Annulling State Senators Heinous Acts of Terrorism

The purpose of this document is to create awareness regarding the acts of Treason committed by U.S. Senators in 2011 to effectively dismantle the American Constitution by implementing unconstitutional legislation which could be carefully interpreted to enact cruel and unusual punishment upon the American People by wilfully attempting to rob them of several of their inherit constitutional rights. Operation A.S.S.H.A.T. maintains that the below listed knowingly compelled a change in the administration of the United States of America through adoption of legislature that is in direct violation of the Bill of Rights, including but not limited to the following: Amendment IV The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. Amendment VI In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence Amendment VIII Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted. Amendment IX The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

We must know before we continue; What is Treason? ...The Constitution defines Treason as specific acts, namely "levying War against [The United States]... What is Levying War? For the sake of better understanding Treason let us define "Levying War" LEVYING WAR, criminal. Law. The assembling of a body of men for the purpose of effecting by force a treasonable object; and all who perform any part however minute, or however remote from the scene of action, and who are leagued in the general conspiracy, are considered as engaged in levying war, within the meaning of the constitution. What is a Treasonable Object? To better understand Levying War, we must know what is legally considered a Treasonable Object Any combination to subvert by force, the government of the United States, violently to dismember the union, to compel a change in the administration, to coerce the repeal or adoption of a general law, is a conspiracy to levy war, and if the conspiracy be carried into effect by the actual employment of force, by the embodying and assembling of men for the purpose of executing the treasonable design which was previously coneived, it amounts to levying of war. It has been held that arms are not essential to levying war provided the force assembled be sufficient to attain or perhaps to justify attempting the object without them. -The United States Supreme Court Reports, Volumes 5-8 page 693

Summary In summary, per U.S. Law any body of men with the intent to dismember the United States of America with or without bearing arms, through the coercion of repealing general law or adopting general law contrary to the general law of the land is committing Treason.

Now that we all understand what Treason is, let us examine the accused: The following body of men voted Aye to the controversial NDAA despite warnings and pleas from their constituents warning them of the unconstitutional language contained within.
State Senators Voting Aye to the NDAA: Sen. Daniel Akaka [D, HI] Sen. Lamar Alexander [R, TN] Sen. Kelly Ayotte [R, NH] Sen. John Barrasso [R, WY] Sen. Max Baucus [D, MT] Sen. Mark Begich [D, AK] Sen. Michael Bennet [D, CO] Sen. Jeff Bingaman [D, NM] Sen. Richard Blumenthal [D, CT] Sen. Roy Blunt [R, MO] Sen. John Boozman [R, AR] Sen. Barbara Boxer [D, CA] Sen. Scott Brown [R, MA] Sen. Sherrod Brown [D, OH] Sen. Richard Burr [R, NC] Sen. Maria Cantwell [D, WA] Sen. Benjamin Cardin [D, MD] Sen. Thomas Carper [D, DE] Sen. Robert Casey [D, PA] Sen. Saxby Chambliss [R, GA] Sen. Daniel Coats [R, IN] Sen. Thad Cochran [R, MS] Sen. Susan Collins [R, ME] Sen. Kent Conrad [D, ND] Sen. Chris Coons [D, DE] Sen. Bob Corker [R, TN] Sen. John Cornyn [R, TX] Sen. Michael Crapo [R, ID] Sen. Jim DeMint [R, SC] Sen. Richard Durbin [D, IL] Sen. Michael Enzi [R, WY] Sen. Dianne Feinstein [D, CA] Sen. Al Franken [D, MN] Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand [D, NY] Sen. Lindsey Graham [R, SC] Sen. Charles Grassley [R, IA] Sen. Kay Hagan [D, NC] Sen. Orrin Hatch [R, UT] Sen. Dean Heller [R, NV] Sen. John Hoeven [R, ND] Sen. Kay Hutchison [R, TX] Sen. James Inhofe [R, OK] Sen. Daniel Inouye [D, HI] Sen. John Isakson [R, GA] Sen. Mike Johanns [R, NE] Sen. Ron Johnson [R, WI] Sen. Tim Johnson [D, SD] Sen. John Kerry [D, MA] Sen. Mark Kirk [R, IL] Sen. Amy Klobuchar [D, MN] Sen. Herbert Kohl [D, WI] Sen. Jon Kyl [R, AZ] Sen. Mary Landrieu [D, LA] Sen. Frank Lautenberg [D, NJ] Sen. Patrick Leahy [D, VT] Sen. Carl Levin [D, MI] Sen. Joseph Lieberman [I, CT] Sen. Richard Lugar [R, IN] Sen. Joe Manchin [D, WV] Sen. John McCain [R, AZ]

Sen. Claire McCaskill [D, MO] Sen. Mitch McConnell [R, KY] Sen. Robert Menndez [D, NJ] Sen. Barbara Mikulski [D, MD] Sen. Jerry Moran [R, KS] Sen. Lisa Murkowski [R, AK] Sen. Patty Murray [D, WA] Sen. Ben Nelson [D, NE] Sen. Bill Nelson [D, FL] Sen. Robert Portman [R, OH] Sen. Mark Pryor [D, AR] Sen. John Reed [D, RI] Sen. Harry Reid [D, NV] Sen. James Risch [R, ID] Sen. Pat Roberts [R, KS] Sen. John Rockefeller [D, WV] Sen. Marco Rubio [R, FL] Sen. Charles Schumer [D, NY] Sen. Jefferson Sessions [R, AL]

Sen. Jeanne Shaheen [D, NH] Sen. Richard Shelby [R, AL] Sen. Olympia Snowe [R, ME] Sen. Debbie Ann Stabenow [D, MI] Sen. Jon Tester [D, MT] Sen. John Thune [R, SD] Sen. Patrick Toomey [R, PA] Sen. Tom Udall [D, NM] Sen. Mark Udall [D, CO] Sen. David Vitter [R, LA] Sen. Mark Warner [D, VA] Sen. Jim Webb [D, VA] Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse [D, RI] Sen. Roger Wicker [R, MS]

House of Representatives Voting Aye to the NDAA: Ackerman Adams Aderholt Akin Alexander Altmire Amodei Andrews Austria Baca Bachus Barletta Barrow Bartlett Barton (TX) Bass (NH) Benishek Berg Berkley Berman Biggert Bilbray Bilirakis Bishop (GA) Bishop (NY) Bishop (UT) Black Blackburn Bonner Bono Mack Boren Boswell Boustany Brady (PA) Brady (TX) Brooks Broun (GA) Brown (FL) Buchanan Buerkle Butterfield Calvert Camp Canseco Cantor Capito Capps Cardoza Carnahan Carney Carter Cassidy Castor (FL) Chabot Chandler Cicilline Cole Conaway Connolly (VA) Cooper Costa Courtney Cravaack Crawford Crenshaw Critz Crowley Cuellar Culberson Davis (CA) Davis (KY) Denham Dent Deutch Dicks Dingell Doggett Dold Donnelly (IN) Dreier Duffy Ellmers Emerson Engel Farenthold Fincher Fitzpatrick Fleischmann Fleming Flores Fortenberry Foxx Franks (AZ) Frelinghuysen Gallegly Garamendi Gardner Gerlach Gibbs Gibson Gingrey (GA) Gohmert Gonzalez Granger Graves (MO) Green, Al Green, Gene Griffin (AR) Grimm Guinta Guthrie Hall Hanabusa Hanna Harper Hartzler Hastings (WA) Hayworth Heck Hensarling Herger Herrera Beutler Higgins Himes Hirono Hochul Holden Hoyer Hultgren Hunter Inslee Israel Issa Jackson Lee (TX) Jenkins Johnson (OH) Johnson, Sam Jordan Keating Kelly Kildee Kind King (IA) King (NY) Kingston Kinzinger (IL) Kissell Kline Lamborn Lance Landry Langevin Lankford

House of Representatives Voting Aye to the NDAA (continued): Larsen (WA) Larson (CT) Latham Latta Levin Lewis (CA) Lipinski LoBiondo Loebsack Long Lowey Lucas Luetkemeyer Lungren, Daniel E. Manzullo Marchant Marino Matheson McCarthy (CA) McCarthy (NY) McCaul McCotter McHenry McIntyre McKeon McKinley McMorris Rodgers McNerney Meehan Mica Miller (FL) Miller (MI) Miller, Gary Murphy (PA) Neugebauer Noem Nugent Nunes Nunnelee Olson Owens Palazzo Pascrell Pastor (AZ) Paulsen Pearce Pelosi Perlmutter Peterson Petri Platts Poe (TX) Pompeo Price (GA) Quayle Rahall Reed Rehberg Reichert Renacci Reyes Richardson Rigell Rivera Roby Rogers (AL) Rogers (KY) Rogers (MI) Rooney Ros-Lehtinen Roskam Ross (AR) Ross (FL) Rothman (NJ) Runyan Ruppersberger Ryan (WI) Snchez, Linda T. Scalise Schiff Schilling Schmidt Schock Schrader Schwartz Scott (SC) Scott, Austin Scott, David Sensenbrenner Sessions Sewell Sherman Shimkus Shuler Shuster Sires Smith (NE) Smith (NJ) Smith (TX) Smith (WA) Southerland Stearns Stivers Sullivan Sutton Terry Thompson (PA) Thornberry Tiberi Tsongas Turner (NY) Turner (OH) Upton Visclosky Walden Walz (MN) Wasserman Schultz Waxman Webster West Westmoreland Whitfield Wilson (FL) Wilson (SC) Wittman Wolf Womack Yoder Young (AK) Young (IN)

As peaceful protestors in America, many of us March, with flags, signs, guns, and we often have protest organizers, which could be considered as leaders. March leaders, Chant Leaders, Religious Leaders, etc. We do all of this because it is protected in our constitutional rights, however the NDAA (and its supporters) have undermined that authority despite thousands of requests from its constituents that they not violate the constitution. In short, the NDAA, says that it will detain Americans with military force through enacting the rights empowered to the presidential office through Enemy Belligerent, Interrogation, Detention, and Prosecution Act of 2010. The aforementioned Act will identify hostiles through a system outlined in the Geneva Act The Geneva Act outlines any American that may affiliate with an, enemy party through a long list of possible intended or unintended relationships, or behaviors, many of which behaviors are constitutionally protected. It does not specify which party/country might be an enemy. However in the NDAA it does directly specify that Americans are included and that it can be used to detain Americans on American territory without warrant or due process. Below Ive attached some key documents proving this to be true, and I highly recommend that you do additional research on your own. National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) 2012 Subtitle DCounterterrorism SEC. 1021. AFFIRMATION OF AUTHORITY OF THE ARMED FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES TO DETAIN COVERED PERSONS PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF MILITARY FORCE. (a) IN GENERAL.Congress affirms that the authority of the President to use all necessary and appropriate force pursuant to the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 10740; 50 U.S.C. 1541 note) includes the authority for the Armed Forces of the United States to detain covered persons (as defined in subsection (b)) pending disposition under the law of war. (b) COVERED PERSONS.A covered person under this section is any person as follows: (1) A person who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored those responsible for those attacks. (2) A person who was a part of or substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners, including any person who has committed a belligerent act or

has directly supported such hostilities in aid of such enemy forces. (c) DISPOSITION UNDER LAW OF WAR.The disposition of a person under the law of war as described in subsection (a) may include the following: (1) Detention under the law of war without trial until the end of the hostilities authorized by the Authorization for Use of Military Force. Later there is a disclaimer within this section: (e) AUTHORITIES.Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect existing law or authorities relating to the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident aliens of the United States, or any other persons who are captured or arrested in the United States. This is where a lot of controversy lies; We saw earlier in this section that any person who has committed a belligerent act...[can be subject to]... detention under law of war without trial... Do these two statements conflict? No! Note that it specifies existing law not constitutional law they are simply re-itterating that the government has been authorized to detain citizens without trail, based on more unconstitutional laws that were passed under the radar during 2010. This is the original bill enabling the detention of American citizens, without Miranda, or trial until after interrogation, and it is frequently referenced throughout the NDAA. S.3081 - Enemy Belligerent, Interrogation, Detention, and Prosecution Act of 2010: http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-s3081/text (c) Determinations of Status(1) PRELIMINARY DETERMINATION BY HIGH-VALUE DETAINEE INTERROGATION GROUP- The high-value detainee interrogation group responsible for interrogating a high-value detainee under subsection (b) shall make a preliminary determination whether or not the detainee is an unprivileged enemy belligerent. The interrogation group shall make such determination based on the result of its interrogation of the individual and on all intelligence information available to the interrogation group. The interrogation group shall, after consultation with the Director of National Intelligence, the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, submit such determination to the Secretary of Defense and the Attorney General.

(2) FINAL DETERMINATION- As soon as possible after receipt of a preliminary determination of status with respect to a high-value detainee under paragraph (1), the Secretary of Defense and the Attorney General shall jointly submit to the President and to the appropriate committees of Congress a final determination whether or not the detainee is an unprivileged enemy belligerent for purposes of this Act. In the event of a disagreement between the Secretary of Defense and the Attorney General, the President shall make the final determination. (3) DEADLINE FOR DETERMINATIONS- All actions requiredregarding a high-value detainee under this subsection shall, to the extent practicable, be completed not later than 48 hours after the detainee is placed in military custody under section 2. SEC. 5. DETENTION WITHOUT TRIAL OF UNPRIVILEGED ENEMY BELLIGERENTS. An individual, including a citizen of the United States, determined to be an unprivileged enemy belligerent under section 3(c)(2) in a manner which satisfies Article 5 of the Geneva Convention Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War may be detained without criminal charges and without trial for the duration of hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners in which the individual has engaged, or which the individual has purposely and materially supported, consistent with the law of war and any authorization for the use of military force provided by Congress pertaining to such hostilities. The above paragraph requires that anyone whom the president has determined to be an unprivileged enemy belligerent must be so in a manner which satisfies Article 5 of the Geneva Convention: Article 5 of the Geneva Convention: The present Convention shall apply to the persons referred to in Article 4 from the time they fall into the power of the enemy and until their final release and repatriation. Should any doubt arise as to whether persons, having committed a belligerent act and having fallen into the hands of the enemy, belong to any of the categories enumerated in Article 4, such persons shall enjoy the protection of the present Convention until such time as their status has been determined by a competent tribunal. This is the only language provided under Article 5, Its sole purpose is to re-iterate that if we think a detainee MIGHT be innocent, they shall still remain in custody. Lets look at Article 4 of the Geneva Convention:

A. Prisoners of war, in the sense of the present Convention, are persons belonging to one of the following categories, who have fallen into the power of the enemy: 1. Members of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict as well as members of militias or volunteer corps forming part of such armed forces. 2. Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organized resistance movements, belonging to a Party to the conflict and operating in or outside their own territory, even if this territory is occupied, provided that such militias or volunteer corps, including such organized resistance movements, fulfil the following conditions: (a) That of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates; (b) That of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance; (c) That of carrying arms openly; (d) That of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war. 3. Members of regular armed forces who profess allegiance to a government or an authority not recognized by the Detaining Power. 4. Persons who accompany the armed forces without actually being members thereof, such as civilian members of military aircraft crews, war correspondents, supply contractors, members of labour units or of services responsible for the welfare of the armed forces, provided that they have received authorization from the armed forces which they accompany, who shall provide them for that purpose with an identity card similar to the annexed model. 5. Members of crews, including masters, pilots and apprentices, of the merchant marine and the crews of civil aircraft of the Parties to the conflict, who do not benefit by more favourable treatment under any other provisions of international law. 6. Inhabitants of a non-occupied territory, who on the approach of the enemy spontaneously take up arms to resist the invading forces, without

having had time to form themselves into regular armed units, provided they carry arms openly and respect the laws and customs of war. B. The following shall likewise be treated as prisoners of war under the present Convention: 1. Persons belonging, or having belonged, to the armed forces of the occupied country, if the occupying Power considers it necessary by reason of such allegiance to intern them, even though it has originally liberated them while hostilities were going on outside the territory it occupies, in particular where such persons have made an unsuccessful attempt to rejoin the armed forces to which they belong and which are engaged in combat, or where they fail to comply with a summons made to them with a view to internment. 2. The persons belonging to one of the categories enumerated in the present Article, who have been received by neutral or non-belligerent Powers on their territory and whom these Powers are required to intern under international law, without prejudice to any more favourable treatment which these Powers may choose to give and with the exception of Articles 8, 10, 15, 30, fifth paragraph, 58-67, 92, 126 and, where diplomatic relations exist between the Parties to the conflict and the neutral or non-belligerent Power concerned, those Articles concerning the Protecting Power. Where such diplomatic relations exist, the Parties to a conflict on whom these persons depend shall be allowed to perform towards them the functions of a Protecting Power as provided in the present Convention, without prejudice to the functions which these Parties normally exercise in conformity with diplomatic and consular usage and treaties. With such broad language regarding the Military Detainment of American citizens, theres no telling who will be a suspect, who will go missing, or why. Will it be you? Your friends? Your mother? Who, if anyone, will notify you? What will you do when your loved ones start disappearing? If these questions plague you then more than likely you are a normal, emotionally intelligent human being. And if this situation frightens you then you understand why the NDAA 2012 is synonymous with terrorism.

What can we do? For starters, lets get these traitorous asshats out of office: Impeachment: Impeachment is a big deal, its an option that until now, Americans havent really excersized. So its important that we weigh in on a couple of the legal snags that they may try to use to hide behind, and its important to know how to approach holding these traitors accountable without sacrificing the constitution. Impeachment in the United States is an expressed power of the legislature that allows for formal charges against a civil officer of government for crimes committed in office. The actual trial on those charges, and subsequent removal of an official on conviction on those charges, is separate from the act of impeachment itself. At the federal level, Article II of the United States Constitution (Section 4) states that The President, Vice President, and all civil Officers of the United States shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other High Crimes and Misdemeanors. The House of Representatives has the sole power of impeaching, while the United States Senate has the sole power to try all impeachments. The removal of impeached officials is automatic upon conviction in the Senate. In Nixon v. United States (1993), the Supreme Court determined that the federal judiciary cannot review such proceedings. We must lobby the remaining 170 members of the house to Impeach their colleagues. No where is it written that the house must unanimously vote to impeach eachother, or that a vote must be made at all in order for the house to impeach unlawful congressmen, so dont waste energy being concerned about the numbers. The only thing the constitution says about the house is that it has the power to impeach members of office. We must contact each of the remaining 170 members of the house who failed to influence their colleagues to uphold the constitution and give them the opportunity to make this right by enacting the power of congress to impeach the treasonists. Write a letter, call them and their secretary, make a music video do whatever it takes to let the remaining 170 members of congress know that they can still make good on their oath of office by trusting the constitution and the support of the people on this matter. In this case the powers that be have provided well documented proof of their own guilt and there are thousands of us whove witnessed them bind America to the fate these attrocities of their own admission. In my own inbox I have a letter directly from Senator Nelsons office blatantly lying about the content within the act and explaining to me that he did in fact vote for the NDAA and fully supports it, (in response to my prior contact begging that he vote no). In order to Annul our State Senators Acts of Terrorism we must act swiftly to remove the players whom orchestrated and voted in the NDAA.

Trial Following Impeachment We also must take into consideration the fact that per the Constitution, the Senate, and only the Senate may hold ruling over the judgement of the impeached. Since the Senate is even worse off in numbers than the house, (with only 7 members of the senate voting no) a fair trial may not be possible until significantly more seats have been filled, you can imagine that this will be a lengthy process (worth every minute of course). And herein lies the question; What to do with the accused until fair trial can be held? To answer this we shall resist the urge to throw the NDAA in the face of its makers. Instead we shall examine the topics of treason, levying war and a treasonable object. It would appear that levying war upon the American people is a crime of war, and there-fore congress would be subject to military detainment until such date as the senate is re-structured enough to enact a fair trial. To Enact the Process enabled to us by our founding fathers: Call the remaining members of congress. You can thank those who voted no and ask them to continue to uphold their honourable oath of office by impeaching the criminals that would degrade our system. You can email the Ayes too if you like demanding resignation or something to that effect, but since there are so few in office that managed to uphold their oath on this important topic, it would be better served to lobby the remaining few to join us in fixing America. The fastest way by far is by calling their offices and asking for this, but its important to articulate your needs in writing, so dont be afraid to send them a letter outlining the problems, or simply a note saying that you support the impeachment of criminals and you hope that they will join America in getting the criminals out of office. Contact the members of house who did not vote at all, let them have the opportunity to make good on their absence in this critical vote: You may use the employee directory at http://www.house.gov/representatives/ to locate each person on this list and their contact info, including fax/phone/ and all office addresses. Fax them a copy of this book!
Bachmann Coble Diaz-Balart Filner Giffords Gutierrez Johnson, E. B. LaTourette Lynch Myrick Paul Pitts Sanchez, Loretta Young (FL)

Contact the members of house who voted No to the NDAA This is a directory of contact information for the representatives within the white house: http://www.house.gov/representatives/ Below is a list of the representatives who voted No to the NDAA:
Amash Baldwin Bass (CA) Becerra Blumenauer Braley (IA) Bucshon Burgess Burton (IN) Campbell Capuano Carson (IN) Chaffetz Chu Clarke (MI) Clarke (NY) Clay Cleaver Clyburn Coffman (CO) Cohen Conyers Costello Cummings Davis (IL) DeFazio DeGette DeLauro DesJarlais Doyle Duncan (SC) Duncan (TN) Edwards Ellison Eshoo Farr Fattah Flake Forbes Frank (MA) Fudge Garrett Goodlatte Gosar Gowdy Graves (GA) Griffith (VA) Grijalva Hahn Harris Hastings (FL) Heinrich Hinchey Hinojosa Holt Honda Huelskamp Huizenga (MI) Hurt Jackson (IL) Johnson (GA) Johnson (IL) Jones Kaptur Kucinich Labrador Lee (CA) Lewis (GA) Lofgren, Zoe Lujn Lummis Mack Maloney Markey Matsui McClintock McCollum McDermott McGovern Meeks Michaud Miller (NC) Miller, George Moore Moran Mulvaney Murphy (CT) Nadler Napolitano Neal Olver Pallone Payne Pence Peters Pingree (ME) Polis Posey Price (NC) Quigley Rangel Ribble Richmond Roe (TN) Rohrabacher Rokita Roybal-Allard Royce Rush Ryan (OH) Sarbanes Schakowsky Schweikert Scott (VA) Serrano Simpson Slaughter Speier Stark Stutzman Thompson (CA) Thompson (MS) Tierney Tipton Tonko Towns Van Hollen Velzquez Walberg Walsh (IL) Waters Watt Welch Woodall Woolsey Yarmuth

Sample letter:

01/04/2012

Dear Congress person, Firstly, thank you for declining to vote in favor of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012. I am a lawful U.S. citizen, and am aware that grand treason has been orchestrated by the President Barack Obama, and many, many congress-people. This treason has occurred through the adaptation of laws that deny me and my heirs our inherent constitutional rights as citizens of the United States of America. This Treason can also be defined as Seditious Conspiracy. I must urge you to impeach the members of congress whom have knowingly compelled a change in the administration of the United States of America through adoption of legislature that is in direct violation of the Bill of Rights, including but not limited to the following constitutional amendments: Amendment IV The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. Amendment VI In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence Amendment VIII Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted. Amendment IX The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. Know that you have the support of your constituents to get the terrorists out of office, and I encourage you to rally with your fellow congress-people whom voted no, or declined to vote and end this crime against Americans, and join us in re-instating our civil liberties. Our rights under the tenth Amendment: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. As Ben Franklin pointed out, When the only other way to get rid of traitorous politicians is a lynching, Impeachment by congress or voluntary resignation is more favourable for everyone involved, and for this reason I look forward to seeing you and your fellow congress people continue to uphold your Oath in Office and excersize the full power of our Constitution. Signed,