| Submit your comments on this article | |
| Home Front: Culture Wars | |
| Oath Keepers Want to Send Armed Guards to Protect Kim Davis from Federal Marshals Imprisoning Her Again | |
| 2015-09-13 | |
| [FreedomOutpost] And this is how the Constitution is supposed to work. This is how the militia enforcing the Constitution when a federal government has gone tyrannical. Members of the group Oath Keepers are volunteering their services to interpose themselves between Kim Davis and federal marshals should they seek to follow unlawful orders from Judge David Bunning or any other judge in opposition to Kentucky law. In a statement by Oath Keepers founder Stewart Rhodes, he expounded upon the unconstitutional orders of Judge David Bunning: We believe Federal District Court Judge David Bunning grossly overstepped his bounds and violated Mrs Davis' due process rights, and in particular her right to a jury trial. This judge has assumed unto himself not just the powers of all three branches of government, but has also taken on the powers of judge, jury, and "executioner." What matters to us is not whether you agree with her position on gay marriage or her decision to not issue marriage licenses. What matters is that the judge is violating the Constitution in his anger and desire to punish her for going against his will. We are already being subjected to an unconstitutional imperial presidency, that grew exponentially under both Bush and Obama, expanding the claimed war powers of the president to swallow up our Bill of Rights and circumvent jury trial. The result is an executive branch that claims the absurd power to declare any American an "unlawful combatant" on the say-so of the president alone. Now we see the rise of an imperial judiciary that not only legislates from the bench but is attempting to expand their "contempt" power to likewise swallow up our Bill of Rights and circumvent jury trial. Both methods are used to allow the powerful office holder to merely point his finger and have his opponent thrown behind bars without a grand jury indictment and without being found guilty by a jury of their peers. No innocent until proven guilty before a jury. Just "guilty" because the leader says so. That is a dictatorship, whether done by a president or by a judge. No one man should have that kind of power in his hands alone to decide guilt and impose a sentence of indefinite detention. Under our Constitution, that dictatorial power does not exist. We must stand against this. And so we will protect her and prevent it from happening again. -- Stewart Rhodes
| |
| Posted by:Blossom Unains5562 |
| #4 So far everyone has missed the question of whether she had run for office before or after the Feds decried gay marriage ok. |
| Posted by: swksvolFF 2015-09-13 16:55 |
| #3 I see the return of 'dissenters', term used to label Quakers and other non-Church of England people who were denied public office. Now it will be Christians unless its a state approved sect. BTW, the law as well as the government were suppose to derive their power from the consent of the governed. We've done away with that. The oligarchs who sit for life, tell you what it is whether the people consent or not. Remember, the rules are for little people. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2015-09-13 12:24 |
| #2 Rednecks with rifles, please just go away. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2015-09-13 11:39 |
| #1 I'm surprised they weren't there for her first arrest. I'm also surprised that her coworkers and local sheriff cooperated with the feds. Bunning has to go. |
| Posted by: jvalentour 2015-09-13 10:14 |