Presidential Candidates – Piercing The Prevarication Voodoo Barrier

by Barry Weinstein –

To the Voters of America, Ladies and Gentlemen, the Great Constituency also historically known as “We The People”, ‘We Have A Problem!’

The driving engine of the problem, as I see it, is that the intended “Separation of Powers” Clause of the US Constitution and the Several States has been breached.

I will present my reasoning and evidence herein for you to decide whether to allow the continuation of the ongoing destruction of America which is being done casually by the Judicial Branch and its extant operatives, the officers of the Courts the lawyers.

You the voters will need to decide whether lawyers belong to or constitute the Judicial Branch of the Government and if so will you allow them to serve in a second branch of the government at the same time?

Thus, the two germane issues are, is there a violation of the Constitution/s of the Several States and / or is there a conflict of interests?

I am writing about this now as the nation is focusing on the GOP debate, for the Candidate that will be the Republican Party choice for the office of the President of the United States in the coming 2016 election. The debate will take place 6.August.2015 and will be hosted and broadcast live by the Fox News Channel in cooperation with Facebook

Please take notice that there will be no questions of the debate participants as to whether they are Lawyers or Not. We know which ones are lawyers, as that is a matter of public record, but they ought to be challenged in their candidacy. Each candidate who is a lawyer ought to be asked why they think that they are not violating the separation of powers condition preclusion required for attempting to simultaneously belonging to or constituting the Judicial Branch and also run for the Executive Branch – that is the Presidency.

The Non-lawyers might be asked their position as well. We The People have a right to know all of the facts.

The following self-declared candidates are lawyers, do they belong to or constitute the judicial branch and is one of them now trying to take over a second branch, which is the Executive Branch as President. As to the conflict of interests see the insightful writing of Daniel Greenfield below.

Seven of the seventeen candidates, listed here below, are lawyers. Personally, I admire some of the lawyers a great deal and find this uncomfortable, but it needs to be done, the Constitution/s demand it and they should know better.

Bush               NO
Carson           No
Christie          Yes
Ted Cruz        Yes
Fiorina           NO
Gilmore         NO
Graham         YES
Huckabee     NO
Jindal            YES
Kasich           NO
Pataki           YES
Paul               NO
Perry             NO
Rubio           YES
Santorum     YES
Trump         NO
Walker         NO

The remedy for the lawyers herein is to Sign an Oath or contract or something binding that if elected that they irrevocably agree that they will forever and a day give up being a member of the Judicial Branch as a lawyer / officer of the courts.

This should have been done with the current occupier of the highest Executive office / Branch, Mr. B. Hussein Obama, Esquire.

Here is what was intended at the Founding of the America and the intentions of the Authors of the Constitution/s at the time.

James Madison, Federalist, no. 47, 323—31- >> 30 Jan. 1788

The accumulation of all powers legislative, executive and judiciary in the same hands, whether of one, a few or many, and whether hereditary, self appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.


Montesquieu was guided, it may clearly be inferred, that in saying “there can be no liberty where the legislative and executive powers are united in the same person, or body of magistrates,” or “if the power of judging be not separated from the legislative and executive powers,” …

… His meaning, as his own words import, … can amount to no more than this, that where the whole power of one department is exercised by the same hands which possess the whole power of another department, the fundamental principles of a free constitution, are subverted.

… “Montesquieu grounds, his maxim are a further demonstration of his meaning” . “When the legislative and executive powers are united in the same person or body” says he, “there can be no liberty, because apprehensions may arise lest the same monarch or senate should enact tyrannical laws, to execute them in a tyrannical manner.” Again “Were the power of judging joined with the legislative, the life and liberty of the subject would be exposed to arbitrary controul, for the judge would then be the legislator. Were it joined to the executive power, the judge might behave with all the violence of an oppressor.”

Madison continues:

The language of Virginia [constitution] is still more pointed on this subject. Her constitution declares, “that the legislative, executive and judiciary departments, shall be separate and distinct; so that neither exercise the powers properly belonging to the other; nor shall any person exercise the powers of more than one of them at the same time;…”

Alexander Hamilton, Federalist, no. 71, 483–84 –>> 18 Mar. 1788

To what purpose separate the executive, or the judiciary, from the legislative, if both the executive and the judiciary are so constituted as to be at the absolute devotion of the legislative? Such a separation must be merely nominal and incapable of producing the ends for which it was established. It is one thing to be subordinate to the laws, and another to be dependent on the legislative body. …

… The representatives of the people, in a popular assembly, seem sometimes to fancy that they are the people themselves; and betray strong symptoms of impatience and disgust at the least sign of opposition from any other quarter; as if the exercise of its rights by either the executive or judiciary, were a breach of their privilege and an outrage to their dignity.

Recently Daniel Greenfield posits:

The decadent civilization has a million laws which it applies selectively. Its universal laws, inherited from a vigorous civilization, are so mired in legalisms as to be meaningless. The laws do not mean what they say. Instead they must be interpreted by a specialized caste. Everyone is always in violation of some obscure laws. Life depends on a lawless dispensation from the law.

The crucial task of the law is interpretation that keeps everyone from constantly being punished. This task is accomplished by lawyers, lobbyists and the politicians who are constantly adding more laws to fix the interpretations in the old laws creating a complex mass of contradictory information. — Daniel Greenfield
Sunday, August 02, 2015 –

The New Jersey Constitution, adopted on July 2, 1776, which was evidently written at the time of the founding of the United States of America states the following:



1. The powers of the government shall be divided among three distinct branches, the legislative, executive, and judicial. No person or persons belonging to or constituting one branch shall exercise any of the powers properly belonging to either of the others, except as expressly provided in this Constitution.

Noticeably: While 0.6 percent of the U.S. adult population are lawyers, 41 percent of the 113th Congress are. Members of Congress are sixty-eight times as likely as all American adults to have practiced law. – State of the Congress 2013 – Measure of America … of America. Here the statistic demonstrates that: “Lawyers are represented in Congress 68.3 times greater than there representation in the general population.”

One last bit of information. The following Founders of America were lawyers:
John Adams – Thomas Jefferson – James Monroe – John Quincy Adams.

For those that will argue that this is evidence that lawyers can be president – I present the fact that these great men were lawyers in the British Empire and so as leaders of the Revolution they forever and a day gave up the right to practice law in the greatest empire of the time in order to establish the Separation of Powers Clause they wrote and voted on which is now contained, and being decimated, within the US Constitution and of course that precipitated the reiteration in all of the States Constitutions.

Further, these men were intent as lawyers to establish the Constitution as the Supreme Law of the Land and the Statutes to implement it.

It is a stark difference to the current lawyers that are dedicated to the destruction of the Constitutions, ergo Liberty and freedom, as evidenced by Obamcare and the other villainous and unconstitutional laws and mandates now tyrannically afflicting the American People.

Please note that I am not accusing all of the lawyers with this self-evident lack of Honor, in particular there are four of the seven candidates herein I have a great deal of respect and hope for.

I hope that this – Pierces The Prevarication Voodoo Barrier for you.

I rest my case.

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply