It Is Still All About Truth!
"The wicked flee when no man pursueth: but the righteous are bold as a lion." Proverbs 28:1
It is being reported that J.A.I.L. Amendment E lost big in yesterday's election -- 90% against to 10% in favor. This figure does not even amount to the number of voters who signed the petition in the first place to qualify Amendment E for the ballot. Supposedly, the issue of Judicial Accountability failed to even amount to a blip on the radar screen, and fared worse than every other issue on the ballot. 90% versus 10% on any ballot issue is very rare! Just seven weeks ago, on September 19th, Amendment E was better than 3-to-1 in its favor according to a poll by Zogby International. See the entire revealing article at Sept. 19, 2006 Poll Reveals Amendment E Gaining Its Lead Even More.
So, with an epidemic of everyone across this nation crying for redress, having very egregious personal horror stories to tell of their injuries due to arrogant and oppressive judges, what is wrong with this picture? Do not people want relief from a repressive judicial system? Do people love their judges and want to hug them?
The fact is, the voters of South Dakota were never presented with, nor voted upon, J.A.I.L. Contrariwise, J.A.I.L. as written, was fairly described for the California ballot in 2000 by State Attorney General Bill Lockyer who stated:
"JUDGES. RESTRICTIONS ON JUDICIAL IMMUNITY. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT. Supersedes existing judicial immunity and creates three 25-member 'Special Grand Juries' empowered to: determine if a judge may invoke judicial immunity in a civil suit; indict and, through a special trial jury, convict and sentence a judge for criminal conduct; and permanently remove a judge who receives three adverse immunity decisions or three criminal convictions. Disallows immunity for deliberate violations of law, fraud, conspiracy, intentional due process violations, deliberate disregard of material facts, judicial acts outside the court's jurisdiction, unreasonable delay of a case, or any deliberate constitutional violation."
Deception by South Dakota Bar Association
While J.A.I.L. (Amendment E in South Dakota) according to A.G. Lockyer is clearly about "judges," Tom Barnett, the director of the South Dakota Bar Association, while campaigning against Amendment E, says he found that the message of "judicial independence," in arguing why judges should be immune, was not selling well with the voters; so he changed the theme of the campaign to a new theme, which is, "It is not about judges. It is about us."
"It is not about judges"? "It is about us"? Does not Barnett refute the findings of A.G. Lockyer that it is about "Judges"? So what is he saying when he says, "It is about us"? Who is "us"? Is "us" the lawyers of the Bar Association he heads? Is "us" the oil conglomerates, banking cartels, multi-billion-dollar insurance corporations who financed the opposition? Has not he, and the opposition, employed the use of lies and deception upon the voters to defraud them out of what they would have otherwise voted for?
Corruption of the entire South Dakota Legislature
I now turn to the corruption of the entire South Dakota Legislature who, at the beginning of the campaign, unanimously "passed" a resolution against Amendment E urging the voters to reject it, using taxpayer-funded facilities and dollars to do so. Such act is criminal and strictly forbidden by South Dakota Codified Law 12-13-16.
Publication of false or erroneous information on constitutional amendment or submitted question as misdemeanor.
Any person knowingly printing, publishing, or delivering to any voter of this state a document containing any purported constitutional amendment, question, law, or measure to be submitted to the voters at any election, in which such constitutional amendment, question, law, or measure is misstated, erroneously printed, or by which false or misleading information is given to the voters, is guilty of a Class 2 misdemeanor.
Now these legislators cannot let the law get in their way in pursuing the defeat of Amendment E, can they? God forbid that these lawmakers should be subject to their own criminal code, for then they would have to be arrested and tried on those criminal charges! So I ask, Why do we have this criminal statute on the books? I suggest this ineffective "law" be removed from the law books. Why retain vain laws?
And then there is this little matter called "The Constitution of the State of South Dakota" which they have all sworn with an oath to uphold and defend. "§1. Right to vote. Elections shall be free and equal, and no power, civil or military, shall at any time interfere to prevent the free exercise of the right of suffrage." Art. VII, §1. The "right to vote" obviously applies to an honest and unfettered election, not to a criminally-influenced voting scam. Twice we placed every legislator in South Dakota on notice by U.S. mail of their criminal conduct, but they ignored us and proceeded on with the election process as if everything was regular and normal.
Misrepresentation by Attorney General Larry Long
Now we come to South Dakota Attorney General Larry Long's role in wrapping up this conspiratorial election fraud. He could not wait to throw the election in his "explanation" as to what the voters were voting upon. He set up the wording to allow the opposition to develop their argument that Amendment E was about letting felons out of prison so that they could go after the jurors who placed them behind bars. Here enters the fear-and-intimidation factor of the voters who have asked me if they could be arrested and jailed for voting for a conviction. I kid you not, folks, that the voters were being told they could be arrested as a juror for the decisions they might make. Now keep in mind that this is supposed to represent the objective of J.A.I.L., and what the voters were voting upon!
Abraham Lincoln said, "You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time." If you accept the "official" results, 10% of the People of South Dakota were not fooled in this instance.
Amendment E did not fail at the polls--it was never presented for a vote
If Amendment E was about what the voters were being propagandized that it was, not even I would have voted for it -- and I am the author who wrote the words! My point is that Amendment E (J.A.I.L.) did not fail at the polls. It just was never presented on the ballot for a vote. It was suggested that I stop the election on Amendment E before it took place, but I stated that the "election process" could not be stopped unless federal authorities stopped it for a fraud investigation.
It became obvious that the entire state government was clearly conflicted, and they could never admit that they were bent on acting out their fraudulent election, come hell or high water. I realized this when I heard of their literally flooding the airwaves with their false and misleading propaganda of what Amendment E was about, just prior to the election. My hope and expectation was that the voters of South Dakota could nevertheless see through the fraud and deception and vote for the truth. However, that was not to be!
True are the words of the Scripture, "My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge:" Hosea 4:6. Unfortunately, the people have not yet learned the consistent truth that you can never, never, ever trust government. As stated by George Washington, "Government is not reason; it is not eloquence; it is force, like a fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master."
What Are The Implications of This Entirely Fraudulent Government?
1. They have forfeited their public trust and must resign
First off, all of these government officials have forfeited their public trust, and must be forced to resign and surrender their office to more worthy men. The South Dakota government has demonstrated that they are unwilling to repent of their evil devices, and must be removed from office by an outside authority, or a greater authority within.
I have recommended that those voters in South Dakota who find that they were deceived by the fraudulent election, draw up, with help if needed, a criminal affidavit supporting probable cause that they were the victim of this fraudulent election, and file it with the F.B.I. and with the U.S. Attorney. The more the better. I know that some have already proceeded with this project. We should first give the federal authorities a reasonable opportunity to investigate and move in on the government of South Dakota.
Also, I am recommending that these citizens further file an affidavit of criminal conduct, citing the laws of the State of South Dakota, with their County Grand Juries.
As to the higher authority within, I refer to the People themselves. Once it is established that no one will do anything to enforce the law, then the remedy necessarily, under the Declaration of Independence, must rest with the People. The highest authority of arresting power lies with the People in making citizen's arrests, as all other powers of arrest are derived as a privilege granted from the People's power of arrest. All official power to arrest is subordinate to that of the People. (Declaration of Independence).
Should such arrests take place, it follows that the arrestees must constitutionally be delivered to a magistrate. However, since there is no state magistrate that does not have a conflict of interest, the appropriate magistrate should be a federal magistrate, before whom an affidavit supporting probable cause should be laid. (Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.)
2. The people's right to vote has been violated
At issue here is the right to vote in an election having integrity. If the government of South Dakota is allowed to tamper with the voting process using the public's money, it will set a precedent encouraging other jurisdictions to see if they, too, can do the same and get away with it. We must keep in mind that government will always become as corrupt in its election process as will be tolerated. Voting is not only a right within state jurisdictions, but also in federal jurisdiction. The violation of this right is a federal crime prosecutable by the U.S. Attorney, (Title 18, USC 242.)
3. It has national implications
Further, all people of other states have an interest in fair elections. If the officials of the government of South Dakota can conduct elections in violation of criminal laws with impunity, such conduct will eventually contaminate their own states. I therefore recommend that everyone in this country raise their voices appropriately in objection to tolerating this evil being perpetrated by the government of South Dakota. They absolutely must be punished for their gross evil deeds against the People. We are a Union of States, and no State can be an Island unto itself when it comes to citizens of this country. ("... And the state of South Dakota is an inseparable part of the American Union..." Art VI, §26). We all, therefore, have an interest in protecting our common right to vote in sound elections within this Union. Once we submit ourselves to the existence of election fraud with impunity, we thereby forfeit our future to tyrants who will decide everything for us without our permission.
If we are willing to fight, and sacrifice our lives, for the right to vote in foreign nations, should we not be willing to contend for that same right here in our own country?
Truth can never reach agreement with a lie
I have been told that "we will just have to fight harder next time for the passage of J.A.I.L." But what this view overlooks is that we are not here engaged in a fair fight. A fight that entails our having our hands tied behind our backs, and allows our opponents to wear brass knuckles, is not a ring which we climb into to try to "fight harder," We need a referee that is neutral, not one that is the state government holding a bet on the outcome.
Also, I have been told, "we need to re-write the J.A.I.L. Initiative so that this will never happen again." This presupposes that the J.A.I.L. Initiative, as currently written, is faulty and needs to satisfy the opponents. This view ignores the fact that never, in any fashion, can J.A.I.L. be re-written in a thousand years to meet the acceptance and approval of the opposition. Such objective can never be accomplished with thousands of new amendments. Truth can never reach a mutual agreement with a lie. At issue here is not whether or not one agrees with J.A.I.L., but rather, whether we are entitled to elections adhering to the basics of integrity. Are you ready to give up your right to vote? If not, you have no choice left but to fight for your right to vote by whatever means are necessary.
"In transgressing and lying against the LORD, and departing away from our God, speaking oppression and revolt, conceiving and uttering from the heart words of falsehood. And judgment is turned away backward, and justice standeth afar off: for truth is fallen in the street, and equity cannot enter. Yea, truth faileth; and he that departeth from evil maketh himself a prey: and the LORD saw it, and it displeased him that there was no judgment." Isaiah 59:13-15.
It Is Still All About Truth!
Return To JNJ 2006
Return To JNJ Library Index for All Years