The State of the Union under a failed Constitution
http://constitutionalguardian.com/federalist_papers/fed94.htm

The Federalist (Number 94)
April 2, 1996


The State of the Union under a failed Constitution
The logical analysis and legal reasoning governing the Federalist 92 proposition on the
legal profession's unconstitutional control of all government and the federal crime of
treason.

Federalist 92 asserted the proposition that probable cause exists that lawyers occupying public
office in either the legislative or executive branches of the federal government are guilty of the
crime of treason. The position was developed as an extension of the constitutional prohibition
against a single 'same hands' faction or group controlling all government. The same hands
group in question consists of the members of the legal profession.1 That position is being
asserted because the unconstitutional power being exercised by the 'same hands' faction in
question, is the source of many of the Nation's most serious problems, and that situation is in
urgent need of correction lest the Nation go down.

The assertion is being made for two reasons. The first is that it is required by law.2 The second
is in the hope that the legal profession will finally overcome the cognitive dissonance and self
delusion so far extensively exhibited and finally come to grips with the grievous harm it is doing
to this Nation. Notwithstanding the egregiousness of the crime involved it is hoped and
respectfully recommended, that the Nation limit itself to requiring the resignation from public
office of those deemed guilty in exchange for amnesty.3

This commentary is written to aid the understanding of those seriously interested in the issue. It
is intended to make clear the sequence of legal arguments that led to the conclusions reached. It
should also serve to identify the particular links in the chain of logical reasoning which fail to
persuade those who may disagree with the conclusions.

To arrive at the conclusion asserted one must do the the following:

1. Define the crime of treason.
2. Determine what the legal requirements are for a court of law to convict an individual of the
crime of treason.
3. Establish why the presence of members of the legal profession in elective office in the
legislative and executive branches of the federal government may be deemed an act of treason.
4. Establish that probable cause exists for the general assertion that the presence of members of
the legal profession in elective office in the legislative and/or executive branches is treason.

These matters will be addressed one by one.

1. Define the crime of treason.

There are certain 'links' in the causal chain that are facts and others that are opinions. The
following are facts:

1.1. The Constitution is the supreme law of the land and the Supreme Court is the sole
entity with the Constitutional right, responsibility and authority to interpret the
Constitution.

1.2. Article III, Section 3. of the United States Constitution defines the crime of
treason. Title 18, USCS, (Crimes and Criminal Procedure) Section 2381 of the Federal
Statutes which is the Federal Statute implementing Article III, Section 3, of the
Constitution, further defines treason as follows:

Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or
adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or
elsewhere is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or be imprisoned for not less
than five years, and fined not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding
office under the United States.

1.3. The case of United States v Haupt, D.C.III., 47 Supp. 836, 839 expanded the
definition of treason to mean any act which 'strengthens or tends to strengthen the
ability of the enemies of the United States or which weakens or tends to weaken
the power of the United States to resist such enemies.'

2. Determine what the legal requirements are for a court of law to convict an individual
of the crime of treason.

The following are statements of fact:

2.1. Supreme Court Justice Douglas in Cramer v United States (1945) 325 US 1, 65
S Ct 918, stated that the crime of treason consists of two elements, which are: the overt
act and the treasonous intent. (Thus unless the Park doctrine applies {see footnote 7}
an individual can only be convicted of the crime of treason if he commits an overt act
with treasonous intent).

3. Establish why the presence of members of the legal profession in elective office in
the legislative and executive branches of the federal government may be deemed an
act of treason.

The following are statements of fact:

3.01. The Constitution was written in 1787 by James Madison.

3.02. The motivation for writing the Constitution was that the United States Federal
Government operating under the Articles of Confederation, did not have sufficient power
to govern.4

3.03. To make certain that the Federal government was given sufficient power to
govern but insufficient to oppress, the Constitution incorporated a system of
'Separation of Powers' and checks and balances into the government's structure. The
government was divided into three separate branches, the judiciary, the executive and the
legislative. The system was designed to provide each branch of government with
sufficient power to check and balance the powers of the other two branches.

3.04. The principle of Separation of Powers is an essential cornerstone principle of the
Constitution because it protects the people of the United States from their own
government.

3.05. There is nothing in the Constitution that requires any person to be a lawyer in order
to serve as a judge or in order to represent others, in a federal court of law. Thus non
lawyers may constitutionally serve in any and all offices of the federal Judiciary.
Nevertheless the federal Judiciary is de facto under the absolute control of members of
the legal profession.

3.06. The Constitution required ratification by the individual States in order to become
law.

3.07. In 1787 the State of New York had expressed opposition to the Constitution and
appeared unwilling to ratify.

3.08. To persuade the people of the State of New York to ratify the Constitution, James
Madison, Alexander Hamilton and John Jay, wrote a series of 85 newspaper articles
which became known as The Federalist Papers.

3.09. The Federalist Papers outlined in the fullest detail the intentions of the founding
fathers and the author of the Constitution as to why the Constitution was written, what it
was intended to accomplish, why the principle of separation of powers was essential to
freedom and how its implementation would protect the people against their own
government.

3.10. The Federalist Papers are recognized by the Supreme Court as the source of
interpretation of the Constitution, second only to the Constitution itself.

3.11. James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, Thomas Jefferson and the great French
philosopher Montesquieu were unanimous in believing the principle expressed by
Madison in Federalist 47 concerning tyranny arising from any single hands faction or
group controlling all government. Madison wrote:

No political truth is certainly of greater intrinsic value.... than that the
accumulation of all powers legislative, executive and judiciary, in the same hands,
may be pronounced the very definition of tyranny. (Emphasis added)

3.12. James Madison defined the term 'same hands' or 'faction' in Federalist 10 as
follows:

By a faction I understand a number of citizens, whether amounting to a majority or
minority of the whole , who are united and actuated by some common impulse or
passion, or of interest, adverse to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent
and aggregate interests of the community.

Henceforth the causal links represent opinions and conclusions arrived at by
this writer:

3.13. Any action which would materially undermine the Constitution, would adhere to
and give aid and comfort to the enemies of the United States, as well as weaken the
United States and strengthen its enemies.

3.14. Any tendency which could result in the nullification of the principle of
Separation of Powers, which is an essential cornerstone principle of the Constitution
and which is the source of both representative government and protection of the people
from their own government, would materially undermine the Constitution

. 3.15. Because Madison wrote the Constitution to include a Separation of Powers
principle to make sure that no 'same hands' faction could ever control all government,
control or tendency to control all government by any 'same hands' faction would
constitute either nullification or the tendency towards nullification, of the
principle of Separation of Powers, and therefore a material undermining of the
Constitution.

3.16. Madison's definition of a 'faction' consisting of 'same hands' applies to all
professional groups as well as many other kinds of groups. The legal profession like all
other professional associations or groups, is a same hands faction or group within the
meaning of Madison's definition. Therefore all members of the legal profession be
they lawyers or judges, are a part of and belong to, that which Madison defined as a
'same hands' faction or group.

3.17. When the members of the legal profession acquired absolute control of the
Judiciary Branch of the Federal government they became a 'same hands' faction or group
in control of one third of all government. From that moment forward any member of the
legal profession who occupied elective public office in either the legislative or executive
branch of government would by his presence constitute a 'tendency to nullify the
principle of separation of powers of the Constitution which would result in the
material undermining of the Constitution, which would adhere to and give aid
and comfort to the enemies of the United States, etc.,' which action, by a person
owing allegiance to the United States, constitutes treason.

3.18. At the present time the 'tendency' to nullify the principle of separation of powers
has become a total 'nullification of the Separation of Powers.' That is because the
effective control of all government is and has been in the hands of the legal profession for
some time.5

4. Establish that probable cause exists for the general assertion that the presence of
members of the legal profession in elective office in the legislative and/or executive
branches is treason.

4.1. It is the duty of every person who owes allegiance to the United States and who has
knowledge of treason to report it to the proper authorities under penalty of law. It is
also the right of every person, in the eyes of the law, to be innocent until proven guilty.
Thus the words 'knowledge of treason' in the law can only mean 'probable
cause' that treason exists. That means to have 'reasonable ground for belief in the
existence of facts warranting the proceedings complained of.'6

4.2. The crime of treason requires a person to commit an overt act with a treasonous
intent.7 The overt act, for a member of the legal profession, is the act of occupying
elective public office in either the executive or legislative branch of the Federal
Government and is a matter of undisputed public record.

4.3. The treasonous intent aspect is covered by the law under Cramer.8 In that case
actual treasonous intent was determined to be legally inferable from the circumstances
and knowledge of the individual. Lawyers specifically trained in the law are required to
know the Constitution. That knowledge and the circumstance of occupying elective
office in either the executive or legislative branches, requires the law to infer that
they legally intend to nullify or tend to nullify the separation of powers principle of the
Constitution and that such action constitutes treason.

4.4. The above establishes 'reasonable grounds for belief in the existence of facts
warranting the proceedings complained of,' which is probable cause for asserting
that members of the legal profession who occupy the aforementioned elective offices are
guilty of treason.

Conclusion:

It is evident from the legal argument presented that the assertion made is fully supported by the
evidence.

PUBLIUS II
(Ronald Bibace)
4720 NW 2 Ave, Suite D-107
Boca Raton, Fl 33431
Internet address: robace@ix.netcom.com

About the author: This writer is a constitutional scholar who wrote Federalists 86 - 93, in defense of the
Constitution. He is like Madison, a non lawyer and like Hamilton an immigrant and naturalized
American.
===============================================================
FIVE WORDS AND TEN COMMANDMENTS TO VICTORY:
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/thelaw.htm

Ronald Bibace