Home Law Who Is the Boss in Washington? Who Really Runs America? ...

Who Is the Boss in Washington? Who Really Runs America? Who Can Get Impeached?

37
Photo: Mark Smith at  News.Missouri.edu

by Mary W Maxwell, LLB

We hear rumors all the time as to who runs the government of the United States. Some candidates are: the oil industry, Zionists, the media, the mafia, the UN, the Bank of England, and Satanists.

Wrong. None of those run the political entity known as the United States of America. I know for sure who is the boss, the real boss, of that country and will tell you now — but first, please grab your smelling salts.

The real boss of the US is the American people.

Perhaps I should limit that to “American citizens,” as there are many people in the US who have never bothered to take up citizenship, therefore they can’t vote.

Voting does come into the story as “the people” rule via their representatives in Congress. You may have heard that elections are rigged, the vote-count at the polls is done by tricky machines, and so forth. I believe that is true and needs to be corrected. The boss can correct it via the law.

Today’s Impeachment Inquiry

Some members of the House of Representatives have now set up an Impeachment Inquiry regarding President Trump.  The issue is that he allegedly misused the office of president by asking the head of a foreign nation (Ukraine) to do him a “personal” favor. (Namely, to cough up some information about naughty activity by the son of Joe Biden who may be running against Trump in 2020.)

We can dissect that some other day.  For now, I am extolling the power of the people, which, in the present set-up is synonymous with the power of “Capitol Hill.”

Which Branch Is Tops in the Constitution?

There are famously five power-holders in the Constitution: the three branches of the federal government (see Articles I, II, and III); the states (Article IV); and the people (mainly via the Bill of Rights).

Don’t be fooled by all that pluralism. The top branch is Congress. How can we know that? Because the Constitution, as written in 1787, gives Congress the power to get rid of any member of the other two branches via impeachment.

Isn’t there a lot of cross-checking, a la Montesquieu’s 1748 balance of power theory? Yes. For example, bad members of Congress can be nabbed by the US Prosecutors. Oh, what branch be that — is it judicial?  No.  It’s rather confusing but prosecutors are in the executive branch, per Article II.

That Article of the Constitution says of the president “He [or any day now, she] shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.” That means a wrongdoer — including Senator X or Representative Y — can be brought to book.

How so? The president and the prosecutors can’t do it. Contrary to some wishful thinking, “the White House” can’t pick off US citizens via military tribunals. No, they have to use the courts.

That is, the Third Branch. But the Third Branch refers only to the federal court involving federal law. We are not talking about removing a member of Congress for a parking ticket or even for murder. Of all the federal laws, the easiest one to use would be the law of treason.

An aside: I am trying to make the case that Congress is powerful and yet show how it can be disciplined.  I have just said that the Second Branch (Executive) and Third Branch (Judiciary) have the means to gang up on a bad congressperson to “remove” that person from office. Sorry, I was being loose with my pen. Even a conviction for treason does not, as such, remove an elected rep or senator. Only a visit to the polls can do that.  Also, each house of Congress can kick out a member, though they almost never do.

Impeachment Is Not Judicial, Doesn’t Require Justice

Today, all in a 24-hour period, Congress could send a president packing, and could send any or all Supreme Court justices packing. Many others, too. Think of it this way: if it’s a job that the Senate had to confirm in the first place, such as a Navy Admiral, a US Attorney, or a Cabinet member, that person is impeachable.

What can such officeholders be impeached for? The Framers of the Constitution carefully wrote that a president can be impeached for “High crimes and misdemeanors.” Their inclusion of the phrase “and misdemeanors” alerts us to the Framers expectation that “anything goes.” I believe President Ford was correct when he said the sins of the president are whatever Congress says they are.

To be exact, Ford’s words were:

 “An impeachable offense is whatever a majority of the House of Representatives considers it to be at a given moment in history.”

This is borne out by the fact that once the impeachment is agreed to by the House, and sent to the Senate for a “trial,” that trial is not judicial. It is political. Does the President get due process?  No. She shouldn’t even ask for it.

I repeat: impeachment is not judicial. (I hear you say “Lots of defendants these days don’t get due process.” Yeah, I know but that needs fixing and can be fixed. I myself labor in that field with sweaty brow, etc, etc.)

Hold on, doesn’t the Constitution say that the Chief Justice of the United States (at the moment, John Roberts)  will preside over the trial? Yes, but only when it is a President being tried. That does not mean the Chief Justice brings any legal paraphernalia over to the Senate with him.

If you feel a need to doubt me, please see the trial of President Clinton who was impeached in 1998. That is the only time in living memory when there was such a trial. The House did impeach Clinton; the Senate tried him with Chief Justice William Renquist sitting there.  The vote was tight, but Clinton did not get convicted.

Renquist said in 1999:

“I underwent the sort of culture shock that naturally occurs when one moves from the very structured environment of the Supreme Court to what I shall call, for want of a better phrase, the more freeform environment of the Senate.”

What’s the Most, and Least, Punishment?

By the way, if Clinton had been convicted, that would not have brought him any punishment other than dethronement. This question is causing a bit of excitement at the moment as to whether Donald Trump, if convicted and thrown out of office, could run for president again in future.

The exact words in Article I, Section 3, go like this:

Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.

Note the phrase “shall not extend further than….” Apparently, although it has not been tested, this could mean that the Senate could convict Trump and yet he could be elected again.

What about Those Other Contenders for Boss of America?

I am trying to knock the reader over with my claim that the people of the US are the ultimate boss. We need to hear this. It will be our way out of a terrible mess.

So, I bet you are thinking “Wow, is Mary so thick she doesn’t know that other entities are more powerful than Congress, and even more powerful than all three branches combined?”

Hang on, I do know that all the ones I mentioned — the oil industry, Zionists, the media, the mafia, the UN, the Bank of England, and Satanists — are in fact exerting a stranglehold over governments and the people, both worldwide, and here in the Great Republic.

Still,  short of nuclear bombs being dropped on us, we should have no trouble controlling, or terminating, those entities. Let me dispose of them in my naive, idealistic way, as follows:

*Congress can control the Bank of England’s power in US by repealing the Federal Reserve Act of 1913.  There’s no such thing as a federal law that the legislature can’t change its mind about.

*The oil industry and the mass media (a well as other “combinations” such as Big Pharma, Big Weapons manufacturers) can be brought to heel right this minute by the ever clever Sherman Anti Trust Act of 1890 which is still in force.  Its proper title is: An act to protect trade and commerce against unlawful restraints and monopolies.

Senator John Sherman (1823-1900)

In a 1993 ruling the US Supreme Court wrote:

“The purpose of the [Sherman] Act is not to protect businesses from the working of the market; it is to protect the public from the failure of the market. The law directs itself not against conduct which is competitive, even severely so, but against conduct which unfairly tends to destroy competition itself.”

[Spectrum Sports v McQuliian],

When you see cases like that you can assume it was a matter of two corporations litigating against each other. That is one way the Sherman Anti-trust Act can be employed, but there is also the provision for prosecution. May I quote the Act in full?

Section 1: Every contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, is declared to be illegal.

Section 2: Every person who shall monopolize, … or conspire with any other person or persons, to monopolize any part of the trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, shall be deemed guilty of a felony. [Emphasis added]

(Good morning, Rupert Murdoch.)

A whole division of the US Department of Justice is tasked with enforcing Sherman’s Act.  It doesn’t do so, however, kowtowing instead to the aforementioned powerful who have got a stranglehold on us.  But I insist it could be done.  We have handcuffs, we have jails don’t we?

All it would take is a bit of citizenship muscle and away we go!

*Zionists. Many people complain that the Congress is supine to an Israeli PAC (Political Action Committee).  It’s true. In fact, the US legislature recently passed a horrendous law (illegitimate as it offends the First Amendment) forbidding people to side with the BDS item. (Look it up. See for yourself.)

Anyway, I have said this so many times I hate to say it again: If Zionists control the US government, whose fault is that? Clearly it is the fault of the US government, not the fault of Israel, Zionists, Jews, or the 9-11 “hijackers.”

Thus, it is ultimately the American people’s fault. See my article on the sinking of the USS Liberty. Heads need to roll and they are not Israeli heads.

*The UN. This organization, which I take to be Rockefeller-created, does not have any legal power over the US. We have signed some multilateral treaties offered by the UN, but we can withdraw from them.  I like to modify the old saying “Pacta sun servanda“. — treaties are meant to be kept, into “Pacta sunt numquam servanda” — treaties are sometimes to be kept, namely when we feel like it.

As there is no enforcement possible (so far) for international law, any nation can do whatever it can physically get away with. By the way, Congress, in 1945, passed the United Nations Participation Act. It is purely domestic law, to make sure the UN does not encroach on the Constitution. It says:

“Section 6. The President is authorized to negotiate a special agreement or agreements with the Security Council which shall be subject to the approval of the Congress by appropriate Act or joint resolution providing for the numbers and types of armed forces, their degree of readiness and general location, and the nature of facilities and assistance, including rights of passage, to be made available to the Security Council on its call for the purpose of maintaining international peace and security in accordance with article 43 of said Charter.” [Emphasis added]

That Act also gave the President the power to enforce sanctions mandated by the UN Security Council without going to Congress for permission. Note: If today’s Congress is unhappy with that, all they have to do is amend their 1945 legislation. Note: the same Act talks about our Immigration commitments, but we won’t deal with that here.

*Finally, to the mafia and Satanists. Hmm. Did I not claim that the boss of America is the people? By George, they are not in charge today thanks to the fact that citizens willingly put up with secret criminal forces. The mafia is the best known such force. And it needs to be said that mafia bosses have many secret deals with government officials.

Could those deals be undone? I think so. But reflect again on the media. Televsion shows  and movies largely determine what gets labelled as good stuff and bad stuff in society. Thanks to the image of The Godfather, a movie from Mario Puzo’s 1969 novel, many people think the mafia is OK. I say the media need a quick left hook from Senator Sherman,

The Satanists? At the moment I am too ignorant of their membership and their methods to be able to know how much power they have.  But from what we have seen in Australia of the child-stealing courts, and what we saw, over decades, of the unbelievably cruel MK-Ultra program in the US, I suspect that truly the Satanists are king.

Don’t hafta be, though.

SHARE

37 COMMENTS

  1. Thank you for your digging up history. Appreciated. However the World in which those laws were written, was an entirely different world, of that which we live in today. NONE of those laws apply today, as evidenced time and time again from a Congress that is COMPLICITE in the crimes of the U.S. Government. That very same Congress has spent the midnight oil introducing ammendments to ensure much of that stuff passed, is no longer valid. Wherein that Constitution does it say, the CRIMINALS can prosecute their fellow criminals. How many times have we now read of application after application to examine the Sept 11 Crime, via those very same channels your talking about, and what was the result ?????? ZILCH. The Supreme Authority empowered to authorise further investigation is so corrupt, there’s no chance of ever opening any investigation. The people within those halls of power, have been diligently chosen by the CRIMINALS in the first place, because they KNOW they can RELY on them to cover their arses. That’s why every one of these applications simply disappears into a black hole, never to be heard from again, and business goes on as usual.
    EVERY member of that Congress is COMPLICITE in the crimes they have allowed to happen, check out Clinton family, the crimes they have committed, (one amongst THOUSANDS) yet they walk free and easy. EVERYONE of these CRIMINALS have the goods on each other, and blackmail them to comply. What does the Constitution say about that ???????????? Who Polices the Police ???????????
    YEP, the PEOPLE, however the average American KNOWS very well, the POLICE are untouchable, witness the murders and crimes being committed by them daily, yet count on the fingers of your right hand, how many get charged, much less convicted for committing such crimes.
    Those people your talking about, who ALLEGEDLY have the power to oversee such things, have been relegated to the side lines and had their teeth pulled, thus are totally defenceless to do anything about it. AND they KNOW IT.

  2. The situation goes to the fact that most people are deluded as to what they’re actually supporting, e. g. satanism is not the commonly-depicted baby-eating cabal. In truth the mainstay is nice folk like this woman:

  4. Jeffrey Epstein. Still his New Mexico ranch has not been sealed off by the FBI. Ghislaine Maxwell is still free, the media is trying to bury the Epstein saga. Prince Andrew (shhh!). Wait til Trunews release their story on USS Liberty – one tidbit LBJ was in the Zionists’ pocket, which explains why the immigration act allowing 3rd world immigration into th US was passed in 1965. And it won’t matter because the ten biggest companies in the world have been siphoned away from the US into Israel, who invented, but won;t be implementing 5G. Then the US can blow away in the wind (spoken by Netanyahu) who also said “and if they want to isolate us, we’ll isolate them!” Don’t forget to look up Carbyne and how they are revamping the 911 call system everytime you call 911 they download ALL information off your phone, and can enable other functions of your phone like cameras etc oh aren’t we living in interesting times!

  5. Mary, is it your claim that the Legislative Branch in US can solve all our woes (except the last two that you excluded; mafia and satanists)?

    • Sort of, Dee. But it’s not because they are a legislative body, although in the case of Sherman Anti Trust Act their law is what made it possible to prosecute monopolizers of business. (The biggies in that era — 1890 — were the railroads, the “sugar trust,” and oil. Rocky was forced to break up Standard Oil.) And in the case of the Fed, Congress only need repeal its own legislation.

      Also, way back in the Spring of Forty-Five, Congress did the right thing by limiting the UN’s incursions , via the UN Participation Act. Not that anyone knows it exists. I did not know till Prof Louis Fisher told me. He runs a website LOUFISHER.org with that sort of info.

      Because there’s impeachment in the air today, I intended my article to show that Congress can coerce the Executive and the Judiciary by mere threat of impeachment.

      So if wrongdoers are maturing their felonious little plan — say, doing a Halliburton — and Prosecutors drag feet, Congress can whisper to the DoJ “Art. I, sec 2, clause 5” and see if they “get” it.

  7. Watch this.

    The American people decided to “get Pence first.” and it took Congress only 24 hours to oblige. Then it was suggested to Pres Trump that he appoint Republican senator Rand Paul as Vice Pres under the 25th Amendment. Once Rand was in, Trump had a sudden need to resign. President Paul then appointed Tulsi Gabbard as VP. (They were already soulmates, if you recall the Stop Arming the Terrorists Act.)

    Rand was not old enough to remember that JFK had appointed his bro, RFK, attorney general, but Dad reminded him and thus Ron Paul became AG. Ron drummed his fingers on the desk and asked “Are there any Fourth Amendment issues that need attention?” As head of the DoJ, he invited Sidney Powell to dob in any miscreant US Attorneys. Being a states rights fanatic, Ron requested the Massachusetts governor to repatriate Jahar Tsarnaev to Boston a.s.a.p.

    Kay Griggs became Chairwoman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff at the reduced-armaments Pentagon.

    VP Gabbard (“VP” now standing for Very Pretty) said “I’ve read Mary Maxwell’s dandy book Reunion: Judging the Family Court; I think she should be Chief Justice.” (Nine of the nine had already quit the Court, as part of a plea deal.) Chief Justice Maxwell said “Thanks! Now I won’t have to buy clothes. And could my good friend Dee McLachlan be Secretary of State?”

    President Paul said OK, there is no citizenship requirement for Cabinet members, as the Constitution does not mention Cabinet. Dee’s first act in the State Dept was to inform Australia that it was no longer a League of Nations type mandate of the US.

    She spoke to Oz’s new prime minister, Fiona Barnett, who informed Sec’y Dee, rather curtly, that she had already nationalized Pine Gap, and had rescued the children from under Holsworthy (the ones who had never seen light).

    Ned was so excited he did not know whether he was Arthur of Martha. Ned phoned Jon Faine’s ABC radio show to ask if there could be a rapprochement. Faine said No and hung up.

    Australian Cabinet now consisted of Phil Hingston and Greg Buck as a duopoly Treasurer, Cherri Bonney as Minister of Culture, and Terry Shulze as Attorney General. Shulze had Martin Bryant charged with a new crime — stealing a paperclip at Risdon — so there would be a trial at which Seascape could come out in the wash. Mal Hughes, as DPP, would handle it.

    Berry absolutely refused, on principle, to join government in any capacity whatsoever.

    Foreign Affairs Minister James O’Neill called for a halt in trade with “certain countries” until they improve their human rights practices. Diane DeVere, with the new Aboriginal portfolio “Coordinator of Our Frequencies,” is tasked with assimilating the white population into the Nation.

    You see? The people really do rule.

  8. You missed who would be the minister for scientific research and restructuring of gravity……. Kevin Bracken with former Australian treasurer Josh Frydenberg, appointed as the official departmental janitor and window washer.

    • And in the restructuring and sale of the ABC Kerry Stokes appointed Faine as the children’s official head yellow banana in jarmys.

        • Thank you Nedski. And I forgot to say that starting in 2020 the Anzac Day dawn service will standardly include Eric Bogle’s “And the Band Played Waltzing Matilda.” And Eddy, as Defense Minister, will drill the troops in the respectability of whistleblowing.

          Rachel Vaughan is about to unseal SA’s Mullighan Inquiry, Shane Dowling will get his mitts into the Wood Royal Commission in NSW, and Wayne Kilowski will do WA’s report.

          What a wonderful world!

      • And by the way, Terry will spend his spare time in his garden organic hothouse trying to breed a straight banana for Canberra’s politician’s smorgasboard.
        Best of luck.
        If he does suceed, Monsanto-Bayer will offer him the world for the discovery and apply the ’round up’ solution.

        • My last ‘hands’ of bananas have even more curvature than previously. They may be chocked full of nutrients, but I would really like them to fatten up some more, I can deal with the curvature. – Dried, they are a lovely snack.

    • For the unitiated, what is being expressed is that Frydenberg will be tasked with clearing out his official BS government 911 science denialist nutters conspiracy theorists and washing the windows to clearly see the truth and reality by government, ABC and press gallery drongos and fakes.
      Ok. Bit subtle for Faine, ABC and Co, not to forget poor Frydenberg.
      But the world is awakening to the swamp creatures.

  9. Mary, a quaint survey of the US as you wish it might be. Unfortunately, the overwhelming evidence is that the real decisions are not made by elected persons, or persons accountable to the electorate, but b y persons identified as long ago as January 1961 by Eisenhower in his farewell speech. Even he could not have envisaged the degree to which the US has evolved since then, and that evolution has nothing to do with democracy. The oligarchs and the plutocrats rule the roost as they have done for a very long time.
    The notion of government of, by and for the people was a very fine one. Such a pity it never happened.

    • “Mary, a quaint survey of the US as you wish it might be”.

      Shite. You mean there will be no references to “Maxwell, CJ”? Shite.

  10. Holy Rudolf Nureyev!. Julius Skoolafish has just emailed me to say that he fulfilled a lifetime ambition to visit the museum at St Petersburg last week, when he was in Russia presenting his credentials as Australia’s ambassador. The Siberian Quartet played a Russianized version of Vivaldi’s Four Season’s for His Excellency. (Winter, Winter, Winter, and you Guessed It).

          • Your comment is a good trigger for the following thoughts, Terry – ah yes, “millennials” – I have not spoken to a single millennial (via grandchildren and associates) that does NOT know that what they are being fed is all BS – wars in the middle east, and even “climate change” – and it is not hard to help them join the dots. So the question then is – what is/who are this small group controlling the narrative?

            The rest of my comment below led me to ponder the following question:

            Has anyone noticed that the interest by governments and their agencies in public opinion about war and peace is not whether the public want war (they don’t, obviously), but how to steer the public INTO war?

            Reading John Coleman’s The Tavistock Institute of Human Relations

            In Chapter 8 he is talking about the night of October 30th 1938 – when “Orson Wells had created quite a reputation for himself as a master at staging faux news events by making use of the English author, H.G. Wells, a former MI6 operative and his book, The War of the Worlds.”

            Coleman goes on …

            “What was the purpose of the “hoax?” In the first instance it was to gauge just how effective Cantril and Tavistock’s methods were in practice, and perhaps of greater importance, it was to set the stage for the coming war in Europe in which “news broadcasts” would play a crucial role in information gathering and dissemination as an established source of reliable information, as well as a forum for directing public opinion.

            He is referring here to Hadley Cantril who in 1944, along with “Research Associates in the Office of Public Opinion Research, Princeton University” published “Gauging Public Opinion” (Fourth printing 1947 here).

            https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.275054/page/n2

            I note the dedication “To George Gallup”

            And that led to a related gem that I have only just stumbled across …

            “Public Opinion in War And Peace” by Abbott Lawrence Lowell

            https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.190346/page/n3

    • Thank you to Mary at 5.32 yesterday and Julius at 7.45. A timely reminder that there is beauty in the world to lift our hearts and minds.

C'mon Leave a Reply, Debate and Add to the Discussion

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