Talkshoe Radio – Maine Exposed: Adjournment Fiasco Between Maine Governor Paul LePage and The Legislature

Discussion on the dispute of “adjournment” with Phil Merletti and Lise DuPont, Researcher and Author of “Where Did The Original Constitutional State Go?”

This is NOT about liking or disliking Governor LePage, this is about the “rule of law.”

Wednesday, July 22, 2015
9:00 PM EDT

Call in Number: (724) 444-7444
Call ID: 27398#

Click here to join in online.

EPISODE 65, LISTEN HERE.

Governor Paul LePage legal memo, click here.

A.G. Janet Mills’ Opinion, click here.

Legislative Council’s letter to Cynthia Montgomery, LePage’s Chief Legal Counsel, click here.

Letter from the Maine Office of the Revisor’s of Statutes, click here.

SP 556 “ADJOURN UNTIL THE CALL OF THE SPKR AND PRES”, click here.

SP 556 – Bill Text, click here.

Advertisements
Published in: on July 15, 2015 at 4:05 pm  Leave a Comment  

Do Maine Legislators Understand The Constitution?

Courtesy of Lise from Maine – Researcher and Author of “Where Did The Original Constitutional State Go?”

Lise DuPont is a former licensed clinician. She graduated from high school from Our Lady of the Mountains Academy in New Hampshire. She has a Bachelor’s Degree from the University of Maine, a Master’s degree from the University of New England, and completed two years of Post-Graduate training at the Center for the Awareness of Patterns.

“There has been a media frenzy regarding whether the legislature adjourned or not on June 30, 2015.

The legislative Joint Order states “On motion by Senator Mason of Androscoggin, following Joint Order: S.P. 556 – Ordered, the House concurring, that when the House and Senate adjourn they do so until the call of the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House, respectively, when there is a need to conduct business, or consider possible objections of the Governor.”

This order clearly shows that the legislature could meet again in the future to discuss issues of that session which would be a continuation of the issues. “Sine die” is not mentioned in the order, and this is a very significant piece to comprehend.

1843 Bouvier’s Law Dictionary:

NO word “adjourn” appears in the said dictionary.

Adjournment:

“Adjournment, is the dismissal by some court, legislative assembly (emphasis is mine), or properly authorized officer, of the business before them, either finally, which is called an adjournment sine die, without day; or, to meet again at another time which is appointed and ascertained, which is called a temporary adjournment.”

This definition shows that there are two ways to adjourn, and they are “opposite” of each other. The first definition is a finality (sine die), and the second definition leaves the “door” open to meet again, if need be.

Attorney General Janet Mills responded to an inquiry from Senators Hill and Saviello on July 10, 2015 regarding the “status of bills” presented to the Governor which he has neither signed nor vetoed. In the first paragraph she states “The Legislature has not adjourned sine die, and more than ten days have elapsed since certain bills were presented to the Governor.”

Why is she arguing something that is NOT in the Joint Order? Doesn’t she know that there are two (2) ways to adjourn or was that NOT taught in law
school?

Is she being clever and manipulative or is she ignorant?

Nowhere in the Joint Order does it say “sine die” which means “finality” meaning that the legislature will not be meeting again regarding those laws discussed and passed. In other words, “sine die” means that the session is over.

The Constitution of the State of Maine (statutory one of 2013) clearly spells it out regarding adjournment and more which is located in Article IV, Part Third, Section 2.

Since the legislature has been “adjourned” (the second definition in the 1843 Bouvier’s Law Dictionary) since June 30, 2015, then how can the Governor present these bills to the legislature since “no one is home” so to speak in the legislative chambers? In actuality, the Governor is being prevented from doing so, and his hands are “tied” at this time. He is waiting for them to return in session so he waits to do something with those bills.

This is NOT about liking or disliking Governor LePage, this is about the “rule of law.”

Thank you!

Constitution of Maine (1820)

SP 556 – Bill Text, click here.

Governor Paul LePage legal memo, click here.

A.G. Janet Mills’ Opinion, click here.

Legislative Council’s letter to Cynthia Montgomery, LePage’s Chief Legal Counsel, click here.

Related: As The Fur Flies At The State Capital…Maine Governor Paul LePage And Legislators Clash Over Fate Of Bills Still On Governor’s Desk, click here.

City of Biddeford (ME): Attorney Gene Libby’s Statements…Quite The Revelation!

Courtesy of Lise from Maine

According to the WGME article, Gene Libby, the attorney for the alleged abuser, states in part: “Libby says his client was investigated and went before a Grand Jury in 1991.”

First of all, this is quite a revelation!

This is the hijacking of the Grand Jury to allow the “accused” in the jury room because of the potential to “control and influence” the Jurors.  The accused has no business nor any delegation of authority to enter a Grand Jury room.

Doesn’t Mr. Libby know this or is he ignorant of the Grand Jury process? Wasn’t he taught this in law school or do law schools not teach this any  longer?

The “accused” is NOT allowed in the Grand Jury room because the Jurors can ONLY interview “witnesses” and see the actual evidence as provided by the Attorney General if the state is a potential party to a cause or as provided by the district attorney, formerly the County Attorney who is a constitutional officer and unlawfully abolished, where the county is a potential party to a cause. The Jurors are looking for “probable cause” (not guilt) to see if there is sufficient evidence to take the cause to trial. The Jurors do not conduct a trial by jury of his peers.

Also, the accused gets a chance to present his witnesses during a trial by jury of his peers (there is no longer a trial by jury of his peers since 1935 and only a trial by jury of the government to ensure a conviction), and the accused can testify in his defense at trial if he so chooses but he can decline to take the stand (see Article 1, Section 6 of the Constitution of the State of Maine). This is where the accused has his chance to obtain his due process rights and not in the Grand Jury room.

Attorney Gene Libby Press Release, HERE.

WGME13 – View report and read more HERE.

WCSH6 – View report and read moreHERE.

Related: Biddeford (ME) Police Department Exposed! Click here.

Grand Jury, click here.

The Purpose And Selection Of The Grand Jury, click here.

Talkshoe Radio – The Grand Jury With Guest Lise DuPont, Researcher and Author of “Where Did The Original Constitutional State Go?” Click here.

Talkshoe Radio – Maine Exposed: Recap!

Wednesday, May 6, 2015
9:00 PM EDT

Call in Number: (724) 444-7444
Call ID: 27398#

Click here to join in online.

Archived program, EPISODE 64, click here.

All Archived Programs, click here.

Commissions: Chief Justice Andrew Wiswell, Justices of the Peace, Trial Justices, County Attorneys, County Commissioners, Clerks of “all” Judicial Courts

Courtesy of Lise from Maine

COMMISSIONS, click here.

Take notice of the commission of 1900 pertaining to Chief Justice Andrew Wiswell. He was one of the incorporators of the 1891 Maine State Bar Association, a private organization. In 1891 he was Speaker of the House of Representatives which is a major, major conflict of interest. He represents the people in his public office and NOT the private Maine State Bar Association. The Maine State Bar Association’s two major goals were legal reform and for the interests of the legal profession. Nothing is said about the interests of the people who have all the inherent powers (see Article 1, Section 2 of the Constitution of the State of Maine). He was a criminal and violated the duties of his public office as a member of the House of Representatives.
Related: 1891 Act Incorporating Maine State Bar Association, click here.

Also notice the commissions of the Justice of the Peace. In 1977 this constitutional office was abolished unlawfully, and this is fraud and treason. The Legislature has NO delegation of authority to interfere into another department as all departments of the state are equal and distinct – separation of powers doctrine (see Article III of the said constitution). They were Justices of the Peace for a particular county which is “local control.”

RESOLUTION, Proposing an Amendment to the Constitution to Eliminate the Office of Justice of the Peace as a Constitutional Office (1977), click here.

Also take notice of the commission of Judge Albert Bennett of Gilead, Maine whereby he was a “trial justice” within and for the county of Oxford. This was “local control, and all judges must be commissioned. See the 2011 response from Chief Justice of the District Courts of Maine Charles C. Laverdiere that he sent me (I conducted a Freedom of Access request under Title 1, MRS, Chapter 13, Section 408-A).

Did he realize what he admitted to?

Furthermore, when a commission says “attorney for the state” it means “county” attorney who has a “dual” role. He acts for the state and he acts for the county where the county is a party to a cause. He also receives instructions from the Attorney General. See William K. Kimball’s commission where he is commissioned within and for the county of Oxford. This constitutional office was abolished unlawfully in 1973 (notice the different enacting clause) and replaced with the district attorney “statutory” office. Are they commissioned? I haven’t found one as yet.

AN ACT to Provide Elected District Attorneys (1973), click here.

Also notice that County Commissioners are commissioned county officers. See John M. Wilson’s commission.

And lastly, Clerks of “all” Judicial Courts for a particular county are also commissioned. See Ezra S. Clark’s commission; see Joshua Gould’s commission. Notice the word “all.” This is very important to understand.

Related: Commissions: County Attorney, Sheriffs, Clerk of the Courts, click here.

Constitution of the State of Maine (1988) Amendment to Clarify the Original Constitutional Resolution Making the Language of the Constitution Gender-Neutral

Courtesy of Lise from Maine

Constitution of the State of Maine (1988) – Amendment

Constitution of the State of Maine (1820)

The so-called amendment of 1988 pertaining to making the language of the constitution gender-neutral is absolute fraud and treason.

Why is that?

First of all, you have to look at the “original” Constitution of the State of Maine (1820) in order to understand “how” the constitution can be amended lawfully. You won’t find this in the “statutory” constitution of 2013 so you have to examine the “origin” of changing the constitution lawfully.

In Article 10, Section 4 it states: “The Legislature, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, may propose amendments to this Constitution; and when any amendment shall be so agreed upon, a resolution shall be passed and sent to the selectmen of the several towns, and the assessors of the several plantations, empowering and directing them to notify the inhabitants of their respective towns and plantations, in the manner prescribed by law, at their next annual meetings in the month of September, to give in their votes on the question, whether such amendment shall be made; and if it shall appear that a majority of the inhabitants voting on the question are in favor of such amendment, it shall become a part of this Constitution.”

Take notice of the last part of this article and section where it says that “if it shall appear that a majority of the inhabitants voting on the question are in favor of such amendment, it shall become a part of this Constitution.”

This means that the amendment “itself” MUST (must is mandatory) become a part of the constitution if the inhabitants voting are in favor of it.

Also notice that it says NOTHING about any Chief Justice arranging and rearranging or omitting anything in the constitution plus it says NOTHING
about having the “approval” of the legislature as the 1875 unlawful amendment says. Since 1876 when the 1875 amendment went into effect, the constitution was codified unlawfully, and all constitutions have been codified fraudulently since then.

What the unlawful 1988 amendment does, in fact, is change most of the constitution where the language refers to the male gender such as his, men
and so forth. Even the preamble has been changed from “His” to God’s.

How can this amendment “itself” become part of the lawful constitution?

It cannot as it is an impossibility prescribed by constitutional law.

Furthermore, is it “really” an amendment?

No, it is not.

In fact, most of the constitution was changed to be gender-neutral, and this is unlawful.

What the legislature could have done lawfully is propose an amendment to “include” women in the constitution and have “that” amendment, if approved, become a “part” of the constitution itself.

Thank you!

Published in: on March 17, 2015 at 12:59 pm  Comments (4)  

Talkshoe Radio – Maine State Bar Association…100 Years of Law & Justice (1891-1991) (Part 2)

Wednesday, March 18, 2015
9:00 PM EDT

Call in Number: (724) 444-7444
Call ID: 27398#

Click here to join in online.

Part 2 – Archived program, EPISODE 57, click here.

Part 1 – Archived program, EPISODE 56, click here.

*Note: The Maine Supreme Court issued their opinion in the Question of Law presented to the court by Gov. LePage….We started the program with the opinion and didn’t get into the 100 Years of Law and Justice which ties in to the opinion. We will continue part 2 next week.

OPINION OF THE JUSTICES

100 Years of Law & Justice (1891-1991),  click here.

1891 Act Incorporating Maine State Bar Association, click here.

Talkshoe Radio – Maine State Bar Association…100 Years of Law & Justice (1891-1991)

Wednesday, March 11, 2015
9:00 PM EDT

Call in Number: (724) 444-7444
Call ID: 27398#

Archived program, EPISODE 56, click here.

*Note: The Maine Supreme Court issued their opinion in the Question of Law presented to the court by Gov. LePage….We started the program with the opinion and didn’t get into the 100 Years of Law and Justice which ties in to the opinion. We will continue part 2 next week.

OPINION OF THE JUSTICES

Click here to join in online.

100 Years of Law & Justice (1891-1991),  click here.

1891 Act Incorporating Maine State Bar Association, click here.

Commissions: County Attorney, Sheriffs, Clerk of the Courts

Courtesy of Lise from Maine

Take particular notice that county attorneys, sheriffs, justices of the peace and clerk of courts are all commissioned. Not so today. County attorneys have been replaced unlawfully by the district attorney which is STATUTORY only.

For your information, Justices of the Peace are NO longer situated in the Judicial Department and so is the Notary Public office.

The commissions EXCEPT for two (2) of them follow Article 9, Section 3 of the Constitution of the State of Maine:

1. Must be in the name of the state, and
2. Must have the signature of the governor, and
3. Must be signed by the Secretary or his deputy, and
4. Must have the seal of the state.

The two (2) older ones of 1825 ONLY shows the “name” of the seal with surrounding stars (stars?). I don’t believe that these two (2) actually
follow the said article as above-mentioned. The actual copy of the seal must be a part of the commission.

I have ordered four (4) more commissions (have to pay for them), and those show a very different seal.

Go figure.

I just ordered more commissions yesterday, and I am awaiting a response.

Remember what a commission ACCOMPLISHES. It provides the one so named in his commission a public office and a title.

Commissions – County Attorney

Commissions – Sheriff

Commissions – Clerk of Courts

Some questions come to mind. Does anyone have answers?

What is a County Attorney and what is his role?

First of all, he is a constitutional, public officer, and this public officer is mentioned in Article 9, Section 2 of the “original” Constitution of the State of Maine.

He is a commissioned public officer, and he has a “dual” role in that he operates “for the state” and also acts “for the county.”

He operates in the county, and takes instructions from the Attorney General whenever the county is a party to a cause.

The County Attorney position was unlawfully abolished in 1973 and replaced with the “statutory” district attorney. I have yet to see a “commissioned” district attorney.

Still checking it out.

I have a book called “History and Civil Government of Maine” by W. W. Stetson, State Superintendent of Public Schools, published in 1898 and here is what is says about the County Attorney (pages 172 and 173):

“The county attorney is elected by the people of the county for a term of two years. It is his duty to prosecute all civil and criminal actions in which the county is a party.

He conducts the defense in all suits against the county, and enforces the collection of all debts, fines, and forfeitures accruing to the State in his county; represents the county in all matters of law; investigates claims, and is the legal adviser of the county officials; instructs and is the advising officer of the grand jury of the county.”

Does anyone see anything wrong with this as above-mentioned in that book?

Continuing about this book “History and Civil Government of Maine” by W. W. Stetson, State Superintendent of Public Schools, published in 1898.

It states in part on page 205: Office of the Grand Jury:

“In the performance of its duties its deliberations are secret, and its members are sworn to keep secret the evidence submitted.

Only the county attorney, as the prosecuting officer of the court, can be present at its sessions and have knowledge of its proceedings.

It is among the duties of his office to appear before it, present accusations of offenses, and submit evidence to show probable guilt of those accused.

If, after hearing the charges and evidence, twelve or more jurors decide by vote that the evidence submitted shows the probable guilt of the accused, an indictment is made out in legal form by the county attorney, is properly signed and attested, and reported to the court, and the accused is then held for trial.”

WHAT IS WRONG WITH THIS?

Does anyone know?

Grand Jury proceedings are kept secret UNLESS a witness says something contrary to what he said under oath in the Grand Jury room in a trial.

The attorney general provides evidence and the names of the witnesses to the Grand Jury if the state could be a party to the situation.

The county attorney is supposed to provide evidence and the names of witnesses to the Grand Jury if the county could be a party to a situation.

NEITHER the attorney general nor the county attorney is supposed to be present in the jury room.

Why is that?

To avoid influence plus it is the “people’s power” to participate in a jury.

It is the people’s power and NOT any prosecutors such as the attorney general and the county attorney.

They alone decide what witnesses, if any, that they will interview in the jury room. They, themselves, review the evidence and decide if there is “probable cause” regarding the accused. They do not decide the fate of the accused; that is the job of the trial by jury of his peers.

The mere fact that public officers have a title, have some delegation of power, and some knowledge is enough to cause “influence,” and this cannot be allowed to happen.

This could cause the people’s power to be diminished and cause some jurors to “look up” to the county attorney for answers.

In the 1898 book as above-referenced the county attorney is the “advising officer” of the Grand Jury.

This is fraud and treason against the people as he has grabbed the people’s power for the county.

Nowadays, prosecutors have “hijacked” the Grand Jury process, and justice is NOT administered by the Grand Jury any longer. The people today don’t even know their own power as jurors.

They have been dumbed-down by the school system.

What I need to find out is “when” did the county attorney “begin” to be the “advising officer” of the Grand Jury.

Does anyone know?

Please post your findings or research in the “comments” section of this post. Your help and input is most important.

 

Related:
Talkshoe Radio – The Grand Jury With Guest Lise DuPont, Researcher and Author of “Where Did The Original Constitutional State Go?” Listen HERE.

1) the purpose of the grand jury 2) selection of the grand jury……..

l. Of the organization of the grand jury

2. The extent of the grand jury’s jurisdiction

3. The mode of doing business

4. Of the evidence to be received

5. Of presentments

6. Of the secrecy to be observed by the grand jury

This is referenced in Bouvier’s 2nd Edition (1843), Grand Jury, click here.

Talkshoe Radio – The Grand Jury With Guest Lise DuPont, Researcher and Author of “Where Did The Original Constitutional State Go?” Click here.

Published in: on March 3, 2015 at 6:45 pm  Comments (14)  

Talkshoe Radio – Discussion On “Brief” Dispute Between Maine Governor Paul LePage and Attorney General Janet Mills…Oral Argument

Wednesday, March 4, 2015
9:00 PM EDT

Call in Number: (724) 444-7444
Call ID: 27398#

Archived program, EPISODE 55, click here.

Click here to join in online.

Related:  Talkshoe Radio – Discussion on Governor Paul LePages’s Request For Opinion of the Justices With Phil Merletti and Lise DuPont, Author of “Where Did The Original Constitutional State Go?” Click here.
Wednesday, February 4, 2015 broadcast, Archived program, EPISODE 51, click here.

Talkshoe Radio – Update on Article V Constitutional Convention Forum and “Brief” Dispute Between Maine Governor Paul LePage and Attorney General Janet Mills, click here.
Wednesday, February 25, 2015 broadcast, Archived program, EPISODE 54, click here.

The “Brief” Dispute Between Maine Governor Paul LePage and Attorney General Janet Mills, click here.

%d bloggers like this: