Is It Over?

Courtesy of Phil Merletti

Folks, this is a MUST READ.

“So you have wiped your brow and you think the election is over. No more lying and deceiving ads. No more trying to get the naïve, uneducated and low information voter to be fooled by the smoke and mirrors. No more betraying good people to fight each other on sensitive and emotional issues, gender, economics, religion, race, abortion and other natural unalienable protected rights provided by our U.S. & State Constitutions. The fact is, this destruction has been slowly occurring for many years.

No matter who wins this election, the president, congressional office, Maine Senate or Representative, the war to subdue your rights will still continue. The only difference will be how dedicated the winners of the election will either continue to destroy your rights or whether they will fight for you and the U.S. & Maine Constitution’s protections.

The ones who voted for the deceivers will have to suffer the guilt and the many consequences. Unfortunately, we will all suffer for what you have done. Learn what the U.S & Maine Constitutions protect, or continue to be fooled and led like sheep.”
Read more HERE.

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.

• Brief of Lise McLain and Dorothy Lafortune, of Gilead and Portland, respectively, filed July 24, 2015

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.

Maine Governor Paul LePage Makes Bid To Let Governor Pick Attorney General, Treasurer

BDN reports “Gov. Paul LePage has made good on his pledge to propose fundamental changes in the way the state’s constitutional officers — the attorney general, treasurer and secretary of state — are selected.

It’s a real power grab, says House Majority Leader Jeff McCabe, a Democrat from Skowhegan. “This isn’t the governor proposing to change these positions from, you know, legislative vote to popular vote,” McCabe said. “This is the governor taking on offices that are statewide offices and putting them under his appointment structure and making them part of his Cabinet.”

Senate President Mike Thibodeau, a Republican from Winterport, said the three proposals should not be partisan and should be considered on the basis of what is best for the state in the future. He expects the bills will be sent to the State and Local Government Committee for public hearings.” Read more HERE.

COMMENTARY –

Courtesy of Lise from Maine

Originally, the Attorney General was nominated and appointed by the governor with the advise and consent of the Council (see Art. 5, Section 8 of the “original” Constitution of the State of Maine) and operated under the control of the Executive department. The Council was unlawfully abolished in 1976.

The tyrannical legislature proposed an amendment in 1855 to bring the Attorney General under the control of the legislature, and it was unlawfully passed by the electors. In other words, the tyrannical legislature “stole” the ability of the governor with his council to select their own “field” person.

Remember, it is the governor who executes the laws (see Art. 5, Sec. 12) and originally the Attorney General was a “commissioned” officer who went into the “terrain” called counties and attended all court sessions to make sure that the laws were faithfully executed for the governor and represented the State if the State was a party to a cause. The AG also instructed the County Attorney if the county was a party to a cause. County Attorneys were unlawfully abolished in 1973.

Today, the Attorney General operates unlawfully from the Department of the Attorney General (see Title 5, MRS, Chap. 9, Sec. 191). There is NO such thing as a Department of the Attorney General related to the constitution. The AG is also mentioned in Article IX, Section 11 of the “statutory” constitution.

In Title 5, MRS, Chap. 5, Sec. 81 the Secretary of State operates unlawfully from the Department of the Secretary of State of which again there is NO such thing as that department as it relates to the constitution. In the “statutory codified” constitution of 2013 it mentions the Secretary of State in Article V, Executive Power, Part Second. This is a “contradiction” pertaining to the Department of the Secretary of State who acts “independently” in it and having the Secretary located in the Executive Department. It defies common sense.

The Treasurer of State is mentioned in Title 5, MRS, Chap. 7, Sec. 121 and in Article V, Part Third of the said constitution.

All three (3) public officers belong in the Executive Department. Not so today except the Treasurer.

What is Title 5, MRS? It is Administrative Procedures and Services. What does this show? That the “state” is actually an “administrative” state ONLY; it is a “statutory” state ONLY. It is NOT a constitutional state at all.

In Article III of the constitution it mentions ONLY three (3) departments: Executive, Legislative and the Judicial. Where is the Department of the Attorney General mentioned? Where is the Department of Secretary of State mentioned?

They don’t exist anywhere in the constitution, and it is fraud and treason.

No one can abolish the office of the Secretary of State and replace the said office with a lieutenant governor. This is another piece of fraud and treason. LePage would commit fraud and treason if he proposed this.

I believe that House Majority leader Jeff McCabe is off the wall. This is NOT a power  grab as all three (3) public officers are supposed to operate from the Executive department to begin with.

Senate President Mike Thibodeau states: “The three proposals should not be partisan and should be considered on the basis of what is best for the state in the future (emphasis is mine).” Is this guy for real? Is he off the wall, too? Of course, he is. Why is that? It should NEVER be “what is best for the state…” Instead it should be “what is best for the people.”

Lastly, why is LePage attending a republican governor’s association meeting in another state? Each State is supposed to be free and independent but that is not the case today.

Related: Talkshoe Radio – Office of the Attorney General and the 1855 Amendment, click here.

Where Did The Original Constitutional State Go? by Maine Author Lise Dupont. 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.

Talkshoe Radio – Office of the Attorney General and the 1855 Amendment

Wednesday, February 18, 2015
9:00 PM EDT

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

Archived program, EPISODE 53, click here.

Click here to join in online.

The “Brief” Dispute Between Maine Governor Paul LePage and Attorney General Janet Mills

State of Maine 1855 Amendment

Are The Political Opinions Of Phil Harriman and Ethan Strimling Regarding Governor Paul LePage’s Proposed Constitutional Amendment Relative To Constitutional Officers On Target?

Phil and Ethan, both former Maine state senators, were guests today on WCSH6TV’s “Sunday’s Political Brew.”

View video HERE.

It is encouraging that Phil Harriman did bring to light the history of Maine’s original constitution (1820) with respect to constitutional officers and, specifically, the Governor’s Executive Council. His statement “the Executive Council was abolished” goes much further into history.

1975 Amendment

Research proves that the Executive Council was abolished unlawfully by the fraudulent 1975, Public Law – AN ACT Redistributing the Powers of the Executive Council. Governor LePage cannot do anything lawfully regarding the state’s business without the “advise and consent” of the council (see article 5, Part 2 of the original constitution). Maine Constitution (1820)

Re the Attorney General’s Office – Research proves the attorney general’s office was “stolen” from the Executive department by the Legislative department via the unlawful 1855 Resolve.

Phil and Ethan (and the legislature) are encouraged to further study the fraudulent 1975 Public Law and the 1855 Resolve, which are null and void, and continue to shine the light on Maine’s original constitution and the authority mandated by this document.

Related:  The Destruction of the Governors Executive Council and the Fraudulent Evolution of Maine’s Legislative Council

What’s Behind Governor Paul LePage’s Proposed Constitutional Amendment Relative To Constitutional Officers?

What’s Behind Governor Paul LePage’s Proposed Constitutional Amendment Relative To Constitutional Officers?

Courtesy of Lise Dupont, Researcher/Author of “Where Did The Original Constitutional State Go?”

Lise comments on this BDN article “LePage sheds light on plan to strip Legislature of power to appoint attorney general, treasurer.”

BDN reports “LePage sheds light on plan to strip Legislature of power to appoint attorney general, treasurer. Gov. Paul LePage said Friday that he will propose a constitutional amendment to take the power to appoint the attorney general and state treasurer away from the Legislature and give that authority to either the governor or voters. “I really think this is a very important decision, probably the most important decision or program we’re [going to] take on in the eight years we’re going to be here, and I want to get it right,” he told reporters Friday. The plan would also create a position of lieutenant governor.

LePage said he will propose that the state treasurer be appointed by the governor and confirmed by the Legislature, similarly to how Cabinet-level positions and state judges are appointed now.

“The Constitution says the chief executive powers will rest in a governor,” he said. “But the way we’ve set it up is the AG has veto power over the governor. I don’t think in 1820, that’s what [the Constitution’s writers] were trying to do.”

LePage’s plan will be a heavy lift, considering he’ll need to convince two-thirds of the Legislature to give up authority it has held for nearly 200 years. But he could have at least one ally: state Sen. Andre Cushing, R-Hampden, has already proposed a bill for the popular election of attorney general, treasurer and secretary of state.” Read more HERE.

Maine Constitution (1820)

1855 Resolve

1975 Amendment

1975, Public Law – AN ACT Redistributing the Powers of the Executive Council

Lise’s commentary:

“The legislature has no delegation of authority to dispose of the Secretary of State constitutional office (see Article 5, Part 3 of the original constitution). The Secretary of State is a constitutional office and cannot be reduced to a “statutory” office which is inferior.

The legislature also cannot lawfully give the governor the authority to appoint the state treasurer (see Article 5, Part 4 of the original constitution) nor have him or her elected by the people.

LePage needs to work on getting his Executive Council back; it was abolished unlawfully by the 1975 fraudulent amendment which went into effect in 1976. LePage cannot do anything lawfully regarding the state’s business without the “advise and consent” of the council (see article 5, Part 2 of the original constitution). He needs to have an investigation into the unlawful elimination of the Executive Council and then declare formally that it is null and void.

All Governor LePage needs to do regarding the attorney general is to have the 1855 resolve investigated and declare it null and void in order to “bring back” the attorney general in the Executive department (see Article 5, Section 8 of the “original” Constitution of the State of Maine).” The attorney general office was “stolen” by the legislative department by this unlawful 1855 resolve that went into effect in 1856.

Remember that the attorney general is a “field” person who executes the laws of the state “for” the Governor, and it is the Governor who actually executes the laws of the state (see Article 5, Section 12 of the original constitution). It is an Executive department function and not a legislative function.

In the Bangor Daily News article of January 23, 2015 it states that LePage wants to find out from other governors how the positions (attorney general, state treasurers) are filled in their states.

Who cares what other states do?

What matters is what the constitution (original) allows and does not allow lawfully.

LePage also wants to create a position called the “lieutenant governor.” The constitution (original) says nothing about this officer and is not allowed lawfully. He should have his Executive Council back instead.

In the same article as above-noted, LePage said: “I want to get it right.”

Is he getting it right?

No, he is not getting it right, and the people “should not” support this unlawful activity.

In the same article it says that LePage wants the state treasurer appointed by the governor and confirmed by the legislature such as how cabinet positions and state judges are appointed now.

This would be unlawful activity (see Article 5, Part 4 of the original constitution).

State judges were appointed by the governor with the “advice and consent” of the council (see Article 5, Section 8 of the original constitution). The judiciary committee now unlawfully confirms the appointments of the governor.

All of this is unlawful.

There is NO council since 1976 which is one hundred years after the American Revolution.

Accident?

No way!

This was well-planned ahead.

Once again, the governor cannot do anything lawfully without his council so, therefore, there are NO judges operating here in Maine. The legislature has NO delegation of authority to be involved in confirming judges’ appointments by the governor. That is an Executive department function ONLY (see Article 5, Section 8 of the “original” constitution).

Additionally, NO judges here in Maine are commissioned (Article 9, Section 3) which “vests” the office, a public office, and provides him or her with a title. They have “certifcates” only of which the constitution says nothing about. Remember that a commission is under “seal” of the state, and a certificate is not.

Furthermore, in the same article as above-mentioned, LePage says that the attorney general operates as a 4th branch of government.

For your information, there are ONLY 2 branches, and they are both located in the legislature – Senate and the House (see Article 4, Part 1st, Section 1 of the original constitution).

By that unlawful 1855 resolve the attorney general office was “stolen” from the Executive department and given to themselves.

All fraud and treason against the people.

LePage also says according to the article that the AG’s office has “veto” power over the governor even though he is the chief executive officer of the state.

Remember that the legislature NOW has control over the AG unlawfully since the 1855 fraudulent resolve so, in reality, LePage is actually “fighting” the legislature who controls Janet Mills.

The said article continues to say that State Senator Andre Cushing (R- Hampden) has already proposed a bill for the election of the attorney general, state treasurer, and the secretary of state.

All unlawful, of course.

Lastly, I don’t think the legislature will do this since the legislature is involved in all three as above-noted. The legislature has become the “omnipotent,” (God-like) bandit, tyrannical department over time.

If anyone supports LePage in this, then those people are participating with him in becoming a criminal.

Neither the legislature nor the governor can be criminals, and if the constitution (original) does NOT allow such activity, then it cannot be done lawfully.

LePage needs to understand the constitution (original), the 1855 fraudulent resolve which “stole” the attorney general from the Executive department and gave it to the criminal legislature, and the 1975 resolve that “stole” the Executive Council from the Executive department and gave the powers to the Legislative Council instead.

What he is proposing is criminal behavior.

Those who support him in this endeavor and criminal behavior are criminals themselves.

Without the Executive Council the governor cannot lawfully conduct business of the state.

Suggestion: Study the original Constitution of the State of Maine to see what is allowed lawfully and what is not allowed lawfully. Study also the fraudulent amendments passed unlawfully over time as well as fraudulent statutes. Remember that statutes cannot supersede the constitution.”

Thank you!

Lise

Thank you, Lise, for this insight. The PPH reports that Governor LePage told reporters that “his proposal is still in development.” It sounds like he’s educating himself on the (original) constitution of Maine (1820).  Since he “wants to get it right”, he will read the 1855 Resolve and the 1975 Public Law.

Attorney General Janet Mills has been at odds with the governor on a few cases arguing they had “little legal merit” and violated a provision of the federal law. Mills states “she also has an obligation to stand up for what she believes is the public’s interest – even if that means going against the administration. I represent the state, not the individual who happens to be the chief executive.” She “doesn’t mind an occasional spat” with the governor. “I love the law. I love litigation.” This Notice and Demand contradicts her statements. This is a matter of public trust and public interest. Yet, Janet Mills took no interest in this issue!  Who’s violating the law?

Governor LePage  “could have at least one ally: state Sen. Andre Cushing, R-Hampden, has already proposed a bill for the popular election of attorney general, treasurer and secretary of state.” Doesn’t this speak volumes about the knowledge (or lack thereof) of Maine legislators? And reporters who can’t ask the right questions and report on the truth of the matter?

There’s plenty of learning for everyone here…if we “want to get it right.” Governor LePage could make a public announcement on the nullification/voiding of the fraudulent 1855 Resolve and the 1975 Public Law, restore our original constitution, and “make it right.” Will our legislators object to the truth? If so, the conclusion is quite clear!

Related: The Destruction of the Governors Executive Council and the Fraudulent Evolution of Maine’s Legislative Council, click here.

Where Did The Original Constitutional State Go? by Maine Author Lise Dupont

This is a great reference, research, informative and educational tool for everyone! A must read for ALL legislators.

You can order the book on line through Barnes and Noble  orAmazon.com, click on the link.  SPREAD the word.

Related: Talkshoe Radio With Guest Lise DuPont on Wednesday evenings. For info and archived programs, click here.

We The People of Maine, Inc. To Be Maine’s Constitutional Watchdog

“Phil Merletti, one of the organizers, says the group aims to act as a watchdog over government at all levels in Maine.” Read more HERE.

We The People of Maine, Inc., click here.

Related:

Press Conference: The Constitutions Get a “Watchful Eye” in Maine, click here.

What is a public office? Who is a public officer? 08/13/2014 08:30 PM EDT – EPISODE 29, listen HERE.