nature, designed to give aid and comfort to the enemies of the United States and to the rebels now at war against the Government and their aiders and abettors, you are therefore hereby commanded forthwith to arrest and imprison in any fort or military prison in your command the editors, proprietors, and publishers of the aforesaid newspapers, and all such persons as, after public notice has been given of the falsehood of said publication, print and publish the same with intent to give aid and comfort to the enemy; and you will hold the persons so arrested in close custody until they can be brought to trial before a military commission for their offense. You will also take possession by military force of the printing establishments of the New York World and Journal of Commerce, and hold the same until further orders, and prohibit any further publication therefrom.

And before that, America’s second president, John Adams, signed the blatantly unconstitutional “Alien and Sedition Acts,” which made it a punishable crime to be critical of the federal government.

Unlike Adams and Lincoln, Trump is still a private citizen. When he’s President, then starts banning various press agencies, then let’s put things in historical perspective and judge what a violator of the First Amendment he truly is, and decide on the appropriate remedy.

Read Full Post »

United States NotesAccording to the December 2012 report by the U.S. Treasury Dept., out of the $450 million Greenbacks issued during the American Civil War, there is an estimated $239 million still outstanding.

In 2013 dollars, this would be at least $10 billion, according to this inflation calculator. While not significant today, it’s significant that such a huge percentage of the Greenbacks are still in circulation, given that they were ordered to be taken out of circulation in 1971, so there have been many that are being privately circulated or collected.

While there were $500 million in interest-bearing bonds that were issued as backing for them, the money supply grew by a total of $950 million, and the interest-free Greenbacks provided significant funding for the Civil War, when the total debt was $2.7 billion by 1865, and no interest was due, nor will ever be due, on the $450 million issued, and nothing is stopping the U.S. government from returning to directly-issued interest-free currency, other than lack of political will.

As for the validity of the American Civil War, I have publicly stated on my radio program and in a recent public presentation that the States had the right to secede from the Union, and that President Lincoln and the Union were in the wrong. The effectiveness of the Greenbacks, and of any interest-free currency, is something that can be independently judged.

For more on United States Notes, see my articles:

1) Gary North gives the false impression that interest-free United States Notes are no longer valid

2) Gary North deliberately omits the fact that United States Notes are interest-free

3) Michael Badnarik on issuing interest-free fiat money like Lincoln did: “That’d be a step in the right direction”

4) Don’t just blame Lincoln for a national legal tender law — Washington signed one, too

5) The Federal Reserve lies about United States Notes (Lincoln Greenbacks)

Read Full Post »

I guest hosted Crash! Are You Ready? on President’s Day, February 20, 2012, and covered the following articles:

1) After 15 long years, I got Dr. Stan Monteith the interview he had wanted with Dr. Peter Duesberg on AIDS

2) Don’t just blame Lincoln for a national legal tender law — Washington signed one, too

3) Challenging Ellen Brown on how counties (can’t) use eminent domain

4) Canada’s judiciary pushing back on an overstepping federal executive

Read Full Post »

A small size $100 United States Note of Series...

I guest hosted George Whitehurst-Berry’s Crash! Are You Ready? on December 28, 2011, and provided in-depth analysis of my articles:

1) The U.S. Constitution doesn’t say money should be gold or silver coin

2) The Constitution doesn’t insist on a gold or silver-backed currency

3) The Constitution doesn’t prohibit both the states and the federal government from issuing fiat money

4) Three prominent hard money advocates endorse the temporary issuance of fiat money

5) Michael Badnarik on issuing interest-free fiat money like Lincoln did: “That’d be a step in the right direction”

Read Full Post »

Obverse of the Series 2006 $20 bill

Three prominent hard money advocates have endorsed the temporary issuance of fiat money, with two of them particularly endorsing interest-free fiat money.

On September 18, 2011, Nelson Hultberg of the Conservative American Party outlined one of the party’s primary planks, to “enact Milton Friedman’s 4% auto-expansion plan for the Fed.

On August 17, 2011, monetary reform activist Kirk Mackenzie outlined his transition period of issuing interest-free fiat money, in moving toward a free market monetary system.

On October 2, 2008, Michael Badnarik, 2004 Libertarian presidential candidate said with regard to issuing interest-free fiat money like Lincoln did: “That’d be a step in the right direction.

Gary North, prominent writer for LewRockwell.com, has curiously stayed quiet by not smoking out these individuals as alleged false-flag infiltrators according to the same standards he used for taking exception with Ellen Brown advocating (interest-free) fiat money. Could it be that Ellen Brown was an easy target, not having any connections into the social circles he travels in, unlike these three other individuals?

Read Full Post »

Michael Badnarik

Michael Badnarik, 2004 Libertarian presidential candidate and “Stepfather of the Constitution,” was asked the following question by a caller on his October 2, 2008 radio show (at 48:44):

During the Civil War, Abraham Lincoln printed Greenbacks in order to finance the army of the North and to pay his soldiers and buy goods. Couldn’t we do the very same thing? Couldn’t we abolish the Federal Reserve and the fractional reserve banking system and go to constitutional money printed by the Treasury and controlled by Congress, which would, we would not have to pay interest on that debt, and we could pay our debts without the interest applied? Wouldn’t that solve the whole problem?

Badnarik responded:

That’d be a step in the right direction, I think.

Despite being a hard money advocate, notice how he didn’t take exception with United States Notes being unconstitutional as he has with blatantly unconstitutional acts like the USA PATRIOT Act, 2001, and the Military Commissions Act, 2006.

For where some people get the idea that interest-free fiat money is constitutional, see my articles: The “necessary and proper” clause: it’s not meaningless, and The Constitution doesn’t prohibit both the states and federal government from issuing fiat money.

Read Full Post »

April 30: George Washington becomes the first ...

Loyola professor and senior Mises Institute fellow, Thomas DiLorenzo, likes to attack President Abraham Lincoln for his policies of questionable constitutional authority.

What DiLorenzo won’t do, however, is attack with the same zeal, the same alleged violation of the Constitution by the first, and generally highly regarded President of the United States, George Washington.

During his presidency, Washington signed the Coinage Act of 1792 into law, which stated:

SEC. 16. And be it further enacted, That all the gold and silver coins which shall have been struck at, and issued from the said mint, shall be a lawful tender in all payments whatsoever

The term lawful connotes even stronger authority than legal, since lawful represents adherence to the spirit of the law, as well as the letter.

While prominent hard money advocates such as DiLorenzo take exception with Lincoln’s issuance of interest-free legal tender United States Notes, I have yet to see a single one of them point out with the same contempt, that George Washington was acting just as unconstitutionally, according to their own standards, as they allege Lincoln was in making United States Notes legal tender.

The issue of whether the federal government has the power to issue paper currency is separate from whether it has the power to make any currency legal tender.

As to where Washington may have believed he was acting constitutionally in signing the 1792 Coinage Act into law, and taking the view of his Treasury Secretary, Alexander Hamilton, over that of Thomas Jefferson, see my article The “necessary and proper” clause: it’s not meaningless.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »