Enrique Ayala Jr 0

Impeach politicians violating our 2nd Amendment rights

51 people have signed this petition. Add your name now!
Enrique Ayala Jr 0 Comments
51 people have signed. Add your voice!
Maxine K. signed just now
Adam B. signed just now

This petition is to make a point. That point is that if you are a senator, congressman, or any other political figure in office are not above the constitution of the United States of America. You took an oath to uphold the constitution. You are now trying to pick away at it that means you are in violation of your oath to office. As stated here : "Violation of Oath of Office and Walker v Members of Congress

In refusing to obey the law of the Constitution and call an Article V Convention when required to do so, the members of Congress not only violatedfederal income tax lawbut theiroath of officeas well.The Constitutionrequires that all members of Congress must take an oath of office to support the Constitution before assuming office. In order to comply with the Constitution, Congress has enacted federal laws to execute and enforce this constitutional requirement.

Federal law regulating oath of office by government officials is divided into four parts along with an executive order which further defines the law for purposes of enforcement.5 U.S.C. 3331, provides the text of the actual oath of office members of Congress are required to take before assuming office.5 U.S.C. 3333requires members of Congress sign an affidavit that they have taken the oath of office required by5 U.S.C. 3331and have not or will not violate that oath of office during their tenure of office as defined by the third part of the law,5 U.S.C. 7311which explicitly makes it a federal criminal offense (and a violation of oath of office) for anyone employed in the United States Government (including members of Congress) to “advocatethe overthrow of our constitutional form of government”. The fourth federal law,18 U.S.C. 1918provides penalties for violation of oath office described in 5U.S.C. 7311which include: (1) removal from office and; (2) confinement or a fine.

The definition of “advocate” is further specified inExecutive Order 10450which for the purposes of enforcement supplements5 U.S.C. 7311. One provision ofExecutive Order 10450specifies it is a violation of5 U.S.C. 7311for any person taking the oath of office toadvocate“the alteration ... of the form of the government of the United States by unconstitutional means.” Our form of government is defined by the Constitution of the United States. It can only be “altered” by constitutional amendment. Thus, according toExecutive Order 10450(and therefore5 U.S. 7311) any act taken by government officials who have taken the oath of office prescribed by5 U.S.C. 3331which alters the form of government other by amendment, is a criminal violation of the5 U.S.C. 7311.

Congress has never altered the Article V Convention clause by constitutional amendment. Hence, the original language written in the law by the Framers and itsoriginal intent remains undisturbed and intact. That law specifies a convention call isperemptoryon Congress when the states have applied for a convention call and uses the word “shall” to state this.The states have applied. When members of Congress disobey the law of the Constitution and refuse to issue a call for an Article V Convention whenperemptorilyrequired to do so by that law, they have asserted a veto power when none exists norwas ever intended to existin that law. This veto alters the form of our government by removing one of the methods of amendment proposal the law of the Constitution creates. Such alteration without amendment is a criminal violation of5 U.S.C. 7311and18 U.S.C. 1918.

In addition, the members of Congress committed a second criminal violation of their oaths of office regarding an Article V Convention call.5 U.S.C. 7311clearly specifies it is a criminal violation for any member of Congress toadvocatethe overthrow of our constitutional form of government. The definition of the word “advocate” is to: “defend by argument before a tribunal or the public: support or recommend publicly.”

The single intent of the federal lawsuit Walker v Members of Congress (a public record) was to compel Congress to obey the law of the Constitution and call an Article V Convention asperemptorilyrequired by that law, theoriginal intent of whichhas never altered by constitutional amendment. The lawsuit was brought because Congress has refused to obey the law of the Constitution. Such refusal obviously establishes the objective of the members of Congress to overthrow our form of government by establishing they (the members of Congress) can disobey the law of the Constitution and thus overthrow our constitutional form of government.

The word “peremptory” precludes any objection whatsoever by members of Congress to refuse to call an Article V Convention. This peremptory preclusion certainly includes joining a lawsuit to oppose obeying the law of the Constitution and it may be vetoed by members of Congress. That act not only violates the law of the Constitution but5 U.S.C. 7311as well. When the members of Congress joined to oppose Walker v Members of Congress their opposition became part of the court record and therefore a matter of public record.Thus, regardless of whatever arguments for such opposition were presented by their legal counsel to justify their opposition, the criminal violation of the oath of office occurred because the members of Congress joined the lawsuit to publicly declare their opposition to obeying the law of the Constitution."

In short let's make it heard that we the people will not take any attempt to ban ammunition, or firearms without repercussions against those attempting to strip us of our rights.

Share for Success