Episode 32. October 18, 2019. CLP Topic Category: Irreconcilable Differences Schiff’s Nullification and Disenfranchisement of Republican Voting Rights.

Episode 32. October 18, 2019.

CLP Topic Category: Irreconcilable Differences

Schiff’s Nullification and Disenfranchisement of Republican Voting Rights.

Introduction.

Our podcast today places Schiff’s impeachment proceedings into the bigger historical context of nullification and disenfranchisement, by the Democrats, of Republican voting rights.

Our podcast argues that two representatives from the State of California are attempting to nullify constitutionally-protected rights of Republican voters, by overturning a legitimate national election.

When placed into the historical context of nullification and disenfranchisement, Schiff’s initiative can be seen as an attempt to use the power of Congress in a political effort to destroy the Republican Party, and impose one-party rule.

The podcast presents the historical parallels between Calhoun’s 1828 nullification argument over tariffs and slavery, and the subsequent attempt, in 1898, of the Democrat’s efforts to eliminate the voting rights of black people.

In the broader historical context, the socialist attempt to eliminate political opposition is a normal course of behavior for a totalitarian regime, and has been attempted before by the Democrats in the South, to maintain one-party rule.

Our podcast concludes that the differences between the Democrat socialists of Schiff and Pelosi, and Trump natural rights conservatives, are irreconcilable and irrevocable.

Schiff’s impeachment proceedings constitute a dramatic and fundamental breach of shared constitutional values of American citizens. Schiff and Pelosi’s initiatives are evidence that California Democrats intend on subverting the Constitution, in order to implement a global socialist regime.

The only peaceful, non-violent solution of the ideological split is a dissolution of the current states into two new nations:

  • The Socialist States of America, led by California, and any other states that choose to live under a socialist regime, and,
  • The Democratic Republic of America, created on the state sovereignty framework of the Articles of Confederation, which changes the representative republic to a democratic republic.

The Historical Context of Nullification and California Secession.

In the case of impeachment, two residents of California have combined forces to overturn a national election, just as Calhoun attempted to use the Senate to argue that South Carolina had the authority to overturn the Tariff Law of 1828.

The original nullification theory, expressed by Calhoun, in 1828, was based upon the idea that the nation was formed as a contract between the states.

Jefferson had stated this idea as early as 1776, and later again, in his Kentucky Resolves of 1798. Jefferson asserted that the federal government was an agent of the states, with certain specified, delegated powers.

The states retained the authority to determine when the federal government exceeded its powers, and states could declare federal acts to be “void and of no force” in their jurisdictions.

In contrast to Calhoun’s state sovereignty compact, Daniel Webster claimed that the nation was not simply a compact of the states. Webster argued that a mythical, synthetic entity, “We, the People,” created the nation.

“We, the People,” invested the Constitution and the national government with ultimate sovereignty over the states.

Under Webster’s interpretation, if the two representatives of California disliked the outcome of the 2016 national election, they have a right to either sue in federal court or seek to amend the Constitution, but California does not have a right to nullify a federal election.

Pelosi and Schiff invoke the principle of the “concurrent majority” that the residents of California are not bound by the national election results, and that the residents of California have veto power over the federal election outcome to protect their minority rights from the tyranny of the numerical Electoral College majority.

Pelosi and Schiff understand that the minority rights of residents of California are vulnerable to the repression of the national Electoral College results of the majority in the upcoming election of 2020, as long as California remains a member of the Union.

Consequently, Pelosi and Schiff must find some extra-constitutional method of nullifying both past and future national election results, or they must secede.

The citizens of California have the right to secede, at will, from the intolerable oppression imposed by the conservative majority. But, as long as California remains within the Union, Pelosi and Schiff are bound by the provisions of the Constitution of 1787.

In Madison’s March 15, 1833, letter to Daniel Webster, Madison explained the right of revolution and secession by stating,

“But whilst the Constitutional compact remains undissolved, it must be executed according to the forms and provisions specified in the compact. It must not be forgotten, that compact, express or implied is the vital principle of free Governments as contradistinguished from Governments not free; and that a revolt against this principle leaves no choice but between anarchy and despotism.”

In other words, for Pelosi and Schiff to proceed with extra-legal impeachment, their efforts must be seen as promoting the anarchy and despotism of socialism.

On the other hand, if Pelosi and Schiff lead the State of California out of the Union, to avoid the repression of the Trump conservatives, they have a God-given right, according to Madison, to secede.

One-Party Democrat Rule.

As was the case in the national elections of 2016, the Republicans in North Carolina won an election for governor, in 1897, which the ruling Democrat  elites in North Carolina did not like.

Daniel Russell pieced together a coalition of farmers, blacks, and common white Republicans to defeat the Democrat progeny of the plantation.

Academic historians called that coalition “fusion” because the fusion of white and black citizens seemed so odd, and contrary, to the outcome that the Democrat elites desired.

Among the many policies implemented by Russell was the enactment of laws that allowed counties to impose property taxes to educate black children.

The use of taxes to educate black children infuriated the Democrats, much like the fury and hatred today, of Trump, and his Make America Great policies.

As a result of the election of 1897, the Democrats launched a massive voter disenfranchisement of blacks, and common white farmers, which ended in a one-party apartheid in North Carolina, that lasted until 1972.

The Democrats vowed to never again be ruled by Republicans and black people.

Furnifold Simmons, Chairman of the State Democratic Party, and a long time U. S. Senator from North Carolina said in 1898,

“North Carolina is a White Man’s State, and White Men will rule it, and they will crush the party of Negro domination beneath a majority so overwhelming that no other party will ever dare to establish Negro rule here.”

In a letter of 1891, Robert Rhett wrote to North Carolina State Representative Joseph Wheeler, a Democrat and laid out the strategy for destruction of the Republican Party,

“I deem it of the utmost importance, that strong and substantial Democrats throughout this District should enter the agrarian order and control it, as they readily can do, if they choose and will go to the trouble.”

 

Paul Escott noted, in Many Excellent People, that in North Carolina,

“the Democratic Party resorted to fraud and force to safeguard its power and then designed a final, undemocratic political and social solution. This solution – segregation and disfranchisement – eviscerated the coalition of poorer whites and blacks and insured that established interests would not be threatened in the future.”

The violence of the Democrats in North Carolina in imposing one-party rule included the nation’s only violent coup d’etat to overthrow the black city council of Wilmington. The Democrats brought a howitzer to the coup to kill unarmed blacks.

  1. Leon Prather, in We Have Taken A City: The Wilmington Racial Massacre and Coup of 1898, wrote that “the Cape Fear River was swollen with the carcasses of blacks.”

Beginning in 1900, the Democrats began a systematic forced sterilization of black people who were considered by the Democrats to be too insane to vote, or to have children.

The Democrat’s language for insane blacks was “uppity blacks.”

The insanity of black people, according to the Democrats, was demonstrated by their coalition of voting with Republicans, in the election of 1897.

The forced sterilization of black people by the Democrats of North Carolina finally ended in the mid-1970s, after 50,000 black people had been sterilized.

As a political strategy, the forced sterilization of uppity blacks, combined with voter disenfranchisement, was a huge political success for the Democrats, in implementing one-party rule.

With the DNA genetics of uppity Blacks purged from society, Blacks in North Carolina now vote almost 100% for the Democrats.

Among the many tactics deployed by the Democrats to destroy the Republicans was the simple step of having the all-powerful state legislature remove elected Republicans, at the county and city level, and replacing them with Democrat appointments made from the central Democrat party headquarters in Raleigh.

This is the same tactic being deployed by Pelosi and Schiff to nullify the results of the election of 2016, in order to replace Trump with the rightful winner, Hillary.

By 1908, all eleven Democrat states of the former Confederacy had created new state constitutions with policies for disenfranchising both black people and common whites.

The Democrats imposed poll taxes, which required individuals to hold on to receipts for a year, or literacy tests, in which Democrat officials determined who was literate enough to vote.

The Democrats controlled voter registration, the voting booths and counted the votes for each election, for almost 100 years, with no outside oversight.

By 1908, black voter participation in the 11 Democrat states decreased by more than 90%, from the 1894 level.

Like the North Carolina Democrats, Schiff and Pelosi want more than just to remove Trump, they seek to eliminate the Republican Party and impose one-party rule, just like they did in North Carolina, 1898.

This is my conclusion.

Natural rights conservatives are in a death struggle with socialists over individual freedom and natural rights.

The socialists do not share cultural or moral values with conservatives, and without shared moral values, there is no longer the basis of a shared national mission of individual freedom and liberty.

There is no solution to this confrontation over the future of the nation, within the existing constitutional framework.

The differences between the Democrat socialists of Schiff and Pelosi, and Trump natural rights conservatives, are irreconcilable and irrevocable.

On any given day, the socialists condemn Trump, but the bigger target for socialists is Trump voters, and their spirit of individual liberty.

A common example of the hatred of the socialist is the quote at the end an article defending Trump.

The socialist stated,

“It’s not Trump’s impeachment that would create a “crisis of legitimacy at the heart of our government.” Trump IS the crisis of legitimacy. He is unfit for the office – dangerous and incompetent. Anyone with an IQ north of a shriveled turnip knows the POTUS has the mind of a troubled child.”

In their moral arrogance, the socialists condemn Trump as an illegitimate president, and condemn Trump voters as having the IQ of a turnip.

The same level of moral arrogance that animates Schiff and Pelosi to overturn an election is the same level of moral arrogance that it has taken for the socialist dictators, throughout history, to torture and kill political opponents.

The main reason that the Trump supporters voted for Trump is found in the Rand Corporation 2016 research,

Rand found that voters who agreed with the statement “people like me don’t have any say about what the government does” were 86.5 percent more likely to prefer Trump.

This feeling of powerlessness and voicelessness was a much better predictor of Trump voter support than age, race, college attainment, income, attitudes towards Muslims, illegal immigrants, or Hispanic identity.

Schiff and Pelosi are engaged in making Trump voters feel even more powerless by taking away their voting rights.

Eventually, and soon, the Trump voter’s feeling of being powerless to the moral arrogance of socialist elites, will turn to rage, and then to the uncontrolled blind violence of a civil war.

The only peaceful, non-violent solution of the ideological split is a dissolution of the current states into two new nations:

  • The Socialist States of America, led by California, and any other states that choose to live under a socialist regime, and,
  • The Democratic Republic of America, created on the state sovereignty framework of the Articles of Confederation, which changes the representative republic to a democratic republic.

The Democrat socialists have a God-given natural right to create their own new nation and live under the slavery of state socialism.

The Democrats do not have a moral authority to impose their slavery on natural rights conservatives.

The two sides are close to a civil war that Schiff and Pelosi assume that they will win.

They are oblivious to the consequences of their actions.

I am Laurie Thomas Vass, and this podcast is a copyrighted production of the CLP News Network.

You can subscribe to all of the audio and text of our podcasts, for $30 per year, at our website.

You can join the political movement to create a natural rights republic and contribute our mission at CLPnewsnetwork.com

You can learn more about the federalist, state sovereignty framework of the new constitution of the Democratic Republic of America at GABBYpress.com

Thank you for joining me today and please visit our entire archive of podcasts at clpnewsnetwork.com