Member training from September 16th 2025.

n our meeting tonight, I reminded everyone of the importance of continually increasing our knowledge—of liberty, of God’s law, and of the conspiracy against freedom—so that we are not destroyed for lack of understanding. Using the recent Charlie Kirk shooting as an example, I stressed that we must avoid the noise, resist the temptation to jump to conclusions, and instead focus on principles, evidence, and the ways such events are used to erode our liberties. We examined how the media and government seek to control narratives, hide evidence, and advance tyranny under the guise of condemning “political violence.” From there, I shifted into the heart of our discussion: understanding the Constitution as for the United States, not of it—recognizing that America is not one republic but a confederation of sovereign republics. By recovering the original meaning of Congress, federalism, and state sovereignty, we strengthen our ability to defend liberty and resist propaganda that would make us forget who we are as free and independent peoples.

Help support ad free content with a one time donation or becoming a member today.

TRANSCRIPT

Our Father in Heaven, we are grateful to come together tonight
for this Tree of Liberty Society
instructions and teachings, we ask for Thy Spirit to be with us to guide and direct
those that present the information tonight and those of us that are to receive it
please Open our hearts and minds, expand our minds to be able to understand and
comprehend all that is given, that we may grow and progress in the knowledge of the
truth. We ask that you would help us to prepare ourselves,
to qualify ourselves to be able to be used by the inability of thy kingdom,
knowing that you are in need of the people that are prepared and qualified for
these last days. Please guide and direct us in these things. Protect and watch over
each one. We ask Thy blessings to attend us this night, asking in the name of Thy
Son, Jesus Christ. Amen.
Thank you, Sam. Now, and go ahead with the minutes. Okay. Yeah, not Captain Kirk.
We’ll be getting into, you know, it’d be kind of silly of me not to talk about
the Charlie Kirk shooting.
But I, there’s not a whole lot. So it didn’t really take up, it’s not going to
take up everything. And so, but I thought it was irresponsible not to at least talk
about it, and give us some principles to go after.
And then we’ll be talking about the Constitution. This Thursday, this Wednesday is
Constitution Day. And it’s important for us to learn as much about the principles
that are within that and that need to be applied, and that we need to go on the
offense in implementing. So the first thing I want to add to this,
I want to have us all remember how important it is that we increase our
understanding, increase our knowledge base, and so the scriptures talk over and over
again. I’ve mentioned I’ve done trainings on this. The fact that, you know, the
reason why we are in the situation that we’re in is because of lack of knowledge.
And so it’s important for us to be reminded every week, what have we done this
week to increase our knowledge, either of the conspiracy of the principles of
liberty, of natural law, of God’s law. And so I wanted that to be a regular
reminder for us, that we are taking a proactive approach to making sure that we are
not adding to the perishing because of our lack of knowledge. So and then of
course, everything that we do is to build understanding of and adherence to the
principles that have built free nations, exposed the satanic conspiracy, and build an
effective resistance to that conspiracy.
Okay, so getting into the Charlie Kirk shooting this last week,
there’s a lot of noise going on and we want to avoid the noise. We want to avoid
the personality -based rhetoric. And we’re going to get into principles that we should
be focusing on. And so as I bring that up, there have been so much noise out
there. So many different ideas, so many different theories, different things that have
been brought up as, you know, as, hey, we know this is what actually happened, no,
this is what happened. There are things that, you know, in the first couple of
days, I was like, whoa, you know, I think this is actually what happened. And then
as more data came out, I said, you know what, I need to change my mind. That’s
not what it is. And so we’re at a point where there are things
related that to this that I can say that I kind of lean towards believing right
now, but there is nothing about this that I am willing to say this is the Tree of
Liberty’s Society position. I’ve talked about this in the past, right? We start off
with, you know, I just don’t know. There’s things we just don’t know about. And
that’s not just with this, but as something new comes out, right? We start up with,
I don’t know. And then we say, okay, we’ve got enough history behind us. I can
make an educated guess to say, this is the probability,
this is probably what happened. And then the next step is, you know, I am
confident. I know that this is true. I just can’t prove it. And then there’s the
final thing, which is what we usually wait for to go public with, is I know this
is true and here’s the
So, just to give you an example of the previous one of, I am being confident that
President Trump didn’t actually get shot. I think there’s a lot of evidence that
shows that that was a complete fraudulent event,
but I don’t have the proof that where I’m willing to go public with it, okay? But,
that there is enough evidence where I think that I, that is where I almost could
say I know that as much as I know, you know, anything. Yeah, go ahead, Mark.
– Yes, I’m with you on that. There’s so much circumstantial evidence, you put it
together and logic says it’s probably beyond a reasonable doubt that it was all
staged. If you put the different bits of information and the events together.
For example, the board, as speeches, he doesn’t have a board that he can hide
under, or the strips of blood across his face were like an instrument.
I mean, there are so many things about it, I can’t think of all of that right
now, that would suggest if you put them all together, logic suggest that it was
almost certainly staged. – Yep. – And there certainly was a motive.
– Right, of course.
– And there’s a lot of things that are popping up that makes me think similar to
things about this, but I’m not willing to even entertain that right now because
things are just developing too fast. And I don’t wanna be a part of
you know, as things like, like I mentioned, there are things that have come up that
I’m like, oh, I believed that a couple of days ago, I no longer believe that with
new information that has come out. It’s important for us to be willing to do that.
And so that’s why I want to focus on just the, just the facts. Yes, Mark.
Mark, this is your third comment. Pardon me? This is your third comment.
Oh, thank you. I appreciate you can can count. I think this is important.
The reaction potential reaction to this we need to really look at that to try to
resist and fight it and not fall victim to it. So gun controls one possibility.
One thing that on the weekend, the talk shows we had Cox on there going on about
social media. One country in Asia just recently banned all social media. So going
after freedom of speech. I think it’s Wilson, the speaker of the house,
was saying it’s emotions that’s the cause. Well, if emotions are the cause, we are
emotional, then they have grounds to go after all of our rights. So I think it’s
important that we, instead of treat it as individuals with individual rights.
So it’s important we anticipate and look at the evidence of what reaction they’re
giving us that will advance tyranny. Yep, I’ll be getting that. You’re getting ahead.
Joyce, go ahead.
Joyce? I’m freaking all the wrong things to unmute my microphone. I can’t figure it
out. I just want to say if anybody is inferring that Charlie Kirk was not killed.
They’re retarded.
Literally retarded and it infuriates me.
It’s important for us to make sure that we know what’s what the facts are before
we state the position. That’s for sure. We don’t want to look foolish. Fact is that
man is dead and it was a horrible horrible crime and yes we should make sure that
It doesn’t lead to taking away our liberties, but it was
live and, I mean, it’s just outrageous. We sound ridiculous and outrageous to even
infer that he wasn’t really killed.
Appreciate that. That’s all I have to say. – Thank you.
Real quick, Mark. – Yeah, the principles, you mentioned we need to look at the
principle. We need to look at the principle of what these people stand for.
This man was obviously a wolf in sheep clothing,
advancing one of the worst tyrants the country’s had a long time. President Trump,
Lindsey Graham was on one of the talk shows yesterday and he said, if it wasn’t
for Kurt, we would have never had President Trump. He was as lieutenant.
He got a huge number of students to vote for the iron. So I think we need to
look at these people, what they stand for, whether he, I don’t think anybody here
He supports his murder, but, you know, he’s supporting tyranny, and he’s supporting
tyranny sometimes in his debates as well. Right, we can disagree with somebody with
not supporting their assassination, so. Mark, you’ve run out of comment times,
okay? Tell afterwards. Let’s hold most of our comments till afterwards. Let’s wave a
real question that needs to be clarified. I appreciate that. So, with all of this
noise, it’s important for us to realize what William Casey said. He said we’re
successful when the people don’t know what’s real. And that gets into some of the
things that have been brought up already, you know, that’s there have been so many
different theories put out there and so many different things that have already been
debunked and some things that are still, you know, questions. And so that’s this is
their goal. Their goal is to when they have some sort of event is to make it so
we don’t even know what’s real. And so there are manufactured events,
there are different classifications. And so it’s important for us to, I think there
is enough evidence for us to say, I don’t know everything, but I can say that this
is a manufactured event of some kind, okay? So before we chop my head off,
let’s look at the different kinds, right? We have number one is complete fiction,
full and complete propaganda, no physical event, fake pandemic is an example of that,
right? Okay. Number two is a mixture of real and fake events, a carefully planned
event executed by the conspiracy with actors and the beast media, covered with
careful precision, typically no loss of life and has bystanders Believing the event
from a distance, Sandy Hook and many other school shootings, the Pulse nightclub
shooting, Boston bombing, Las Vegas concert shooting. Those are examples.
Number three, a real event, but was orchestrated by the conspiracy. Terrible things
happened. Conspiracy planned and funded the event, 9 /11, Oklahoma City bombing,
et cetera, right? We don’t want to look foolish and say that no planes hit the
Twin Towers on 9 /11. Planes hit the towers. The towers came down. Okay?
The Alfred P. Murrow building was bombed. We’re not going to say that it didn’t get
bombed. Those things really did happen. But the explanation of what happened is where
the lie is, right? It’s a manufactured event. The government was involved in those
things. And the official line is a complete and utter lie.
Okay. And so when we see a manufactured event, we have to kind of see what, what
combination of these there are. And then a non manufactured event,
but a big event that happens that people know about, right, there are completely
genuine, a person not connected to the conspiracy commits an act. And we look at
some at an event, we have to ask ourselves, you know, which four things does this
event fall under, right? And so I would say the completely genuine event is not a
manufactured event. But the conspiracy and the conspiracy usually if it’s a legitimate
event, the conspiracy quickly has the event go out of our
Zeitgeist, right? It’s not covered in the news anymore. It’s not it’s it’s maybe
gets a couple of days and then it disappears But the things that are a part of
the first three are the things that Are in the news for a long long time.
Well, you know, we’re on 20 something years for 9 /11, for example And so it’s
those are the things that they want to bring up over and over and over again.
Okay, so we’re following principles, and we’re seeing, does, does, do any of these
things fit? Things that pop up, current events.
So what we need to watch for are of course what happens to public support, what
happens in the culture because of it, and what new legislation comes out of it,
right? That’s, that’s where we really need to focus on, especially before we know
all of the facts. That’s where our focus should be not trying to come up with some
new theory that’s going to be, that’s going to make us look foolish in the next
day or two. Okay, give you an example of some of the culture changes that they are
working on with both of these shootings. Okay, we have the Trump shooting, where you
had they were all condemning political violence. The Biden talking about political
violence. You had NATO talking about political violence as no place in our
democracies. Other heads of state saying the same thing. And then we have here with
the Kirk shooting, you have Kamal Harris saying political violence is no place in
America. You have another senator, Warnock, saying, you know, this is Warnock saying,
“Political violence is anti -democratic.” You have the National Governors Association,
which Utah’s governor is the head of, saying, “We all come together in condemning
“political violence in every form.” And then you have Cory Booker saying, “We must
call political violence what it is, evil.” Okay, so those are the political shifts.
Those are the, not political shifts, but those, that’s the cultural
conditioning that of course they want to instill in us, that defending ourselves and
the principles that are covered in killing no murder, they want to make you think
that those are always wrong, that those are always evil, that you always have the
opportunity to change things in the ballot box and whatnot, and that to actually
defend yourself is always wrong.” So there are things that are going on right now
where they want to cover their trail. They want to make sure that the evidence is
not available for us to investigate. Similar things happened after 9 /11.
There are videos that have disappeared. They immediately cleaned up all
you know, rubble in all of the building and all of the evidence and destroyed all
the evidence before any real investigation could be done into 9 /11. Same thing
happened with the Oklahoma City bombing and in other instances. And we see similar
things happening right now with the Charlie Kirk shooting. We have lawmakers are
calling to remove his assassination videos. Social platforms face pressure over graphic
footage circulation lawmakers quickly demanded that the platforms take action Republican
Anna Paulina publicly called for Elon Musk and and Mark Zuckerberg and tick -tock to
remove the footage She wrote on X. He has a family young children and no one
should be forced to relive the tragedy online Another Republican from Colorado,
echoed the police saying, “I agree completely. I never want to see that again. I
hate that I saw it at all.” And I can definitely sympathize with not wanting to
see it, but it is essential that crimes, you know,
the information is available publicly for people to be able to go over the evidence.
And the fact that they want the evidence removed from the public is very alarming
and very concerning and it is a red flag. Carmen?
You just said a little while ago about how 9 /11 and the Oklahoma City bombing,
how everything, all the evidence was cleaned up and disappeared. Yes.
Before they really got to do the investigation. And for some reason this went
through my mind. However many years ago, what 15 years ago,
what’s her name? Oh, gosh, I just had her name in my mind,
but she was kidnapped from her bedroom. Yeah, oh, yeah, Elizabeth Smart, Elizabeth
Smart. Yeah, Elizabeth Smart, that people just invaded the home,
messing up and covering up and destroying evidence that could have possibly pointed
at a sooner point in time. Is that what you’re talking about?
That’s a great example, yep, absolutely. Anybody that doesn’t remember any of the
trainings we did on that, there was first responders that we’re part of the
investigation that said that there were there was child porn on the father’s computer
and they said oh we’ll just you know we’ll worry about that later we need to worry
about finding the daughter and all that just went away.
Really? Yep.
Whoa I didn’t know that. Of course I don’t watch TV so
– Okay, thank you. – Yeah, Mark, question?
– Just more evidence of what you had just said a moment ago about all the pundits,
all these politicians talking about political violence. And I have an article here I
won’t read from, but it has Harris, it has Pelosi, it has Gavin Newsom. Trump said
the same thing. We And we will not tolerate political violence. So, and they all
said that within two hours of the event. So it’s pretty strong evidence that they
all got a script advance to say that, ’cause that’s not a phrase that’s been used
in the past to any extent. And yet they’re all saying Republicans and Democrats
alike. And one last point on that, it’s really important. They do love violence. I
mean, Trump just blew up a ship at sea because he didn’t like who was on it, and
he’s, you know, killing, attacking Yemen on a daily basis.
700 ,000. Well, even their own citizens, their political violence is used every day
against the people in the United States. And so, yeah, they want a monopoly on
political violence. Yeah, it’s okay for the government to kill people, but it’s not
okay for us to kill anybody that’s supporting the government. Mark, just as a
reminder, everyone, we’re limited to three comments during the one -hour meeting.
You can make more comments as you want at the open forum afterwards, but during the
meeting, we are all limited to three comments per person. Well, is that a bylaw?
I never heard of that. That was number five for you, Mark. No, – No, I asked your
question. – So, I don’t know about a buy, it’s something that we brought up a few
months ago. And so we’re just encouraging folks to allow others that opportunity. So
we wanna just make sure that we are keeping it in there. So, thank you. So
continuing on, we have a TikTok response with removals and safeguards, TikTok
confirmed. It is removing videos of Charlie Kirk’s assassination and outlined the
steps it is taking to prevent harmful clips from spreading further. The company also
issued a statement to cyber guy expressing condolences to Kirk’s family, just, you
know, YouTube confirmed it’s removing graphic videos of the assassination while
boosting authoritative news coverage. They’re prominently elevating news content.
So whatever the official story is, they, they, They are making sure that they are
removing anything that might be evidence, and they are making sure that anything that
goes against the official line will be hidden. Okay, so we have government and media
sources working together to ensure that evidence is covered up and made unavailable,
and that only the official line is made available to the public at large.
So what else, what are some other things? Maybe this is a distraction because
there’s so much focus on it where you have things that have never happened with
anybody else before, where you have entire sports leagues giving tributes,
you have teams from cities that Charlie Kirk’s not from, having giant events,
you have multiple governments honoring him,
but I’m just saying that this is not normal. So the amount of coverage this is
being given tends to say, oh, is there something that they want to make sure is
out of the news? Okay. So what are some other things that happened the day before
or maybe the day after, right? The day before 9 /11, for example, you have Donald
Rumsfeld testifying before Congress about billions of dollars missing,
right? And so, and then all of a sudden, the next day, trillions of dollars,
trillions, thank you for the correction. So trillions of dollars missing. And the
next day, that part of the Pentagon just happens to get hit by a plane or missile,
whatever the case may be. So, just as an example of what I’m talking about. Sam,
go ahead.
I thought it was interesting. So, Sunday, I guess a lot of you,
it sounded like thousands, were flocking to the different churches. And you think
about the different There they’ve got to all be controlled by the conspiracy and you
think about the control that they have over the people over the youth and To think
I think the one church they said had like three rows It was like 1500 people more
than what they normally have And it was it was really interesting to see that the
other thing too is They weren’t taping off the crime scene at all.
People were going in there cleaning everything up. When did I ever do that? Right.
Thank you. So I want to look at one thing we have here.
The day before it is on the 9th. The entire 50th birthday album for Epstein was
released, including this card written by Donald Trump to Epstein.
Now, of course, Trump denies it. Some people are claiming AI, but this is,
you know, before AI was a thing, you know, there are many,
many different things that are in there.
I say the preponderance of the evidence is, yes, Donald Trump gave this to Jeffrey
Epstein. And so, you know, they wanted to get that out of the news. And then we
have the day of the shooting. Republicans block the Senate vote to release the
Epstein files. So the United States Senate, controlled by Republicans, and we have a
lot of our members here in Utah, both of the state Senate, US senators from Utah,
voted to make sure that Epstein files did not get released.
Same thing July 17th the house did the same thing with all of Utah’s Delegation
voting to block the release of the files. So You have two major things that the
the July event, you know already happened, but we have the Epstein birthday
Folder as well as the Senate vote happening on the same at the same time
is something that could very big possibly be something that they wanted to make sure
and get out of the news cycle and get people to stop demanding the release of it
because Trump calling people stupid for still demanding the release wasn’t really
working. It was backfiring. So we’ve got to maybe get another distraction. And so
what was Charlie Kirk’s position on Epstein? We’ll play this clip.
There’s no volume. Oh, okay. Thank you. I’m going to make sure that I share the
volume this time.
Okay.
I’m done talking about Epstein for the time being.
I’m done talking about Epstein for the time being. I’m going to trust my friends in
the administration. I’m going to trust my friends in the government to do what needs
to be done, solve it, balls in their hands. I’ve said so he wasn’t, you know,
definitely wasn’t being a critic of the administration. He was supporting the neocon
agenda. He wasn’t an enemy of the conspiracy. So Kirk was not an enemy of the
conspiracy. There’s so much noise being created, designed to discredit the conspiracy
exposure. A lot of fake conspiracies out there designed to make sure to look us
look foolish. And we want to make sure that we’re keeping our eye on how the
conspiracy has taken and takes advantage of the situation. This is what we need to
remove emotion, remove attachment to individuals and personalities, and maybe even our
favorite theories. And just look at the data, look at the facts and where it goes.
There is no part of this that I’m willing to come forward and say, I’m willing to
take my reputation on XYZ, except for what I’ve shown you tonight.
Carmen go ahead.
Oh, is Charlie Kirk. I do not I never heard of him until the day he was killed.
So tell me who is he? Okay, is he such a tell me so so he’s a 31 year old guy
is the head of turning point USA. They would go to colleges. And they would debate
college students on social issues, political issues, and have people come up to a
mic, you know, and say why they defend transgender issues, you know, for example,
and Charlie Kirk would come up with some kind of a, you know,
a remark, and then they’d make a video of it, and then they’d spread those videos
out to show that, hey, Charlie Kirk is, you know, in on the so -called right side
of social issues or he’s a conservative, that kind of stuff. And so he was really
popular on social media and had that college campus organization.
Thank you. Yep.
So let’s see what time is it. So I’m hoping that that we can make sure that we
stick to those principles and that way we can make sure that we are not accepting
things that are false, but we’re also not shutting out the truth. If the evidence
came out for something that shows that the official line is not true, we need to
make sure that we’re willing to accept that whatever it is. I don’t know what that
is right now. And so there’s just a lot of crazy things to be out to be out
there and we can talk more about that in the open form maybe Q &A.
So but I want to talk about the Constitution for the United States. Now this is
the we’re getting to principles. This is how we the rubber meets the road. How do
we actually start applying correct principles and holding people accountable. And so
this you know might sound weird or might sound petty. on petty, it might even sound
like a grammar Nazi, you’re like, oh, we know what it means. ‘Cause most people,
when you say that it’s the Constitution of the United States, why am I saying
Constitution for the United States? And we see here, just look at the Constitution
itself. You look at the preamble and it says at the very end, it says the
Constitution for the United States of America. So why did the founding fathers use
that word? Was that just weird old English? You know, does it does it matter?
Does there a distinction? Is it a distinction without a difference? It’s important
for us to understand that this is really the foundation. So what is America, right?
A lot of people in the media Politicians will say we’re a democracy, but I would
hope that everyone here would say of course, that’s not true. And so others would
respond that, hey, you know, America is a republic, not a democracy. Well,
I think I might shock you and I’m going to say that it’s not a republic either.
And I’m going to challenge you and I’m going to say right now, and we’ll get into
it later, the idea of America being that people will,
you know, when we say we’re not a democracy, People will say the word democracy is
not in the Constitution Right. Well, the word is also not in the Constitution The
word Republican is but it’s never referred to America. The United States is never
referred to in the Constitution as a Republic and I want us to understand why this
is important. Okay as much as it’s important Why we’re not a democracy The
importance of America, the United States of America, not being a republic is just as
important.
So, again, what is America? We go to the Constitution, Article 4, Section 4,
gets into that part, what I was just mentioning a minute ago. The United States
shall guarantee to every state in this union a Republican form of government.
Okay, every state in the Union is
Promised guaranteed a Republican form of government The Constitution does not say the
United States is a Republican form of government The states are sovereign and the
general government is subject to the states and is not And the general government is
not sovereign, and therefore it cannot be a republic. Okay? I’ll get into that.
What we are is a confederation of sovereign republics. So now I’ve given you the
answer of what we are. Now I’m going to provide more evidence why that is the
case. That is what the Founding Father said, and it is essential for us to
understand why we are not a republic, but we are a confederation of what is
supposed to be 50 sovereign republics. So before the Constitution,
right, we have here the very first Congress, September 5,
1774, you have the first continental Congress meets. Okay.
And I want us to pay attention to that word, Congress, because I don’t think we
understand what that means generally speaking.
Representatives from 13 separate colonies met together.
So they weren’t all part of, they were colonies of England, but they were not
intertwined together
besides their relationship England. Okay, so we look at the Constitution again,
and it’s talking about the states are superior. They are not subdivisions of the
general government. Okay, go to the Declaration of Independence, talking about these
colonies, these United colonies are, and of right ought to be free and independent
states. Now today, we think of states as political subdivisions,
much like a county. But that is not what that means, right? We see today the only
independent nation that is referred to as a state typically is the state of Israel.
State just means it’s its own country, okay? That they are absolved from all
allegiance to the British crown and that I’ve all political connection between them
and the state of Great Britain is and ought to be totally dissolved. So is the
state of Great Britain is that like one of the subdivisions of Europe. No, it’s
it’s its own independent nation. And it’s the referring to independent nations as
states. Okay. And that as free and independent states,
they have full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances,
establish commerce, and to do all other acts and things which independent states may
have right to do. So they’re saying each of us individually all have the right to
do what sovereign independent nations have the right to do. Okay, so on September
3rd 1783, King George did not sign a peace treaty with the United States He signed
13 peace treaties. He signed a peace treaty with 13 sovereign nations All separate
all independent. Okay So does that matter so does this for matter article one
section one of the constitution All legislative powers here in granted shall be
vested in a Congress of the United States Which shall consist of a Senate and House
of Representatives Now that might seem like so what that’s old news But as I bolded
and italicized the word Congress, we need to understand that word The definition of
that word. What is that word? Why did the Founding Fathers call it Congress and not
Parliament?
When they said no, we’re not going to call it Parliament, were they just being
difficult and saying, you know, we don’t want to be part of England, we’re not
going to call things the same thing that England calls things. And so we’re going
to come up with a different name for it. No, it’s not at all. I mean, you think
of New York, right? New Amsterdam all kinds of different things that were Not
original names to the United States There’s a definition of Parliament.
Okay, go back to the dictionary definition of the time the Samuel Johnson dictionary
it says the definition of Parliament is the assembly of the king and three estates
of the around, namely the Lord’s spiritual, the Lord’s temporal and commons for the
debating of matters, touching the common wealth, especially the making and correcting
of laws, which assembly or court is of all others, the highest and of greatest
authority. Okay. So it’s an assembly of the king is basically what a parliament is.
So we don’t have a king, so is that simply the only difference between a parliament
and a congress as we don’t have a king? No. Congress has a strict definition as
well. Okay, we go back to Johnson’s dictionary and we look up the word “congress.”
What is the definition of “congress” when they wrote the Constitution and they used
the word “congress?” Okay, an appointed meeting or settlement of affairs between
different nations. So when Congress meets right we have individuals from the nation
of Utah, from the nation of New York, from the nation of Texas coming together for
a settlement of affairs between them.
The word Congress was very much deliberate and tells you that we weren’t just
independent sovereign nations before the Constitution. We are intended to be sovereign
and independent nations right now with the Constitution.
Again, we have Edmund Burke in a speech to the electors in Bristol in 1774,
talking about Congress versus Parliament. Edmund Burke, right? Everybody remembers his
famous quote about those that what’s it called stand up against the only thing evil
needs is for good men to do nothing.
He said Parliament is not a Congress of ambassadors from different and hostile
interests. Okay. Parliament is not a Congress. Congress is ambassadors from different
and hostile interests. Parliament is not that. Which interests each must maintain as
an agent and advocate against other agents and advocates. But Parliament is a
deliberative assembly of one nation with one interest, that of the whole. Where not
local purposes, not local prejudices ought to guide but the general good resulting
from the general reason of the whole. So he’s saying that these are very different
things and the Founding Fathers knew that they were very different things, you know
They they change definitions of words to control the speech to make us think
something that is true. That is not true And so they you know that they think that
Congress is there to Is an assembly of one nation with one interest, but it is not
it is different and hostile interests coming together. Okay,
so yes, it matters. 13 sovereign nations come together to form a confederation,
giving a new government limited powers relating to the combined actions of the still
sovereign nations, nation states. So if it was of the United States,
that would mean it was for, you know, it was of this nation that created something.
But it’s not. it’s for these nations that created something. So the Constitution is
for the states, not of this new nation. And James Madison explained this very
clearly as well, and the Federalists, do you remember what the Federalists are? These
are the letters to the people to explain to them what the Constitution was,
to defend it against detractors and people saying it was one thing when it wasn’t.
So James Madison explaining what the Constitution was and what it was not. So the
act of the people as forming so many independent states, not as forming one
aggregate nation, each, right, so right there, right there, he says, not as forming
one aggregate nation. Each state in ratifying the Constitution is considered as a
sovereign body, independent of all others, and only to be bound by its own voluntary
act. In this relation, then, the new constitution will, if established,
be a federal and not a national constitution. Okay?
It’s not a constitution for a national constitution. It is not a constitution for
the nation. It is a constitution for, that is federal. Okay, and and now today like
what federal not national again That’s an example of the conspiracy changing the
meaning of words where today those are almost used Interchangeably when you say the
national government or the federal government people would think you were talking
about the same exact thing But but we have James Madison saying no this is for
this is a federal constitution not a national constitution So what is federal?
Federal is relating to a league or a contract. So whoa. Oh,
that makes sense now. It’s a federal government So because it’s this this government,
it’s a contract between separate parties agreeing that to do something There’s not a
new nation. It’s just a contract between a principal, right and and the contractor
And so we defend the Constitution by understanding it, looking at what the words
meant when they were given,
defending the independence of each state, and keeping the federal government within
its bounds by going on the offense. This keeping the contract within the bounds of
the contract.
Okay, and so hopefully we now we understand this principle. We will be better to
able to defend the principle, the real principles of the constitution and not the
platitudes that people put out there. We need to be united as a nation.
We need to be, you know, one people and understand that no, we are not one people.
We are not one nation. We are 50 Sovereign independent republics with different very
different interests very different cultures very different people that need each of
those need to be defended boldly and and strongly and We need to we must not fall
for the propaganda That destroys the liberty of the people by making us one nation
so With that we are oh we were able to finish before 10 o ‘clock.
So good. So let’s open it up to some Q &A before we do
open form. So this is Q &A specifically on what we covered tonight.
So feel free to raise hands.
Mark, back to the definition of parliament. So it was assembly of the difference
parties, you know, whether it’s part of, excuse me,
I think regional governments, but but as well as the king.
So just because we don’t have a king, can you still have a parliament with the
assembly of the different nations? I mean, that is a definition of Congress,
I understand, but it seems like part of the definition still exists in America. – Of
what? – We just don’t have a parliament. But you’re saying, are you saying because
there is no sovereign, the whole use use of the federal government is not sovereign
so it cannot be a parliament because it has to have a sovereign so it doesn’t
matter if you have assembly at the other regional branch of governments yeah because
it’s not well especially in ours because they are they are representing different
nations coming together and so we’re not a parliament and that’s why they gave that
that word instead of using and So from what you’re saying, I know it’s only
symbolic. It seems to me we should have state anthems. We should have a– our state
flag should definitely fly above the national– excuse me, there I am,
the federal flag. The federal flag, yes. And the question is whether we should honor
a federal flag at all. Should we really honor it at all? It’s not a nation.
I mean– We, you know, I think with that you have the, with the war of 1812 and,
you know, the national anthem coming out of that, we were unified in defending our
union. And so I was in our independence. And so in that way, I guess you could
honor it, you know, for sure. But yes, you know, the founding fathers, you know,
Thomas Jefferson said, I’m a Virginian, not an American. And so you uh that attitude
was was common in the founding era and it wasn’t until you get to the 1860s where
you start really getting into the heavy propaganda of the one nation concept and
getting rid of the idea uh in and and then the the state’s becoming subsidiaries as
opposed to the master above this uh you know federal government. So would you agree
that it would It makes sense to have state atoms. It makes sense to put the state
flag above the US. – Yeah, state patriotism should be much stronger than national
pay, or again, I said it myself. It’s hard to get over the brainwashing, right? Our
state patriotism should be above federal patriotism.
NB, is that Nate? Go ahead,
you gotta unmute NB. be?
Sorry, can you hear me okay? Sure can. Let me kill some background music here.
Sorry, it’s just prepping some brass. So I had just a question comment on the
Charlie Kirk situation. Yeah. So similar to most of us, it’s interesting where it
seems like rather than being right, everybody wants to be first. First with,
here’s the the correct opinion. Here’s what happened. Here’s this. And I think you
aptly termed it earlier that more often than not, you just end up looking like an
idiot, you know, coming out with information way too soon. So I think there is that
standard, right? Let’s be right. Let’s not just be first. The second thing that I
was just going to discuss briefly is the principles of the conspiracy are
multifaceted, similar to the tentacles on the, on the book that you published, right?
And I go back to, I neglected who it was that said, you know, never let a good
crisis go to waste. And then because we know, or at least I would subscribe to the
idea that evil is everywhere. Evil certainly may be and certainly is independent of
a worldwide global conspiracy that there may, in this instance, just something to
consider. It may have been something that this individual did operate alone. But then
the interesting thing is, is of course how, you know, because our media is
controlled by one to three individuals, depending upon what resources you want to
subscribe to, pretty easy at that point for, you know, the news media to wait 20,
30, 40 minutes, receive its marching orders, receive, okay, here’s how we’re going to
spin it. Here’s how we’re going to use it. This is terrific. this is fantastic and
you know off to the races. So that’s all I was going to say is that I think it
is critical to, you know, try to be right, not just be first, but also to weigh
in the idea that, you know, the tentacles part of me of Satan and those operations
that he would seek to encourage very evil acts, which, you know, it doesn’t get
much more evil than the gunning down of an innocent individual.
And then And how that was used is, of course, extremely telling. And myself as
well, I’ve kind of find myself on both sides of the fence currently, right? Saying
like, oh, no, this really is like a global thing. And then going back and saying,
well, maybe it wasn’t a global agenda to create it, but it certainly was and became
very quickly a global agenda to manage it. But there in like you said again, like
was it a global agenda to kidnap Miss Smart years ago, I don’t think so.
But was it certainly like an agenda on how to narrate that? Oh, 100%.
So anyway. Yep, I would agree. Thank you.
Yeah, Mark. Yeah, for years I’ve referred to America as a constitutional republic,
and you’ve correct me on that tonight, and I haven’t done it for a long time. But
I think it’s probably, and you tell me if you agree, accurate to call it a
constitutional federal system and then go into the fact that the federal government’s
a contractual, contractual relationship with the states and that would you agree that
it’s probably acceptable to call it a constitutional federal system? Sure,
yeah, because it’s, yeah, well, federal means, means like a contract. And so it’s
the contract is the constitution. So yeah, that’s definitely accurate. – Yeah, and
there are Republican elements in it, you know, representative nature of the
legislature and so forth. And there’s even a small bit of a democracy in it,
but it’s certainly not a democracy and I agree with you, it’s not a Republican.
– Yeah, yeah. And all of those elements are in service to the contract. So, you
know, I’ve given the example of the contractor building the house for an individual,
right, there, there are elements of different facets besides just a contract,
you know, to every contract. And so just because a contract is elements of different
principles doesn’t mean it’s no longer the main thing. It is still a federal compact
of independent sovereign republics and one comment on the democracy side that’s the
elections yeah so the way I view the election the federal government they’re we’re
electing administrators we’re not electing anybody but administrators to administrate
the Constitution does that make sense sure but it’s only with and it’s the election
is only saying, “Hey, when are we all?” Because the federal government doesn’t even
control the elections. It just says when they are and what they are, but it is
each left up to each individual independent nation to decide how those elections are
held and what the rules are. And so there’s only just the unity of saying,
“Hey, when are we going to choose this Congress, these representatives from each
independent country to come together to meet for this union? Yeah,
so there’s two points here. One is that the states elect the representatives,
but once they’re elected, then the responsibility is to administer the Constitution.
Yeah. For and on behalf of the interests of their nation.
Okay, let’s have our closing prayer and then we can get into the open form and we
can talk about anything we want to.
Becky, are you available to give the closing prayer? Our dear Father in Heaven, we
are grateful for this opportunity to meet and to be taught and learn to understand
truths. We ask that that would please guide us and direct us, that we will not be
deceived, that we may know truth from there, that we may stand for righteousness and
be example unto the world. We are grateful for our many blessings that thou bestows
upon us, and we ask that you please bless Ben and his family for his efforts to
teach
and help us to gain a better understanding of our roles and our rights and what we
are to do to try to bring back those that we have lost.
We are grateful for all that Thou blesses us with and we pray for these things in
the name of Jesus Christ. Amen. Amen. Thank you, Becky.