Published May 29, 2024, 9:02 a.m.
9am Bill Mohr II will be perspective on religion in government and the principles America was founded on. The Mohr family has a long history in the study of the Constitution and lawful self governance. In our series of Mohr Minutes, he will be teaching current issues and apply the Constitution for guidance. Also we will be joined by Ralph the IT Guy and Karen the Riveter 10am Constitutionalist, Dr Dan Cummings will be talking about a solution for National Debt Repayment. "I have been fascinated by the Constitution of the United States since my older childhood and began a serious and in-depth study of it at the age of 14 that has continued to the present. This study has included constitutional history, constitutional law, current events concerning the problems of our time, foreign policy and the challenge of America's enemies, and sound free-market economics and its enemies. That study has never ceased and continues today. I have learned much even in recent years and continue to grow year by year in my understanding of America's problems, both foreign and domestic. I was born of good parents and raised in a loving home with 4 siblings in Salt Lake City, Utah, where I attended the public elementary and secondary schools and graduated from Highland High School. I then attended the University of Utah for 8 years, from which I obtained a B. A. degree (in mathematics) and an M.D. degree. I worked my way through college for both degrees and paid my own way (I refused all taxpayer supported college loans). My college years were interrupted for 2½ years by a Christian mission in Hong Kong and the Philippines. After I finished college and medical school, I moved to Washington D. C. for 3 years to complete a medical residency in family medicine. I married Virginia while I was in medical school, and we have raised 5 children since then, all of whom were home-schooled, at least up to junior high school (1 of them was home-schooled until college). All of them are now college graduates. All of them and their spouses are self-supporting in the American economy. Since I completed my family medicine residency, I have practiced family medicine for 41 years in various states around the country. I have been self-employed for most of that time and have learned all about the challenges of running a personal business and occasionally working as an independent contractor. I have also spent a few years working for hospitals and another employer, so that I also understand the challenges of being employed by others. I have always been in excellent health and remain so now, and I am accustomed to nearly continuous hard work with occasional brief vacations." I have served in the House of Delegates (the policymaking governing bodies) of 3 different state medical associations, and I served a prolonged term on the Board of Trustees (the executive council) of 1 of those state medical association. I have served in many lay ministerial assignments in my church. X/Twitter: https://twitter.com/i/broadcasts/1MYxNomeDkoKw Rumble: https://rumble.com/v4y6cn0-bnn-brandenburg-news-network-5292024-liberty-essentials-and-constitutionali.html https://rumble.com/v4y6c99-bnn-brandenburg-news-network-5292024-liberty-essentials-and-constitutionali.html
Good morning and welcome to Brandenburg News Network. I am Donna Brandenburg and it's the 29th day of May 2024 and welcome to our show. We're going to start out this morning with Liberty Essentials with Bill Moore and Ralph the IT guy. And then we're going to go into our second hour with Daniel Cummings. Dan is a real interesting guy. I met Dan through the Constitution Party, the National Constitution Party. He has run for many offices. And he is a doctor, very, very educated. And from the beginning of his life, he really started studying the Constitution. This guy knows his stuff. So I decided that with the in the effort of educating both myself and everyone out there, because I think that that we've I know my education on it was abysmal when it was as in the government schools. So we're trying to catch up here with what people like, say, Bill Moore. He had the privilege of having his dad teach him, you know, being a constitutionalist and some other people that had that privilege. So the rest of us are kind of like making up time here and we're learning as we go. And I think the beauty of this is that we actually can help teach each other and share what we know. Well, Dan has actually written an amendment and it's on paying back the national debt and it's kind of interesting and so we're going to look at the principles that he has there as well as just just just listen to this guy talk and um it's it's an important thing to just I think just to listen to people sometimes and dan has got such a vast amount of knowledge that you it takes a little while to digest what he's talking about because it is so complete so this should be really interesting but in the meantime I've got a funny thing to tell everyone out there, and I'm going to bring on Bill Moore and Ralph the IT guy. Hey, how are you guys doing this morning? Great. Good morning. So what I think is really interesting here is that we – hang on. Of course, my phone is ringing right now. Hang on a second. Let me restart this. And what I think is really interesting is I got up and we got on the chat here and I was talking to Bill and I said, you know what I think I want to do is I think I want to define the term liberty. And what did you say, Bill? So that's the exact same thing I was thinking about this morning when I sat down. Isn't that crazy? Because isn't that the way that, honestly, that God works? He'll nudge us all at the same time as confirmation of, yep, this is where you're supposed to go. So we're going to do a little comparison. So I brought up Copilot, which is an AI bot. And I want to take a look at exactly what that says so that we can compare what the new definition is. Because Copilot is moderated, just like chat GPT. and Claude and Open Inc and such. They're all owned by the globalists and they're moderating it. Now, with that said, I don't think that AI is a bad thing. I think it's a tool we can use. But what I do think is bad is when and they're trying to scare us away from AI because if we actually use it unmoderated, it's going to tell the truth. Okay. That's what they don't want. It's not the AI that's bad. It's the people that are throttling it down and keeping the actual information from us. I think that we all should be using AI because it's a tool, but we need to have an unmoderated type of that. And quite honestly, And part of my team is working on that right now to make this to be something that's decentralized and unmoderated, which is going to scare the living crap out of the globalists because that's exactly what they don't want. They don't want this information because it's going to tell us everything about them. So I'm going to read the definition. I don't know if I can. I can't put it up on the screen right now. I don't think. Let me see. Oh, I might be able to hang on here. Learning as we go here, guys. Learning as we go. Um, I know I can't, but I can not, not in this format, but what I can do is I can read it to you. And this is off the, this is off the, uh, uh, I'm Ralph is just sharing links here. So hang on, send it in the private chat, please. So at any rate, liberty is a noun, a concept that encompasses several meanings. Number one, freedom within society. It refers to a state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one's way of life, behavior, or political views. Two, the absence of imprisonment or enslavement. It is the state of not being imprisoned or enslaved. Three, power or scope to act as one pleases. Liberty gives individuals the power or scope to act as they please. Four, freedom from control by fate or necessity. It represents a person's freedom from control by fate or necessity. Presumptuous remark or actions. Sometimes liberty can also refer to a presumptuous remark or action. And the synonyms for it are independence, freedom, autonomy, sovereignty, self-government. Liberty is often enshrined in the constitutions of democratic societies. Okay. They went off the rails right there substantially. And it is the Statue of Liberty is, for example, is a symbol of freedom and democracy. Okay, we got two fails there on co-pilot. But we're going to keep going on this. So what would we like to share here, gentlemen, that is the actual? Let me go over here and see what Ralph posted. 1938 version, still technically copyrighted. Freedom, liberty, freedom, special privilege or exemption, immunity, permission, ungranted or undue freedom, privileged district. The 1894 version is in public domain. 1894, yeah. So here, here it is where I'm getting fed. I'm trying to, I'm trying to retype the 1894 version that I've got here, but, uh, it's long. You're an it guy. Can't you copy paste it? Not from a book from 1894. Oh, you're coming right out of a book. Okay. Oh yeah. Some of us have collections of these things. So let's, let's see what they say here. Um, Okay, so this is the 1894 public domain version. The state of a free person, exemption from subjection to the will of another, claiming ownership of the person or services. Freedom, opposition to slavery, serfdom, bondage, or subjection. Number two is freedom from imprisonment, bonds, or other restraint upon locomotion. Much more intelligent version. of a definition than what, say, AI has. I'm going to go share this on my Telegram channel. You know, that might actually work pretty well. Let me see if I can copy that. I'll put it in my Telegram channel, and I'll clearly call this out as AI. Then I'll copy the 1894 version and stuff. Talk amongst yourselves while I get this out there so everybody can see it. In the meantime, don't go too much on my typing here. I'm typing as fast as I can, which means I'm not looking at it as I'm typing. Okay, we're going to go ahead and blame Ralph for this. Let me see. Sources. Actually, definition of sources. The source is Bing. If you want a better version, take the picture that I sent you. That's of the actual page. I don't think I saw that. Yeah, I can't post it in the private chat. Okay, hang on a minute. So here is the definition. So let me see. That's something that StreamYard actually ought to change is be able to share an image in the chat and then be able to take that and share the image on the screen. Well, if you, yeah, I think you could share that if you did it from a picture, Ralph, and then I'll just throw it up on, you know, if you want to share your screen, we could do it that way if that works. Not really, because I had to take a picture using my phone. Okay, well, here we go. Just keep going here. This is what we do. This is real news for real people by real people at the kitchen table, sort of. At least the backdrop of the kitchen table here. So hang on a minute. Let me get this in the AI version. Copilot. Yeah, it says in the 1894 version, three would have been a privilege conferred by a superior power. permission granted, as leave or as liberty given to a child to play or to a witness to leave court and the like. We often hear that as being granted liberty. You can look back. One example in the New Testament is with Paul when he stood before King Agrippa. He was given liberty to speak on his behalf. It can be referred to as a permission from a superior authority as well, or a privilege exemption franchise immunity enjoyed by prescription or by grant as the liberties of the commercial cities of Europe. That's in reference to a different structured government there. Do you have any more, Ralph, that you're putting up? You've got like six points. I think that's really enough. unless we want to be totally. Well, yeah, there's 10 of these. Oh, for Pete's sakes. But it's complete, you know? I mean, that's the point is that it's complete. This book is probably at least 15 pounds. That's pretty close to what I had pulled up. I tried to remain as close to the definitions as listed by Noah Webster in 1828. That's my go-to dictionary, even though it's missing a lot of modern terms that we use. But in 1828, Noah Webster, just the first couple of points, he said that liberty is freedom from restraint. In a general sense, an application to the body or to the will or mind. The body is at liberty when not confined. The will or mind is at liberty when not checked or controlled. A man enjoys liberty when no physical force operates to restrain his actions or volitions. Natural liberty consists in the power of acting as one thinks fit without any restraint or control except from the laws of nature. It is a state of exemption from the control of others and from positive laws in the institutions of social life. This liberty is abridged by the establishment of government, as an example. Noah Webster, one of the things said about him, and I love this phrase, is that during his life, he had taught millions how to read and not one man to transgress the laws of God. What is the source on that, Ralph? The source for what I typed out there? Yeah. The 1894 version of... Let's see. It's A. Webster's Dictionary, but I don't remember exactly what edition. Let me see. Webster's International Dictionary of the English Language, being the authentic edition of Webster's Unabridged Dictionary, comprising the issues of 1864... 1879 and 1884. Now thoroughly revised and enlarged under the supervision of Noah Porter, DDLLD of Yale University. With a voluminous appendix. Okay, so 1984 version, Webster's International Dictionary of the English Language. Yep. Okay, you got to truncate some of this stuff because I can't get it out there. Yeah, but you get into books this old and just the... Incredible titles they give some of these books are kind of cool. It's not just a book of words anymore? Not so much. All right, hang on. I'll finish this up. I think I got a virus on my computer. Something came up. Click to delete immediately. Huh. Well, let's see what happens here, guys. Yeah, it's got a whole page of state seals too. Oh, that's pretty neat. I've never actually seen all the state seals together. Oh, here. Cool. This is good because we talk about liberty a lot, right? Whether it be in our circles or on the show or one on one with people. And it is important to understand what liberty actually is, not just what we perceive it to be. A lot of people use liberty and freedom as synonyms and interchangeable words. However, it's not exactly that way. Freedom would be the ability to do whatever a man thinks is fit in his own mind, whereas liberty would be the right to do or to act as one sees fit, except when in violation of the law. I think I've said it before on this show, that liberty is the right to do the right to do what the law permits. Okay, hold on here a minute. Let's see if I can. All right, we're gonna do all kinds of stuff here. Okay, now I've got the definition up and that's Webster's and there we go. we can compare the AI bot and the actual dictionary, which I think is valuable. Okay, there we go. Okay, so freedom, the state of being free, exemption from the power and control of another, liberty, independence, privileges, franchises, and immunities. Okay, so let's talk about that. And we've got enough up there for people to chew on. So let's talk about your thoughts on this this morning, Bill. Oh, yeah, I kind of hit on some of that really quick. We know in the scriptures, it's listed as liberty in the New Testament where it's talked about where the spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty. This is kind of referring to the spiritual man more. We're all born in sin and bondage. We're born in chains. That's where our will desires just to serve self. However, when we are set free in the spiritual, we are granted liberty to do an insurmountable amount of things. We're told that we'll be able to do more than what Christ himself did on this earth. There is the liberty that we are able to enjoy, but we are never granted the authority to transgress the laws. Even then, whether it be spiritual or physical, You transgress a law of this union or of the state, and you're subject to the civil punishment that goes along with it, right? Now, granted, you may have the ability to do so, but liberty comes with a cost as well, understanding that every action we take, we have to accept the consequences of it. It's not a freedom from punishments. but rather the ability to do as we see fit to accomplish our purpose and then to accept whatever outcome comes from. Freedom would be the ability to do what you want and not have to worry about any recourse of it. I think actually one of the points that Ralph just posted in the chat was the exemption from necessity and choice and action as the freedom of the will. So it actually, it's a little unnerving to me when people talk about the freedoms we have in America. Because as much as we do have some, each one that is guaranteed to us by our establishment of government not granted but guaranteed, understand that difference. Every one of them comes with a cost or a warning label, so to speak. For instance, we'll take the big one, the one that is constantly under attack, the Second Amendment, okay. Each one of us has the ability and the right and the liberty to keep and bear arms, okay. I don't know if we've done a show on that. I think we did, where I talked about the root word of arms. Where did that come from? The Latin word is arma, which means literally weapons of war. It doesn't refer to just pistols or rifles or knives, blades, whatever. But it is, in fact, any weapon that can be used in a war front or warfare with an enemy. And that can be extended to whatever you can think of. Tanks, planes, ships, cannons, weapons. Guns, nukes, whatever you can think of that we can use in a war, the American people first have the right to that before the government does. However, that right comes with its warning label where if you misuse that, if you misuse your liberty in that regard, you will be held accountable to the crimes that may be incurred by you. Okay? So the punishments are always there. You don't have the freedom to take your firearms and go murder somebody. But you have the liberty to have them. You have the liberty to use them. And understanding each use, you will be responsible for the consequence. There's a big word there that can't be overstated. Responsibility. Yeah, responsibility. Firearms are a great analogy for a lot of things in life. For instance, when you pull a trigger, when the bullet leaves the barrel, you are no longer in control of it, but you have the responsibility for where it goes. So it's a good idea to understand the aspects of each individual right that we have. The same things can be said with words. A lot of people use the freedom of speech. Congress cannot make any law abridging the freedom of speech. That means that you have the right, you are at liberty to say whatever you wish to say. However, does that extend to every aspect of life? And the answer to that is no. Because if you come into my house, for instance, you are not at liberty to say whatever you may. There are times when somebody's going to cross the line on another individual's liberty. And if you come in here and threaten my family, for instance, in my own house, then I'm going to take drastic action and put a stop to it. And that is not a... an infringement upon your freedom of speech because no individual has the right or is at liberty to threaten another's liberty. Okay? There's a concept in there that applies to every guaranteed right under our Constitution. And I think a lot of people grade the area and want to get rid of those lines to say that It applies anywhere and everywhere at any time. And that's not the case. The freedom of speech extends to the ability to not be shut up amongst the public area or the public arena, and that includes government. They do not have the right to tell you that you cannot speak out against them. However, when you're speaking lawlessness, and it extends to abridging or infringing upon another's ability, another's liberty in that regard, then you are held accountable for the words that come out of your mouth. Same thing with a firearm. Once it's spoken, you can't take it back. It's going to hit wherever it's aimed at, right? So there's a huge difference between liberty and freedom. And we need to understand that, because when we talk about liberty essentials, we have to be of the same mind to know that our liberty is not granted by our government. Each individual has the right to utilize it, the right to exercise it, but is always responsible, the word you used, Donna, is always responsible for the outcome thereof. All right? You can look at January 6th. The right of the people to peaceably assemble and petition their government for redress of grievances. First Amendment. The right of free speech there. The right of the press. Everything was extended in the First Amendment there. That was the show of the people exercising their rights. They were at liberty to go there. They were at liberty to say what needed to be said They were well within their rights to do so. However, the paid provocateurs, as we call them, were not at liberty to go in and damage public property in that regard. They were not at liberty to create a riot and to rally people into it and entrap them. But just like the BLM, the burn, loot, and murder protesters, they don't have, or Antifa, they don't have the right to close the highways down and stop the travel of other people. They don't have that ability to do that. Yeah, yeah. In that sense, they are exercising their free speech. However, it is at the cost of another's right to travel. I understand the right to travel isn't listed in our Constitution. That's because it's a common law right. Anybody that says we don't have the right to travel is, I don't know, their mind is somewhere else. Because I can walk out of my house and walk down the street and go pretty much wherever I want to. And nobody's going to stop. That's a right of the people. and it exists before the Constitution was ever written down, before the Constitutional Convention. It is a right guaranteed to man at birth. So in that sense, yes, they're exercising their right to free speech, however, at the cost of another's right to travel. So there's infringement there. They do not have the liberty to do so. They exercised a freedom that they didn't have. And they should have been held, each one of them, to an account for that. There was another one, and I forget the guy's name, but a very popular time when they shut down a highway and a truck came in, and I forget the truck driver's name, but he came in and just about barreled through the crowd because of the area they were in. He couldn't get that truck to stop soon enough. And they ended up dragging him out of the truck and killing him, right? Now, were they exercising their liberty to free speech there? I would say not. They extended beyond that. They shut down the guy's right to travel. They shut down the guy's right to life. What is more important to that? That's one of our liberties is life. And life, liberty, and property. That is a right that we have. And when they put an end to that, before that even, when they considered putting an end to that, they are now lawless. They are not exercising liberty, but are exercising freedoms not contained or not given to man. And all of this can be summed up in what Jesus said, do unto others as you would have them do unto you. I mean, if you want to simplify this and you want to know exactly how to conduct your life, before you act, speak, and do something, weigh it out. How would you like to be treated in this situation? And apply it to that, you're golden right there. You know, you've got it figured out. I mean, it's very simple. And the debating on the fine points with people is where they really lose perspective and focus on how to make a good decision. It's very simple. Treat other people and conduct yourself in a manner in the same way that you would want to be treated. Simple. Simple. Yeah, and I actually get scolded for that consistently because that is the golden rule by which we should conduct ourselves, right? Absolutely. However, there are certain aspects of life that people don't understand, especially within the churches of America. And one of those things is reproving darkness and reproving each other when we get out of line, okay? Now, I, for one, I've said it before amongst other groups as well, I, for one, don't like to surround myself with people who can't agree with me all the time because there's no learning there. I like to surround myself with somebody smarter than me or somebody that may have a different opinion of something. and be able to contrast between the two. Because iron sharpens iron, right? We have to remain sharp. So there has to be a little bit of conflict, a little bit of contention between people if we want to hone in our ability to have a rational discussion. So I don't surround myself with people who think like me, because we probably wouldn't get along first and foremost. But the reason behind that is I want people to be able to call me out when I get out of line. Because if you don't, guess what? I'm going to continue down that same path and I'm going to continue to say things out of line. That's one thing I like about Karen. She often gets on me when I use wrong terminologies like citizen, okay? And as much as that's true, I use it only because the people understand it. But when you look deeper into it, there are aspects that do not apply to us. So it's that constant sharpening there. And a lot of other people don't like that because they don't like to be reproved when they get out of line. They want to be right all the time. So when I treat somebody that way and they get irritated with me and say, oh, you need to treat people how you want to be treated. Well, let me tell you something. A lot of people don't want to be treated how I want you to treat me, right? I agree with that. I'd rather somebody be blatantly truthful and honest because that's how we learn. Instead of sneaking around the corners like a bunch of little sniveling rats and not going to the person and talking to it. I really have a big problem with that. You know, just in general, that gossipy nonsense. You might as well do what the Bible tells us to do and stop the gossip and go to that person and try to resolve it. Instead of being a gutless coward. and going off in the corner. There you go. Yep. It's as simple as that. I mean, when somebody offends us, go to them. Right. Try to try to try to win them back. Try to get them to understand and do it rightfully. Do it out of love, not because you want to be right. But just just make the case that, hey, what you just did was absolutely wrong. Right. If you're offended, just stop. Walk around the house a few times and, you know, get perspective on the fact that most of us are walking around like a bunch of little kids, you know, fighting for life. a gum wrapper on the playground to make a teepee for the ants. You know, I mean, it doesn't amount to anything. And give people grace for what they do wrong. Now, if they're intentionally, when their intention is to harm others, that's the discernment part of it, to decide whether they're intentionally harming others or whether they're just kind of fumbling around, trying to be, you know, being a human being. There's a big difference there. Huge, huge difference. Yeah, and that's where the ending of that goes then. That's why in Matthew 18, which you were just referring to, you go to them. If they don't want to listen, take a couple more people that understand the situation and go to them again. If they don't want to listen, then you bring it up to the whole assembly. If they don't want to listen to all the people, what are you to do with them? You cast them out. You treat them as a heathen. Say, nope, then you don't have any partners. And then you wash your hands clean of it. It's done. It's over. You let them do what they're going to do and understand that they're going to keep doing it until the Spirit comes along and reproves them of it. There's nothing else you can do about it. Quit banging your head against the wall. It ain't going to change. So there's that. But also, one thing that people don't talk about regarding liberty is When we have the ability and the right to do all of this stuff, understand that not only do those things exist, but liberty also comes with a duty. Right? And let me... I should have pulled this up, but I just thought of it. Hey, that's what we do. We create it on the fly. We're braidering right now. But... Not necessarily in the legal process, which Brader should be a part of, but the state of Michigan is off the rails. So one thing that Ronald Reagan had said, and I like a lot of what Ronald Reagan said, and I'm not vouching for him. I understand that a lot of the stuff that he did was still unconstitutional. It was lawless. However, a lot of times people get things right even though what they do is opposite. So he said one thing that is quoted often, and that is, freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. Now in this sense, you need to understand freedom is referring to the liberties granted to it. He says, we didn't pass it on to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same. Or, one day, we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children's children what it was once like in the United States where men were free. There is a duty of each individual to carry this on because you cannot just go through and live your life and enjoy your liberty and then die and not tell that to your children and not give them the same tools that we had to protect it, to carry on the American system that was put in place over 250 years ago. Otherwise, we just doom them for the same infringements, the same transgressions, in an exponential amount of tyranny. Instead of taking the time to fight for our own liberty and protect it here on the forefront. Well, and the really sad thing is that the government indoctrination camps has really... done a disservice from this entire nation to take out, how do I say this, to take out anything that actually teaches us on the way it was intended to work. And I think this time, and I think this is something I really appreciate about the rightful president of the United States, President Donald J. Trump, who had the election stolen from him, and his rightful office, is that everything that we're involved in right now appears to be exposure. We didn't know so many of these things going back years, how bad it was or how they have been usurping their power for decades and decades and decades before I was born. And I'm 60 years old. I know you and Ralph are quite a bit younger than me, which is great. I get to be grandma to all y'all. But the reality is that we didn't know. And when you look at most people who are in families, they're spending so much time trying to provide for their families and just make it work because the state and the federal governments are stealing from us every single day. And you know what? The thing that is that's really sad is that they don't need our money. None of them need our money because they're getting funded from the globalists through dark money accounts and PACs and all of that. All they do by taking our money is disabling us further from having the resources to fight them on an even ground. I'm going to tell everybody right now, keep your money from this political nonsense unless it's something, a candidate that you believe in or you're helping to pay your way with the burdens that are on the few that are fighting. And I'm going to give an example. We've got our convention coming up, our nominating convention, July 27, correct? Yep. Yep. And that's on, I can't remember where it's at exactly, but we'll continue to promote this. And we would like to invite everybody to come to this. It's fun. We're going to have some expenses there, but we don't do it to have a fundraiser, to have a fundraiser, to have a fundraiser, to have another fundraiser, which is what the Republican Party and Democrat parties are all about. Their fundraisers are fundraiser to have fundraiser, to have fundraiser, to have fundraiser. No. If we're doing something, it's going to be, well, let's see, we got to pay for food. I paid for all the food last time. And you donated a firearm. And so we personally floated that entire thing and didn't ask anybody for anything. And it was just a gathering after the meeting. It was a gathering where we could all hang out together. And that was as family, as we should. But the meeting in July, because of where it's at, we have a few expenses to be able to accommodate people. It's not a lot because we're really trying to manage things with as little impact as possible on people and not looking at it as a huge fundraiser. Unless somebody feels like they really are moved by God to make a donation or to help in this fight, that's great. But we're not going to do fundraiser to have another fundraiser to pay for the next one and come out of this dead even. It's a waste of people's money. And that's exactly what they're doing. They make people feel like you've got to donate to this candidate in the Republican Party and all this kind of stuff, save the whales, whatever it is. And it's never going to accomplish the goal because it was not designed to accomplish that goal. It's designed to keep people broke, demoralized, in their place, fighting for survival. They don't need our money. I think another purpose of it, though, too, is also to get people to feel like they're doing something, even when they're not, so that they can feel like they have the moral high ground. Mm hmm. Yep, just to be able to say, hey, I had my pocketbook in on this one, so I get to share a part in what the outcome is, right? The whole thing is on pay-to-play. The entirety of our political climate in this nation is pay-to-play. They vet you at a low level, and if you're honest and you're not going to play ball with them in their criminal nonsense, oh, they kick you right off the island. and you go get to be playing out with the island of misfit toys, but you don't get to sit at the table with them. And the more truthful you are, the harder they go after you. So when you look back in history of all these people that have been assassinated, and there's a lot of talk about assassination right now, tremendous, there's been a lot of assassinations globally. And that, that keeps coming up over and over again. directed at, oh, do you think President Trump is going to be assassinated? They're going to try to assassinate him, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Why is this coming up in the narrative? Because they're programming people. They're programming people to get ready for a radical change. And I think that it's going to be a radical change that's coming up. I would not be surprised if there was a very horrific outcome that's already been planned and who would be planning it every every one of them that's in on this to keep the status quo yep and that that's always been the case um it was said uh by roosevelt that everything in politics is first pre-planned right and that that's been the kid that was in the 30s all right So it's nothing new. If you look throughout history, you can see where certain people have rose up to power and other people have rose up in opposition. And the narrative was played out right before our eyes. And it's the same narrative we see today, the divide and conquer thing. The leader of the Freemasons at one point in time said that when the people need a hero, we will deliver him up. That's the way it's been designed, and that's the way the American people want to continue to play with it. Who is Edward Bernays? So this is really weird because this came up, and I posted this earlier this morning. I think it was this morning. I don't think it was last night, but one or the other. And so here's Edward Bernays. And this is kind of interesting because Bernays was part of Tavistock, which is the, the what Courtney Turner and I've been covering in real history and that whole Tavistock Institute, which has created all of these global do-gooder organization and, and basically how to steer thought and, and actions of the, of the the population at large. He's not necessarily a good guy, but he told the truth here. And that's going back to AI. Talk about God curating this. We could have put this together if we tried. You know, it's like he's telling the truth. He was involved in this, but he told the truth. And he's not necessarily a good guy. He's part of the subversion of the human population of the planet, but he told the truth. And so this is, and truth is truth. It doesn't matter who it comes from. Truth is truth, you know? Yeah, that's one thing we pointed out a while back when we brought up all of the FEC registered presidential candidates, which is well over a thousand, I believe now. But those are all, for the most part, those are all individuals who want to make the difference and have, have given the American people the option. However, the mainstream media and the conservative crack, as I call them, they continue to promote the same two just to keep the division going. To keep out real people, it's a barrier for entry. And then you put together the uniparty that is running the whole thing. And now the libertarian parties, you see them completely go off the rails. with what they were doing. I mean, booing candidates, both President Trump and Kennedy, they were booing them. They did not thoughtfully listen and choose the best candidate. They had to choose somebody from their club, the Libertarian Club. There's a lot of Libertarians that have been pretty upset with the choices that were made nationally there. Well, good. Join the Constitution Party because, quite honestly, every single one of us has said that the greatest accomplishment we could have would be end the party system. And that includes the Constitution Party. All the parties need to end because they're special clubs to keep Americans out. And the reason why we're on it is because we're using the tools we have to end the system that we know is corrupt. Yeah. We agree with the party system, but we have ballot access. So if we can get good people in as a disruptor, that that's the strategy. I mean, look at the foundations, right? Both George Washington and John Adams, first and second president, they both warned of the political party structure and warned that it would become a two-party structure if left unchecked, right? However, his son later on, John Quincy Adams, had mentioned to the people at large that political parties are a good thing and are necessary, right? Well, you have this opposing force between father and son now. And I had to look up into that to understand why that was. political parties in themselves are a good thing because they are like-minded groups of people that want to either keep a certain thing the way it is or make a change in a certain part of government, okay? So that is the basis of what the American people ought to be doing. Political parties are just an avenue for like-minded people to get together and say, hey, we need to address this issue. So we're all going to band together here and we're going to find the person that we can put up to make this work. However, that's where it should stop. Because no political party, and this is My opinion, I kind of fall more in the lines with John Adams on this, but no political party should ever have a name on a ballot. And that is a huge downfall, especially in the state of Michigan where we adopted straight party ticket. How many times I have seen people over and over say, oh, we need to vote straight red. We need to vote all Republican. We need to vote all Democrat. We need to make sure everything is straight and unified here. Well, have you looked into each one of those candidates? I guarantee you the majority of people have not. And if you look at the individual candidates, you may be voting for a political party and a political party structure. However, don't think for a minute that the people who are controlling that structure haven't put up somebody to slip them in or, in a lot of cases, put up a lot of people to slip them in and given you one or two good guys who want to make a difference. Okay? Okay? They do a character assassination, so anybody that's actually not their choice to subvert the United States will never make it to the top within a party system. And another thing, too, is that I've heard people argue that a two-party political system is the inevitable outcome of first-past-the-post elections. But If you look at all of the other voting systems out there, whether you're doing runoff elections or ranked choice or anything like that. I'll be right back. They all have similar weaknesses to them. It's just how they're exploited. The method of exploitation of them may be different than two parties, but they all have the same kinds of weaknesses if you look into them deeply enough. Yeah, well, there's an exploit in almost everything. You as an IT guy probably understand that a lot better than I do. I remember during the smartphone era, right, when iPhones first came out and then Google first came out with their step up in the Android, I remember all the hackers going in and trying to do what they called root or giving root access, right, giving you full control over everything in your device that you paid for. they would go in and find these little exploits in a way to force their software into the phones to make it do what they want it to do. And I'm sure that hasn't changed at all, though I hear less and less of it because we're given more access little by little. But for the most part, everything that we can set up, there will always be a small exploit that can be used to... create a different outcome than what the creator of that determined, right? Or that the creator wanted. Good analogy. Yeah, well, thank you. It's just the way I see that. But the same thing can be used in political party structures. Each political party has their own so-called constitution. We know it as bylaws. The Republicans, Democrats, Libertarians, Greens, the Constitution Party, U.S. Taxpayers Party, The Working Class Party, I don't know, I think there's a couple others, several in Michigan. The Prohibition Party, everybody has their own set of bylaws, right, called their constitution, and that is the laws that that they want to govern the party. However, the three of us on this show alone can attest to there are exploits within the bylaws. As tight as you can make them, there will always be something or some wording, as we talked about before, some wording that gets changed that no longer fits the desired outcome, right? In 2022, Donna, when you showed up, you created the uproar, the most uproar of a convention ever held within the Constitution Party, in my opinion, right? I'm a troublemaker. I'm a disruptor. And why is that? It's not because Donna used an exploit or a small area that wasn't addressed, but rather Donna understood, asked the proper questions, got the correct information, and utilized every aspect of the bylaws, or our little party constitution, utilized every aspect of that that she possibly could to get the desired outcome. And there wasn't even an exploit. And how many people, Donna, accused us of violating those bylaws? Oh, I got accused. So everybody after after Gateway Pundit did the hit piece on you calling me a billionaire Donna Brandenburg, which is very far from the truth that, you know, it's like it's like it's funny people. There was a meme that came out the other day. that I saw that's like people assume that I have horses, that I have money. No, honestly, that's the poverty starter kit right there because once you start on horses, you're going to continue rescuing them and loving them. It has nothing to do with it. But they did a political hit job on me calling me billionaire Donna Brandenburg. Well, right then and there, everybody's like, ah, she's got this. I'm not going to help her. She's one of those bastards that's a billionaire. I don't want to be around her. That was an assassination, character assassination attempt on me. And then it continued throughout the entire campaign to the point where I was accused at the taxpayer party, the Constitution Party, of paying off all the delegates. Everybody's always accusing me of paying off everybody. I've never paid off anybody for anything. And it's absolutely crazy. I don't pay off because I said from the beginning, if I cannot win, honestly, I don't want the job. Never wanted the job anyway. I agreed to do it. But titles don't mean anything to me. I've had a lot of them. I don't need them to feel better about myself. But yet every single person was sitting there looking at me going, hmm, don't know about her. She's a billionaire. Can't be good. Can't be good. Well, first of all, they believed a lie. They believed a lie and they based all their decisions on one lie that started out with Gateway Pundit. And after that came out, it was absolutely almost impossible for people to get past that. No matter if they said they were a friend or not, that's canonized in their minds. And they have not questioned it. They haven't seen any receipts. They don't know the proof of it. Nothing, zero. And at that point in time, I'm like going, anybody that's in that area, you're so stupid. I am not going to take the time to try to educate you. If that's where your head is, that you're going to jump at a headline and be done with a human being based on what the media says, I'm not going to take my time to educate you because that is such a low IQ way to approach things, to believe what we've been told the media lies, and then to turn right around and literally do harm to another human being. Because for whatever reason, now all of a sudden we're going to listen to the media. And it was terrible. I mean, you and I both know it. I got accused of paying off all the delegates at the convention and such. I didn't pay off anybody. I didn't do anything like that. I showed up. I had been asked by somebody in the Constitution Party to run before I went as a Republican because I hated everyone, both the Republicans, the Democrats, the Constitution Party, everyone. I hated politics. I didn't want anything to do with it. or anyone, or anything, because I knew everybody was a bunch of liars, cheats, and thieves. And so I decided, well, okay, the group that asked me to run, I have tremendous respect for, and I'm like, you know what, I think I'll go ahead and try this. As an true outsider who just runs businesses, and not a billionaire, a very poor farm kid who just knows how to work, that's it. And so I, you know, so then once the Republican Party, and it was the Republican Party that took me out. It wasn't the Democrat Party. The Republican Party and the Signature Gatherers and the Board of Elections, they were all working together. And what political party is Jonathan Brader from? I believe he's Democrat. I'm pretty sure he is. Yeah. So, but it was all of them working together. It was the Uniparty with their paid operatives working. that took me out. And so, including Sean Wilmoth, he was the first step of depriving me of being able to be on the ballot. And you know what? There's other articles out right now that they're using those signature gatherers that they're being paid. They're paid political operatives and they are absolutely doing this. There's another one that came out just recently. One of our viewers chipped me this link and said, hey, you might think this is really interesting. It wasn't just in Michigan that this happened. This is the first step in taking out a candidate right there. and the signature gatherers were all part of it and the Attorney General's office destroyed evidence because I know they had it because I was told about it before and then they got rid of that investigator and he was threatened and coerced. And so this thing is so big, it's amazing. But the point being is that we have to be very careful And and give these candidates that are not the ones that the media is necessarily pushing, because we may be missing somebody that would be the perfect candidate that doesn't have the media attention or the name draw because it's being sold by the media. Both sides, they're both involved in it. And quite honestly, this is why I think Brandenburg News Network has become such an important part of what I believe is going to work. It's citizen journalists. And I've been asked, you should monetize this. You should do this with it. And I'm like going, no. Because the minute that non-billionaire Donna Brandenburg decides to fold in that thing, in that area, It is compromised right there. We do not make money off of what we do here. Everyone here does it for free because we're patriots. That's the only way you can have a non-biased voice. And I've said it. I saw President Trump get up on stage and talk about the graffiti in Washington, D.C., And I was right out there and say, I was just there. There was no graffiti in Washington, D.C. Why would he say this? At first I sat there and I'm like going, hmm, there's no graffiti in D.C. And it's one of the safest cities I've ever been in. I was there. I saw it with my own eyes. So why did he say that? And it's like when somebody says something that I know is patently not true, that was not true. I am going to say something and I don't care which side of the aisle it's on. President Trump, I believe he said that because there is definitely exposure that's going on. There's more to what's happening with President Trump than just what we see in the news. He's a master of game theory. And so sometimes when you listen to what people say, there may be another purpose that's being accomplished then. And you've got to sit back and not listen to the headlines and get yourself all mad and pissed off. But to sit back and go, huh, well, well, well, I'm going to go ahead and walk around the building a few times and see if something else shakes out before we demonize that person for what they say. We're at war and nothing is straightforward. So here's a perfect example to finish out the previous thought there. When all of those accusations came flying at us in 22 and 23, let's finish the outcome of what had happened here. We had spoken earlier about Matthew 18, how when there's an offense from one to another, you go and address it, right? Well, that's exactly what had happened. yet the accusers refused to open up and deal with the issue one-on-one. They wanted to make everything public. So when given the opportunity to address it in public, what was the response? Well, we're not prepared for that right now. And then the final outcome, after everybody was done, nobody wanted to hear it anymore, The final outcome, what does the scripture say about wicked men? Wicked men flee when no men pursue, right? All of them, one at a time, walked out. Why? Because they could not prove what they were saying was true. Because the people were willing to stand up and demand the proof before the accusation. Or to prove the accusation, right? Right? We're not here allegedly making false accusations. If you want to accuse somebody, you bring the proof and let's handle it one-on-one. And I was really proud of that process because you and Jerry and some really good men and women stood up and said, this is not right. Well, that is the fulfillment of liberty. And I'm going to say it right here. That pastor, there was a 14-year felony. They went so far as to commit a felony rather than have... an honest an honest vote on it and somebody get through that thing is sitting out there like a bad dream because I know who was all involved in it because it was my security guy that caught him and we almost got kicked out for telling the truth the pastor went out and my husband saw him the pastor went out of that of that um uh uh you mentioned sanctuary, the convention, the sanctuary of his church. And my husband saw him using every expletive under and cussing and yelling and cussing out in the narthex of that church. He saw him do it. Somebody else later on was using a notary seal to stamp paperwork, and my security guy caught him. And Ethan Hobson went to him and said, hey, there's been something, a crime committed here. The freaking pastor went and shut the cameras off to hide it. So who was involved in it? All of them. And we know the names. And guess what? They're not part of the Constitution Party in Michigan anymore. U.S. Taxpayers Party, brave men like Bill and Jerry stood up and said, we aren't going to tolerate this. And they were removed. And that's what needed to happen. But that 14 year felony is sitting out there and I've got the names. I know all of them that did it and who tried to cover it up, who stamped things with a notary seal, who's liable for a $100,000 fine for leaving her notary seal there, who shut the cameras off, the pastor. That's where the duty of liberty comes in, right? Mm-hmm. Because we have to be willing to step up and put an end to the lawlessness if we want to preserve our liberties. That was a perfect example of what we began the show with in a very small detail. And that's a perfect example of what needs to be done in America and what needs to be done in Michigan. And the three of us, what needs to be done in our little county here to make the difference and to make the change necessary to bring about the same result that our founding fathers had. Without that, there will be no change. The people have to wake up. They have to step up and start doing everything they can within their power. I'm not going to go and ask everybody to do everything that you or that I or that Ralph is working on. Because not everybody has the same skill set. But like we said in April, everybody can do something. And everybody is required by their own liberty granted to them by their own creator that was given to them upon birth. It is your duty to step up and do something to preserve that liberty. Otherwise, we are just condemning our posterity to the same tyrannical forces and exponential growth that we're dealing with currently. I, for one, am not willing to do it. I've got four kids, and actually I don't think they're at the library doing history lessons right now, come to think of it. But I've got four kids, and I have to answer for what I hand to them. when I stand before my Creator. I will have to answer for every action I took and every action I didn't take. So as for me, I'm going to stand here and I'm going to stand on solid ground. I'm going to stand on the rock, the truth, and do everything I can to preserve the liberty, not for myself, but for my posterity as well. And that should be every one of our desires here. if you're not interested in that, then, you know, go about and live your life. You know, we'll see you in the end out, right? But I'm not willing to work with somebody that doesn't grasp that concept. Agreed. So, and that's why we hold the line. Well, hey, our buddy Daniel Cummins is on behind the scenes here right now. Do we want to end with some words and then we'll go on and let him come on? Oh, of course. Of course. So is there, is there anything else you, you guys want to say? You've been pretty quiet today, Ralph. No, I'm, I'm good. I'm looking to, looking to hear what, looking forward to hearing what Mr. Cummings has to say. He's always interesting. Yeah. Awesome. Well, I see him backstage there. So, so then there's your liberty essentials, actually defining liberty and what that means. Um, let's see. He just disappeared again. We'll have to come back on here, but, uh, We'll take our time. I'm glad that we have a relaxed format here because we can accommodate all sorts of things. So I think this is a really good subject to talk about because there's so many bad decisions being made out there in the political world. I'm seeing very, very, very, very few people who are actually doing the right thing. Most people are trying to build themselves little fiefdoms, and it's all motivated by fear. They want control in an out-of-control world, and they think by having their way followed every single time. their new little grassroots group, their new little this effort, that effort. They don't even realize they're part of the problem. They are absolutely part of the problem because they refuse to work with other people. They've got to carve out their niche to be the stars on the show. It doesn't work that way. The person at the top should be the servant of all and helping to get their voices out or helping to resolve problems. but not just be the dictator on the top, which is what we actually have had with Gretchy. It's amazing. I think, too, when we talk about everyone needs to do something, If you don't think you're capable of doing something, you most certainly are. There are all kinds of places that need to be filled. All the way up from if you've got kids, get involved in your school board. I know somebody that started looking at the curriculum that they were trying to teach her actually it was her grandkids and she was taking care of her grandkids and She pulled them out of school because the curriculum was not teaching her kids properly, and she started homeschooling. And that was an admirable decision. But even if you don't want to go that far, you know, Bill, your kids are at the library. Get involved at your local library. Make sure that that library actually has enough resources to be able to be accessed by kids. By everyone that wants to actually learn things, get involved at your township, you know, go to the go to the monthly meetings at your township board, even if you're not on the board, at least voice your opinion there. You know, there's all kinds of different ways that you can be involved, even in small bits that can kind of nudge the needle toward fixing things. So I brought this up since there are a lot of people asking, what do I do? And I don't know what you should do or what you are capable of doing. But there's an event coming up this Saturday that I had the honor of helping out with and establishing. And it's not organized by any group or political party or organization. This is the people's meeting. There will be people from the entire state of Michigan that are coming to this. Again, it's this Saturday, Saturday afternoon. It's the other side of Flint over in Burton, Michigan. And there will be speakers such as Mike Bambus is going to be there. I know he's been on the show before. Yeah, great, Mike. Yeah, Paul Urban's going to be there. I'm going to let you guys talk a minute because I'm going to see if I can get Dan on here because he just dropped out again, okay? Sure. There's some other friends and acquaintances of mine who will be there, including Bradley Dean. He's going to be there as well. But there will be a variety of topics, everything from overcoming fear, which is going to be done by – I'm not sure if the pastor of that church is going to do it. I think he ended up having to go to a funeral, Greg. So there's another guy. His name's Mike, but I don't know his last name, and I don't know anything about him. But he's going to be talking about overcoming fear in your local communities, mainly the fear that is derived from government tyranny and their push on the people. And there's going to be such thing as Mike is going to introduce how to protect you and your assets from unlawful seizures and such through trust. He'll go into business a little bit talking about PMAs or private membership associations, I'm sure. Paul Urban is going to be speaking on the Constitution. And namely, he's going to address the issues with initiatives and referendums, right? The powers that the people have that a lot of them don't know about and what it takes to develop petitions and to be able to address and remove unlawful acts. Who's talking about PMAs? I just caught that. I'm sure Mike Bambus will touch on PMAs. He usually does when he talks about his trust. Oh, yeah. So, yep, and then there will be some other things like being able to be self-reliant, what it takes to prepare your families and prepare your households for the future if something were to happen, and then what our duties are as parents and as Americans to educate our posterity, right? So there's going to be tons of stuff there. There will be some snacks and such provided, but you should bring your own food that you like because I can't vouch for what's being brought. But it should be a pretty good event. Nonetheless, I would encourage anybody that can come to go ahead and come. I've got a 12-passenger bus that's leaving Kent County Saturday morning. So if you need a seat and you can't make it because of gas or something, give me a shout. We'll load you up. That's all of us trying real hard to help each other out, being able to come to the table, wherever that is. And it shouldn't be a barrier. There shouldn't be any barriers for entry or people getting to events or participating. This should be open to everyone. Yep. I'm still waiting for Dan to get on. He's having problems getting on. He said he's going to try it with his phone. We're going to talk here until Dan comes back on. He's in a little trouble. That bus has really become a handy tool, hasn't it? The what? That bus. Oh, yeah. It's a short but fascinating story as to how that came about. Okay, go ahead. Let's hear it. Okay, well, we've been looking for a vehicle for quite a long time. Megan and I have driven around minivans because we've always had three kids. And so we've had seven passenger minivans for a long time. And I stick to namely one brand because I know – all of the little defects and things that need to be repaired. I got to know it really well. But we got to the point where we were looking at something larger and I wanted to treat my wife to something a little bit nicer. So I had scrimped and saved a lot of money and I had my heart set on one particular van And I was looking, and every time I'd look, something would come up, and it just wouldn't fit into the puzzle, right? And finally one came up, and it was in Texas, and the guy who was selling it had just bought it, and he was waiting for it to get to Chicago. So I said, well, let me know. I'm not going to rush this thing. I'm not going to push God to give me something that I desire. But I was praying for it. I was like, if this works, if this is what you want, just make it happen for me. If not, slam the door closed and I'll move on. So anyway, he said it was going to come at a certain day, which it didn't, and then a couple days later it didn't come again. The courier ran into problems, and there were problems all through this thing, but I was cool. I wasn't anxious about it. And finally he said, well, it should be here at 1 o'clock this afternoon. I was like, all right, well, I'll leave after work and I'll come down there. There was another guy ahead of me that had a family of eight that was supposed to look at it before me. Okay? And for some odd reason, right, call it providence, when I got there, he had thought I was that guy. So he had called me first and had me come and look at it. And when I came to look at it, I had a set amount of cash I was going to pay for it. I couldn't pay a penny more for it. It wasn't going to happen. And we were like $200 off after debating price a little bit. We were about $200 off. I says, well, I handed him the keys back and said it isn't going to work. All right. because I can't go a penny more than what my set price is. I'm not going to do it. And I went and looked at another one that just happened to be right down the road that I really liked as well. And I'm looking at that one, and the thing is beautiful. I love it, right? It's so much cleaner and nicer than the first one I was looking at. And I brought it out. I was going to test drive it, got in, and the guy was going to come out and ride with me, and he came out and said, oh, I can't sell it to you. We sold this one already. I was like, ah! Ah! Like, how does this stuff happen? And so I got back in the van, and I got a text message from the guy with the first one. He said, you know what? If you really like this thing, go ahead and pay me your price, and you can drive it home. That's cool. Which, yeah, which was only, the guy was honest. He showed me what he paid for it and how much he had into it. And he made like, I don't know, maybe 50 bucks on it. Right. That was it. But he didn't have his, he didn't have to have a shop work on it. No detailing. It just showed up from Texas and I got in it and drove it home. And then ever since then, it's, it's, it's been a great little fan. And we look forward, we've had several opportunities now to haul the homeschool kids around. When you get into homeschool communities, you have to understand there's a lot of kids. And all the kids have to go to places at the same time, right? So a lot of people have bigger vans and such. So we've had the opportunity to be able to take large groups of the homeschooling kids and the girls' friends and such to the events that need to be done. And it's been fun. So I look forward to events like this and knowing somewhere along the way, I may even be driving down the road and somebody maybe broke down on the side of the road that's going there, right? That's the kind of stuff I look for because I'm going to stop and say, hey, you know, you need a hand? Oh, I'm just trying to get to this event over here in Perth. Well, jump in. We'll come fix your vehicle when we're on our way back. But I'm not going to have you miss the event. That's cool. Well, I've got Dan here. Ralph, I'm going to ask you to stay on. And, Bill, you can stay on if you'd like. But we're going to do this kind of a little differently. So Dan's on the phone here with us. So we're going to do an audio. So if either one of you guys can stay on, that would be great. And we can have some discussions and such. But I know you usually have to go to work, Bill, but you're welcome to stay. Yeah, that I do. I will leave it in the competent hands of Dan Cummings. That guy has been a great influence, and he doesn't even know it, but he's been a great influence on how I look at and how I study the Constitution. So there's so much knowledge and so much perseverance with Dan. And you can tell him I said that, or if he can hear me, that's cool. Yeah, he can hear you right now. I look forward to watching the show when you're all finished, but I do have to get to my crew. That's awesome. So, okay, thanks for being on, Bill. It was a good show today, and hope you do well at your event this weekend. I'm going to be gone this weekend, so I can't go to that, but I want to hear, are you guys going to tape it? Yeah, we'll be recorded. Okay, that's cool. I have to watch the rerun on it, I guess. So thanks for being on today, and then we'll see you next time. I'm going to do our little intro here, and I'll be right back with Daniel Cummings. Bye. morning and welcome to the next uh segment of brandenburg news network I am donna brandenburg and it's the 29th day of may 2024 and welcome to our show I've got uh dr daniel cummings on right now and we've been talking about him and his knowledge a little bit and welcome to the show dan how are you well I'm good today except for having trouble with my equipment I'm making one last attempt here to get video for you I have attached a camera to computer that already has a camera that doesn't seem to be working. Okay. Well, we can just do audio today. That's fine. I can share your picture a minute so people can see who you are. That's Dan. And we'll be talking about all sorts of things today, including, first of all, I'd like to have you introduce yourself. And then let's go into what we want to talk about today, which is you wrote an amendment for paying back the debt. I began my Constitution studies more than 60 years ago, intensively at the age of 14. That was not actually the beginning. I had read the Constitution before that. I remember the first constitutional commentary book that I read, and I still have that in my possession. It was called Your Rugged Constitution. I do not know the age that I read that. It might have been as young as 10, but it really all began about 14. That was more than 60 years ago. It was immediately after the 1960 election where I was very disappointed that Kennedy defeated Nixon, but I was Republican then in my thinking. My parents were Republican, grandparents were Republican, everyone in the family was Republican. That seemed to be the gospel truth. I soon began to learn different. I became very early acquainted with the John Birch Society and read Robert Welch's early work, which all just had the ring of truth. to me. I believe it was the Holy Ghost. I am a Christian and believe in the Holy Ghost as a revelator to us. That has continued with variable intensity over that 60 years with an increased intensity the last decade or a few years more than that. I have been dissatisfied with the two party system since my very first voting experience as an adult. And I've gone more than 60 years without ever, even once, voting for either a Democrat or a Republican for president. I have always found alternatives. Well, you're way ahead of the curve on most of us here because, you know, it's amazing how God leads us down the paths to understanding what's really going on and appreciate the years that you've spent studying and being able to share with us your knowledge. Now, I have been a registered Republican until about 14 years ago. Well, excuse me, actually 12 years ago. I was a registered Republican when the Constitution Party came to me 12 years ago and asked me to run for Congress. I was living in Wyoming then and was associated with the Constitution Party. I was, in fact, either their elected secretary or treasurer. I do not recall which, but was not deeply involved in the party then, other than gathering a few signatures as we were trying to establish ourselves as a party 14 years ago. Our first venture on that was not successful. We turned in a very large number of signatures, but I'm sure you know and many in our audience will know that the signatures are gone over tediously and meticulously by personnel in the state elections office and are discarded for anything that is amiss. Well, that's how they rigged Myron. At least that is the way I believe it was in Wyoming, where elections still tend to be somewhat honest. I'm sure there are problems, but they're not as big as the problems in some of the other states. So 14 years ago, the Constitution Party failed to qualify for the ballot. We repeated two years later, that's now 12 years ago. This time we were better planned. We started in advance, had I don't know how many hundreds of very official forms printed for our use. more signature gatherers, and started very intensely on the first day that the law permitted that to process to work, and gathered a number of signatures that greatly exceeded that required under law, turned it into the election office, and got back the sad answer shortly thereafter. Very shortly, the elections office treated us well, Our state chairman had been a marked gentleman in his dealings with the state, and we had a good elections officer who was fair-minded toward all players in the political system. He called the state chair and says, you are short X number of signatures. However, you still have several weeks to gather more, so The second phase went out. We doubled or tripled the number that was needed, turned them in, qualified. Under Wyoming law, that made the Constitution Party, Wyoming law calls a, I have forgotten the word. It's a P word and it's not preliminary. But anyway, a temporary party. We had ballot access. Provisional. We had ballot access once that year. Is it provisional? Provisional, you're right. We became a provisional political party for one election cycle. Thereafter, it all depended on voting results. Wyoming requires political parties to achieve at least 2% of the vote for three offices designated by law governor secretary of state united states house of representatives those are the only ones that count senate doesn't count if we actually elected a senator and had nothing else to show in an election the party would disappear two years later at least back go back to the uh signature gathering stage Well, the whole thing is really set up as a barrier for entry. So like the signature gathering is the first step of rigging the election. And all the people that are involved in that, from the signature gatherers to the board of elections and canvassers, but it starts with the signature gatherers. And that's honestly where quite a bit of the nonsense begins. And then it's carried through because... It's a vetting process, in my opinion, to keep actual candidates off and only allow in those that they choose, which is really unfortunate. I mean, I firsthand experienced that. And so it's a real problem. Yes. I think it's less of a problem in Wyoming than Michigan, but there's a problem there. Well, Michigan is dead center swamp creatures, you know. Yes, I understand that. I'm looking in from the outside, but I've watched Michigan for years. The and this was an off year election, no governor election, no secretary of state election because there were four years. So it was House of Representatives only. The state chair. made a personal trip about halfway across the state to visit me. He did not call on the telephone. Came to my office and explained or reviewed Wyoming laws with me that I pretty well already understood. But he reviewed them and said, we need someone to get 2% of the vote so that we can continue to function as a political party and we think you're the man to do that. I replied that I thought several others in the Constitution Party had already considered doing that and that the candidate was available. I had in mind challenging a certain Republican senator in the primary simply because he needed challenging and certain things, uh, were important to be said to the Republican party and in the Republican party and that Republican party conventions, things that, uh, I would like to have said over the years and didn't have the opportunity to, he says, no, everyone has pulled out and I says, okay, I will take that challenge. And I ended up with 2.1% of the vote. That was my weakest election in Wyoming. It improved thereafter. And as long as I was in Wyoming, Wyoming always had that 2% that was necessary. Fortunately, after I moved from Wyoming, the party was well enough known that it continued to be successful. with my successors running there. The height of my campaigning there was my third round. And guess who my opponent was? Who's that? Liz Cheney. That was going to be a guess there, but man. I was Liz Cheney's first opponent from the Constitution Party. She has become notorious, of course, way outside the Constitution Party and the Republican Party. She's almost the household word in many places. I think it's underneath. Particularly here in Utah, where we're detached from her, and she has never run on an office here, yet people still know her. Yeah, she's in the dictionary. When I say that Almost anyone. I was Liz Cheney's first opponent from the Constitution Party. Ears open. And access is established. That means something. So that was an interesting start. My third time around, I also beat the libertarian. Partly because he simply was not libertarian. in any respect, had no concept of all of what liberty was, did not have any of the crazy ideas of the libertarian party or any of the good ideas either. He just wasn't libertarian. Interestingly enough, he came to me early in the campaign and said, if you will drop out and endorse me, I can beat Liz Cheney. I just laughed at him. The campaign ended in a very interesting manner. My last public engagement that year was on the PBS debate. PBS put on a debate in Wyoming every year. All candidates were invited. All candidates were treated on a fair and equal basis. All the entire program was put on the internet, might still be there. It's put on the internet to stay there for years for the public in the world to see. The position we had in the debate was by drawing straws, by lot, random. For fairness, it was not by alphabetization or party or anything else. As it turned out, he was to my right. And the closing statements went from left to right. In my closing statement, I reviewed very quickly certain things I believed and closed with this statement. Not only am I the most constitutional and the most conservative candidate in this race. I am also the most libertarian." And I handed the mic rightward to the libertarian candidate who responded, I am a moderate Republican. What? And I beat him. Oh, that's amusing. It's hilarious. Yeah, that is really funny. It's sadly the only time I beat the libertarian. I beat him good after he said, well, if you drop out and endorse me, I will beat Liz Cheney. No, he didn't come close. I didn't come very close either. Yeah, because that whole thing, the whole Republican Democrat thing is highly rigged. And so I don't know. I've got a lot of thoughts on it. But what would you like to talk about? Do you want to go to the amendment? I would like to. It has great importance. Okay. For what it is and what it is not. Okay. Let's start with what it is not. Many listeners, high percentage of your listeners, I am sure because of their beliefs and why they are listening, have heard about a balanced budget amendment concept. That concept has been around for a few decades now. As patriots have watched the national debt grow insidiously year by year to understand that it really has grown year by year since Eisenhower. Political lies float around that Bill Clinton once balanced the budget. Not true. We can talk about that another day. It's a somewhat separate topic. I heard a few days ago a claim made that George Bush almost balanced the budget. Again, not true. That could go to the same topic. That one was more complicated because it gave birth to the Medicare drug program. The truth is the national debt has increased every year since Eisenhower's best year. He balanced the budget once out of eight years. And there have been tricks made to hide that. There are accounting maneuvers that some use to try to make the budget look balanced, but it hasn't happened. And patriots among us, most of us, nearly all of us understand that an increasing national debt that is becoming recently an exploding national debt, increasing many times faster than it did to the Eisenhower, Kennedy, and even the Lyndon Johnson years, leads to national catastrophe. So there has been a movement out there for years to amend the Constitution in one way or another to try to stop that. There have been many proposed amendments that have a certain similarity to them. They tend to fall into two classes. that are rather easy to separate, uh, one class, uh, being saying that the federal government will be balanced except in time of emergency. Yes. What's wrong with that? Are you there? Yeah, I'm there. I'm just listening. I'm pondering. Um, it gives them an excuse. It gives them an excuse. Federal government shall be balanced except in a Time of declared emergency. Yeah, it gives them an excuse. Because they can just declare an emergency at any point in time. Every year. Every year. So we've been under an emergency. Congress and the President. Congress, if it's assigned to the President. The President, if it's assigned to the President. Congress and the President, if it's assigned to both of them. It doesn't matter the wording of the amendment exactly or the fine details. When that can be set aside by a declared emergency, we can count on the United States being permanently, continuously in the state of emergency. And that's exactly what happened. As I recall, I think we've been technically under several dozen concurrent emergency declarations for something like the last 40 years. Yes, yes. So the problem with that amendment should be apparent even to people of slightly substandard intelligence. It just isn't going to work. The second basket of balanced budget amendments goes something like this. The president shall propose And Congress shall pass a balanced budget. The problem with this is not quite as obvious. The workaround is not quite as obvious. But there is a very sound reasoning in human psychology why that's never going to work. Any guesses? I'm going to let you talk to that. Okay. This is what will happen. The president will submit figures that are balanced. He will make a delusionally high estimate of expected revenue out of this world. And Congress will accept that delusionally high expectation on revenue and spend it all. At the end of the year, the president will get on television to the American people and apologize and say, I'm sorry. We made a good faith estimate the beginning of the year for a balanced budget. It just didn't work out. Yeah. We just, it's an excuse. We just didn't get the revenue in. So. Revenue. We had a bad year. The revenue didn't come in. We made a good faith estimate. Nothing good faith about it whatsoever. Total nonsense. But that's what will be said. And the defect in those two is that neither one of them touches the real problem, which is borrowing. Congress's authority to borrow money on the credit of the United States, Article 1, Section 8, Clause 2. The second most important power that the Philadelphia Convention considered some 200, almost 50 years ago now, in the Constitutional Convention. Then it was critically important for the integrity of the United States. We had come out of our war for independence with a huge national debt, huge by the terms of that day. Then it was only a few million dollars. its minutes of spending today on our on our clocks today but then that was a very significant figure and our national honor and integrity was a state to pay that so the founders in Philadelphia very wisely gave the United States federal government unlimited borrowing authority and a good credit rating. The United States has had an excellent credit rating ever since then, despite Alexander Hamilton getting us off probably not to such a good start with the National Bank. We've had problems with finding the right answers from the very beginning. a second round of National Bank in the early 1800s and then the Federal Reserve since the early 1900s. But during that time, the United States has had a top of the line credit rating and has been able to borrow whatever it wished. And that is a problem now. What was good in the beginning for the honor and integrity of the United States has become a problem now. Because Congress and the president simply do not know how to stop spending money. Spending money is their answer for everything and every problem in the world. They cannot think of anything above and beyond that. Can I reframe that just a little bit? I don't consider it spending. I consider it money laundering into their pockets through going through alternative means like sending it to Ukraine and every other country on the planet where the money never gets to the people. They say it does, but it always seems to be back in the pockets of the politicians. Well, there's a lot of truth to that. But what is our number one biggest budget? Defense, isn't it? What? Defense. Sorry, I didn't understand that. Defense? Social Security is number one. Okay. And it goes to the people, more or less. Of course, it goes into the economy thereafter and politicians end up with some of it. But the money that goes to the politicians is not our biggest problem. It's the money that goes to the people. I could accept the word laundering for that as well. It's kind of laundering for votes. Buying votes is what it is. Buying votes. It's still buying. So money laundering could apply there. But America is not going broke with the politicians, particularly Congress getting rich. Yes, they do get rich. But when we add up what they get, it's nothing compared to what the people get on Social Security welfare, Medicare welfare, and lots of other welfare programs. Let's not address that right now. Let's get on to the financing. Do you think that that's actually getting to the people, or is it being diverted out of those funds to make it look like it's going to the people but never really hitting the mark? Well, people get their Social Security, and it's spendable. by them. We can debate the virtues and the corruption of Social Security on another day, and that's an issue dear to my heart. But today, let's talk about something that will turn off the national debt. Well, I like the solution-based. I mean, we need to find solutions, and I think this is what we're talking about today is bringing it to the table and actually having solutions for this. Right. Today, this amendment chokes off the extra debt money that is both laundered to our politicians for their own benefit and to the people for buying votes. because first of all, I don't say anything about the budget. It doesn't matter how unbalanced Congress passes its spending bills with this amendment in place. The amendment fixes that because it does not address the budget. It addresses borrowing directly. It does not require president to submit a balanced budget. Doesn't really care on that. The real problem is that high credit rating that the United States has in its ability to borrow money and print money, embezzle money, counterfeit money, but keep adding to the debt. My amendment stops that. So should we go through it section by section? Yes. Are you ready for that? Yes, I am. I've got it up on the screen right now. Okay. Section one simply repeals that borrowing authority of the United States. It takes away Congress's authority to borrow money on the credit of the United States and Congress will not be able to borrow money on any other credit. The market simply won't tolerate that. Uh, Nobody will be able to sell those bonds if it's not backed by the credit of the United States. So Clause 2 is gone. Critically important as we were coming out of the war for independence as a young nation. Today, it's simply a disaster. It is the spigot that allows money to flow in to the deep state. whether real money or counterfeit money or fiat with all of those Congress cannot borrow. There's nothing that Congress can do to say that we owe you money, Federal Reserve or anybody else. So that's the beginning. When does it start? The first day of the next fiscal year. Why so early? Why not give Congress time to prepare? Congress's preparation, if we allowed time, would be to increase the national debt unbelievably by making all sorts of commitments, borrowing gargantuan quantities of money so that they would have that ready to spend when the spigot turned off. In my teenage years, a California representative in Congress proposed what was called the Liberty Amendment. Are you acquainted with that? I'm not. Rather simple, too simple in some ways. Section one simply said, the United States shall no longer operate any businesses or enterprises not specifically authorized by the Constitution. I think it was Section 2 that said all of these businesses shall be liquidated and dispersed within three years. And Section 3 was after three years, the 16th Amendment will be repealed and no income tax thereafter will be legal in the United States for the federal government. It went nowhere. It did not get submitted to the states. And no state requested that it, to the best of my knowledge, no state requested that it be submitted as a constitutional amendment. What year was that, Dan? It was the three-year delay. In three years, Congress is going to stock up the 20 or 30 year supply of whatever Congress could get away with. And giving Congress time to adjust is not an answer. They will not change. They almost cannot change. It's almost compulsive in their psychology. Nothing is to be gained by giving Congress lead time TO ADJUST BECAUSE IT SIMPLY WON'T HAPPEN. WHEN WAS THAT AMENDMENT PUT OUT, DAN? FIRST FISCAL YEAR THAT IT'S LEGAL. WHEN THAT COMES AS RATIFIED IN A PARTICULAR FISCAL YEAR, THERE WILL BE ONE TO 11 MONTHS LEFT IN THAT YEAR BEFORE IT TAKES EFFECT. IT WILL GO INTO EFFECT ON DAY ONE, OCTOBER 1ST, UNDER PRESENT LAW. As far as I can tell, the only thing Congress could do to adjust that slightly would be to get off the fiscal year, go to a calendar year, change it from October 1st to December 31st, January 1st. That would give them three more months before their financial program crashes. I'm just simply not willing to give Congress any lead time on that. There's no good reason to, because nothing will change. Let's go back to the Liberty Amendment. What year is that in? And it was in California? Yes. California once was a civilized part of our Republic. I can remember those days in my teenage years when California had some problems and San Francisco was already gone to the devil. back then but uh orange county you know where orange county is yes it's the first county south of los angeles disneyland territory orange county was a hotbed of conservative activity uh had the best or one of the three or four best congressmen year after year after year at uh changed it with the election of Sanchez a couple of decades ago, and it's gone to the devil since then. But in my youth, that was the source of some of the greatest patriotic activity in the United States. Interesting. Very interesting. And immigration has had a great deal. Well, they're buying votes. I mean, it goes back to the buying votes and diluting the votes of Americans. I mean, I'm absolutely shocked that they're even talking about giving non-Americans the right to vote. It's shocking. Yes, it is. Not only are we paying for this, but we're paying their way and giving them the treasures of and what Americans have worked for. They come here and they're not working. And that's a real concern. When you have the government pay like $400 to $800 a night to these chain hotels that are owned by the globalists, And besides that, cars and credit cards and whatever else they're giving them, this is our money. And they're just throwing this away. Now, if somebody wants to come here and work and become an American, that's one thing. But they're funding an invasion and a subversion of our elections by what they're doing right now. That is all true. All true. And the key to that. is the borrowed money, the ability of the United States, the ability of Congress simply to put it on that great credit card that is Section 8, Clause 2. It simply got to go. That is the answer to the finances. It's not the answer to the social problems. It's not the answer to the welfare state. not the answer to a lot of the corruption, but at least those things will thereafter be required to pay for themselves. Well, and I think once we solve the underlying problems of cheating the elections and getting honest people in there, we can address these things such as the money laundering, and the funding of an invasion, a military invasion of the United States, we can address all that, write it. And I think all the social problems will write themselves once the structure's back under control. And that's all true. So let's go on and look at Section 2. Okay. Because there is one kind of emergency that might be justified for borrowing money. That is war declared by Congress. No war that we have ever fought was financed on the go. I'm not sure that that has happened elsewhere anywhere in the history of the world. Wars are expensive. Wars do not pay for themselves. It's critically important that the United States be able to fight to protect our independence, to protect our territory, our national integrity, our freedom, when appropriate. And when is that appropriate? Only when Congress declares war. That's the reason for that phrase in Section 2, war declared by Congress. It leaves out wars declared by the President. It does not eliminate the possibility of the president taking military action. That's a separate issue that is best not combined with this and complicated because this should be strictly financial. But when the president decides to go to war, he's got to pay for it. As it goes, he cannot borrow any money, no money at all. to finance it. So although it does not directly address that problem, it makes it very much more difficult for a president to get out of control by himself because he's got to pay for it. Well, to your point, the key is in all of this is, uh, is you cut the funding. And you have people that are willing to cut the funding on some of this nonsense and it just dries up like a raisin and goes away. Right. Liberal bureaucrats, as much as the media and the establishment praises them for their loyalty and so forth, it ain't there. And if they don't get paychecks, they're not going to come to work. Right. It just will not show. But that's another subject. If we have time at the end, we'll come back to that. But it's a good subject. Yes, it's an excellent subject. We have a lot of good subjects, more than we can talk about in a day or a week or a month. Well, I think what I'd like to do, Dan, is just make sure that you can come on on Wednesdays. And we're going to continue this conversation because I think that we need to have these very educated conversations on how to fix problems. how to fix things and use the legal, the lawful precedent that's there to write things, right? And then a little bit more thought and how to subvert their attack, their unlawful attack on the United States by the usurpers who are currently waging war on this nation. I think too, a lot of the social engineering problems that we're running into anymore would also be, it would pretty much disappear overnight with the programs being defunded. Exactly. It's funding. Let's go on a little bit more with section two. Section two allows borrowing and allows increasing the national debt with a declared war by Congress. It has a limitation, two limitations actually. First of all, that borrowed money cannot be spent for any purpose whatsoever except for military operations in that war. The war cannot be used as an excuse to increase the welfare state. It's only for that emergency and it ends 90 days after peace is declared. Timeline. We already have a huge national debt. So how do we deal with that? Section 3 prioritizes that. It puts first in line for payment those people and institutions that have actually put money into the national debt. The widow. who decided that United States bonds were her best security for retirement. And now she is living on those bonds. The kid who succumbed to the propaganda in the schools of buying a 10 cent bond stamp every week and putting it in a book that turned into the United States bond when it was full. I don't know whether that's even done. Does that sound familiar to you, Donna? Do you remember anything like that? I remember that type of thing when I was very, very, very young. But I don't know if there's anything out there that's like that now. I believe that that's... I don't either. I don't believe that it's out there. That was the way that elementary school kids were drawn into the idea of going into the federal government. I remember going back to probably somewhere between first and third grade, I think, buying bonds to support the United States, buying bonds as a loyalty, as a patriotic measure, which is not, particularly today. Less so today than it was even then. Well, what's a really sad thing is now people are putting their money into these ridiculous political parties, which are part of the subversion of the United States. And when they fund these fundraisers over and over again, it's just making the problem worse. rather than going to the root of the problem and ripping this thing out by the roots and dealing with it. It's a continuation. And I don't think people really realize how extensively they're being used as puppets in this game of the globalists. I don't think they even have a clue that they're actually part of this. They don't have any clue at all. So in Section 3, those... Persons and institutions who actually sacrificed, put up money, bought a bond and did without something else. They are first priority for repayment. The national debt continues for them. They become part of the legitimate national debt along with the military for the wars. Others are not secondary priority. They are out. That's the purpose of the non-federal institutions. Federal institutions like Social Security Trust Fund and a whole bunch of inter-agency loans in the federal government where agency A needs something so comes from agency B. accountants put on the books that Agency B owes Agency A something or other that was never paid for by little old ladies financing their retirement or little kids being sucked in in school or others actually sacrificing and buying bonds. The Federal Reserve, probably the biggest part there is the Federal Reserve and all of only part of the national debt that we supposedly owe to the Federal Reserve, that's gone. The Federal Reserve takes the total loss. The United States taxpayers don't owe the Fed anything after Section 3. Now, are the little old ladies and the others totally protected? No, unfortunately. They're first priority, but The payment for them, the bonds required to pay them off, might not sell in the marketplace. I call this subtitled the bankruptcy amendment. The United States is headed for bankruptcy one way or another. We may pretend it does not exist. We may use inflation to cover it. We may use counting tricks to pretend that the debt is paid, but there is no way in the world that the national debt as we know it and as it is projected in the future with present legislation is going to be paid. It simply can't be. Well, and I think that's a figure to help. That's a realization. Our entitlements alone are projected to cost twice the domestic product, gross domestic product of the entire world for the next two years. Our present entitlements, Social Security, Medicare, and so forth, those things we have promised in the future that are not paid for. What's the cost? A good, reasonable accounting says it will cost twice the gross domestic product of the entire world twice the domestic product of the entire world let that sink into the minds of the audience who's listening ain't gonna happen in reality we can pretend that it does we can do bookkeeping tricks but uh Very little of the national debt in the end will probably be paid honestly, but it will give us a chance to start over with a clean slate. Section four, how to pay that debt. As present United States securities that are legal under present law mature, they may be replaced once and only once. And the only once is part of the key here. Only once with a dead instrument of equal value, or at least equal denomination. In the beginning, I wrote that amendment with value and changed it to denomination so that we cover accounting tricks as well. Equal denomination that is fully amortized with a maximum life of 50 years. Three keys there. Only once, fully amortized, and maximum of 50 years. For many people in the audience, the fully amortized will be the most difficult part to understand. The little history outside of national finances is helpful here. A little way in our past, before you and I were born, probably before any of our listeners were born, because it's now probably a little over 100 years old, the standard method of financing homes was by rollover debt. What's rollover debt? Well, it was this. A young couple wanted a house, would go to the bank, would get a 30 year loan, say, or maybe it was 20 or 15. And it would be paid in this manner. It's usually interest only until the end. So they would pay the bank each month interest on that principal. And at the end of the loan, they would owe the full amount that they borrowed. A crushing financial problem. Because human nature being what it is, when payments on the principal were not required over that 15 or 30 years, they generally were not paid. Looking at what the bank was owed each month, that's simply what was paid. Interest was owed, principal was not. owed until the end of the debt instrument, the end of the mortgage. And then all of a sudden it was all due all at once. It was customary in America back then for people to lose their homes. If they happen to have a 30 year loan, why starting out as a young person after 30 years, elderly, less able to work, retirement was not the usual thing uh crushing poverty with people looking back to their children and grandchildren for support now if they could qualify for a new loan for 30 years it was okay they get a new loan that might be 20 years after they were dead which is why that was so hard to get they still didn't get ahead in general it was a catastrophe for homeowners amortized mortgaging came in something over 100 years ago I think I don't know the exact year I have not researched that history but it was a heavenly solution uh when amortized mortgage came in principal Principal payments were required along with the interest payments. Principal payments were not very big in the beginning because most of the payment was interest. But as the principal worked down, the interest worked down with it. There was less principal to charge interest on. So more of the payment went to principal and an acceleration of the debt removal occurred with amortized financing. And now, although some people lose their homes, economic catastrophes still happen. The usual thing, the national standard is that people buy homes that eventually are paid for, that belong to them then without obligation to the bank. that does not address tax issues and the fact that some people lose their homes to taxation and that taxation is a form of false rent. Another topic for another day. Well, we're only tenants on land at this point in time because if they can remove it from us, even if you own it, then you are a tenant. You are not truly a land owner. And just so everybody out there knows I'm going to make no bones about it. There's a kind of a new scam thing going on. I consider it a scam. It's X my tax in Michigan. It's only about redistribution of the tax funds. It's not really getting rid of it. It's taking it out of the local areas and aggregating it onto the state. Bad plan. Don't get sucked into the headline. You've got to look into this thing further, but anyhow, I digress. Please continue. Yeah. Uh, But anyway, that just adds to the picture of the disaster of rollover-type financing. Rollover financing started with Hamilton in Washington State. Not universally. Occasionally, there would be amortized bonds here and there. But in general, the federal pattern has been rollover financing and it has all of the problems of the rollover financing of homes in our distant past that we abandoned because of so many homeless people the difference being the federal government doesn't die so there's always new buyers there to step in on the rollover debt. That's got to go. That's why my amendment requires only amortized financing and only once. We have that huge debt to pay, some of which is morally, some of which we are morally obligated to pay. That doesn't mean it will be paid. It doesn't mean we'll be able to pay it. Some bankruptcies happen to nice people. But at least we're addressing it and hoping and trying and providing a mechanism to pay it, an honest mechanism. So let's give some examples. Why do I put consolidation of bed instruments there? For this reason, simplicity. Let's suppose that the government has 40, 25 year, or $25, 40, $25 bonds coming due today. Of course, they've got probably 40 billion, but let's simplify the arithmetic so we understand. The federal government has 40, $25 bonds that come due today. They qualify as part of the national debt under Section 2, Section 3. If they don't qualify there, why, they're just asking somebody's out of luck, somebody doesn't get paid. Mostly the Federal Reserve, we don't care that they don't get paid. They were never an honest part of the system. But the widow, hopefully, does get paid. So we've got 25 widows with $25. Let's see. So we've got 40 widows with $25 bonds to come due today. We don't have the money available to pay them. So we could issue 40 new $25 bonds that are fully advertised. Well, that's 40 different transactions 40 things that must go through accounting. If there happens to be an investor out there who wants to put down $1,000, then 40 times 25 is 1,000. And he's willing to take one bond. All of a sudden, the accounting work in the Treasury Department has been simplified because now there's one bond to deal with instead of 40. And when he buys his $1,000 bond, 40 widows get paid off their $25, which they should be paid because that was honest debt. That's what consolidation is. And they must be similar. Those 40 $25 bonds must all be due today together or maybe within a few days, maybe a three day interval. Some reasonable period of time and circumstances that is reasonable to consolidate them together. We could look at bigger figures. 10 banks have $10,000 bonds, and one bank is willing to put up $100,000. So now the Treasury is not in debt for any more than it started. It's still the same $100,000, but it's simpler to administer it with one buyer instead of 10. So I hope that I've covered all the bases. Number one, section one, the unlimited bank account is simply gone. It is gone. Number two, we allow for declared wars. Number three, we recognize honorably those who have actually sacrificed for the national debt, done without something for the debt that should be paid off. Four, a way to do that that is honorable. And I don't see any workarounds in it. I hope there are none. If there are in the audience any ways for a workaround, please let me know so I can approve the amendment. So far, nobody has provided any good workarounds. Section 5, directing the courts of the United States to invalidate any debts acquired by the United States, not according to those terms, I think Section 5 will give the United States government a credit rating of zero for most purposes. Nobody's going to come in and loan money to the federal government unless it's very secure by sections two and three and the financing in section four. Now, will this pay off the national debt? I don't know. It will eliminate it. Unfortunately, some of that elimination might be bankruptcy. Unfortunately, somebody might lose. Those bonds carefully defined in section four might not sell in the financial marketplace. I understand that in advance. But the United States is headed for bankruptcy anyway. It is inevitable on our present course. The way we are doing things now, bankruptcy is inevitable. Cannot be avoided. It may be papered over. It may be hidden. But it will occur. And for people to argue that that's not fair to people now is the equivalent of saying, okay, it's fair to dump it on our children or our grandchildren. Exactly. Those who complain that they might be hurt and it's not fair for them to be hurt are saying it's okay to hurt the children because I don't want to be hurt. Well, yes, it's unfair to us. That's true. It is unfair to us. But we voted for those crooks who did it. It's more unfair to our children to come. And it's more unfair to our grandchildren. So let's take the evil that is the least evil. Let's take the unfair choice that is the least unfair and dump it on ourselves. We deserve it. I love the way that you put this because I've been saying that too. It's like, whose fault is it? Is it the politician's fault? No, the government is a reflection of society and of individuals and individual choices. they we're into this we're into the situation where we're in right now because it was our fault we were part of it not just not not just the people that came before us though it was their fault too but somebody has to has to put a line in the sand and say we're done with this regardless what we got handed it's not our choice but I do think that god allows us to be in situations and he will give things to those who are tough enough to handle it. And if you look at it that way, then it becomes an honor to be able to handle problems, whether they got dumped on us, whether we helped create them, whether we were part of the system, it doesn't matter. If he's asking us to stand on this and fix this situation, what an honor that is. That's a nice way to put it. We get the honor. Mm-hmm. of harming ourselves to avoid a greater harm to our children and an even greater harm to our grandchildren. And it's the greatest love is when we lay our lives down for each other and the way Jesus did for us. You know, he laid his life down so that we could have a relationship with God Almighty. And now it's our turn to you know, the saying that was like, what would Jesus do? Jesus would take the hits in order to, to save the, his children. And now it's our turn. Yes. A wonderful, wonderful comparison. Well, you know, I, and I, and you and I've talked, you know, some significant time, but not enough significant time, you know, about the fact that all of this goes back to actually our faith in God and our trusting of God in all situations, whether things are good or tough, whatever. He's going to walk us through this if we are sticking close to him, focusing on him. And following his lead, not the lead of where we want to go, but where he puts it and graciously accepting the fact that he's smarter than us. He's just he's just smarter than us. And he can see the full picture where we can only see part of it. We need to trust him by knowing his character, knowing that he's good at all the time and full stop. That's all we need to know. If we know that God is good all the time, we can walk even in the darkness, following him, knowing that he's even in the darkness there. We don't have to be afraid of anything. We just need to focus on him and follow his lead and take it. If he gives us a tough assignment, what an honor that is to us because he thinks that he put us in the position and knows that that we can handle. He gives us what we can handle. So all I can say is thank you, God, for this time that we live in and the honor of taking on the tough projects. Amen. Amen. Well, I'm going to let Ralph close with any closing remarks here, and then we're going to say a prayer and then go on with our day. Would you like to say the prayer today, Dan, or do you want me to? I would love to. Okay, Ralph, do you have any words here to say? Then we'll go in prayers. No, I think the exchange method there is a real interesting aspect of this as far as shifting that over. The consolidation and exchange is one that is real interesting and not something I've heard proposed before. So that's pretty cool. As far as I know, it's original. I wrote it some 40 years ago. And in the beginning, I had a 20-year repayment for the national debt. But the national debt had just passed $1 trillion instead of the high 30s that we have now and maybe not even exactly sure what it is. as things are getting further and further out of control. I remember the political fight with the slogan being, early in the Reagan years, no trillion dollar debt, because we had not quite gotten to one trillion yet. I put 20 years for a repayment. Why not multiply 20 years by the 38 or so trillion dollars we have now because that puts the payment for the national debt up into the 700 year mark and that's just not a repayment that's that's a dream that's a delusion to think of repaying the national bill in 700 years uh Thomas Jefferson said money borrowed should be repaid in one generation. 20 years fit well with that. I don't see 20 years being doable in any way, but 700 years is ridiculous. So that's why I chose 50. That's a lifetime for repayment instead of the generation that Jefferson wanted. To think of it going beyond the lifetime for a working history of 50 years, Many people work for 50 years before retirement or death. To stretch beyond that is only to pretend that we're dealing with the problem and not reality. Well, it's everything that we're looking at right now is an illusion because nothing's getting handled. And that goes from how businesses run to personally helping our communities. There's responsible ways of doing that. But then there's also the responsibility of jumping in as an adult and caring about our communities and our families and being here as a servant and a caretaker of this world rather than somebody who victimizes others and takes the advantage for herself. And with that said, I think I'd like you to end with prayers here, Dan, and then I'm going to end the show when you're done, okay? Thank you. Our Heavenly Father, we are thankful that we have enough liberty left in the United States that we can talk about its problems with minimal fear, that we can talk about solutions including radical solutions that challenge the government and challenge the evil elements of our society with minimal fear and minimal consequences. We ask you to bless us that those consequences may decrease to the point that friends and neighbors in fear may join us We ask thee to bless the weather that it may be conducive to the benefit of our country and economy and our agriculture. We ask thee to bless the American people that they may see the dire straits in which America stands today. similar to that of numerous prior civilizations that have fallen because of the dangers that we see today. We ask thee to bless us with wisdom, help all of us who already understand some of the problems that we may grow in understanding, that our studying and learning may be profitable and effective. We ask thee to bless those who we have chosen by our voting to serve that they may see the dire straits in which the country is functioning and begin to exercise some political bravery and fortitude toward addressing those problems. We ask thee especially to bless the American people, the electorate that A new wave of freedom may burn in their hearts and that generations to come may be more attentive to freedom than we have been. And to bless us as a nation with any other blessings that we need in thy wisdom. And we ask all of these things in the name of Jesus Christ, the father of our liberty. Amen. Amen. Thank you so much, man. And this is where we go to that part of the show, boys and girls, go to brandenburgforgovernor.com because I am the best non-conceiter who has ever not conceded in the history of the United States of America. With that said, God bless you all. God bless all those whom you love and God bless America. Make it a great day. I'm not going to be on tomorrow and I don't think I'm going to be on Friday either. I think I'm going to take a pause this week But we'll be back on Monday. And I just want to let you know that you're loved. And there's many of us that are fighting this fight. Come and join us because we ain't backing down. We're taking this nation back. And we're not asking permission from liars, cheats, and thieves. So have a wonderful weekend. And make the world a better place with all your decisions. And treat everyone as you would want to be treated yourself. We'll see you next week.