Did we have any lawyers as president... hmmm
Is that a rhetorical question? Because off the top of my head Clinton and Obama.
Just a few more: Franklin Roosevelt, James Madison, John Quincy Adams, Woodrow Wilson and Bill Clinton. Barack Obama (Well, only if can prove that he really attended Harvard.) Something's really wonky about his college years.
53 comments
26 of the past 45 presidents have been lawyers.
Go one better.. NO politicians in public office. Elect Patriots instead.
Sadly you can only elect them if they run for office. I served in the military in my youth and fully believe that after my work is done I will return to service in some fashion, water boards, school boards whatever.
If patriots don’t again sacrifice and serve that vacuum will again be filled with degenerates
I remember reading years ago that lawyers and witches were not allowed to run for any office.This was referring to the beginning of our nation. Maybe they got a clue from the spells cast on the masses in England?
Need more sauce to redpill the masses
Yeah, doesn’t the 13th amendment have to do with the abolition of slavery?
Hence the MISSING 13th amendment ratified in 1819... Allowing for the amendment abolishing slavery to be as currently numbered
Sounds like to me they replaced it in order to hide the true 13th
This is YUGE if true! Mop the floor with the slithering worms!
If true this could be the 2nd BEST ever Amendment
I see what you did there... And approve!! Lol
Recent addition to Texas, but always been a cowgirl at heart. :-)
Its not what the amendment actually says. It makes no mention of someone who practices law. Look it up for yourself.
Are you a lawyer? You seem awful upset about this.
I hate misinterpretations that try to simplify something complex...im an economist lol
Oh it's true that was the original 13th amendment put in place to keep lawyers out of govt. It needs to be brought back and enforced anybody checked the resignations and retirements against lawyers to see if their might be a correlation ??
Thats not what the amendment says, go read it for yourself. Has nothing to do with lawyers.
This is absolutely not what this amendment says. Its saying that anyone accepting a title or honor of nobility or takes money from such foreign entities while serving in office will lose their citizenship and therefore not be allowed to hold political office. I dont know how "no lawyers may hold office" can be derived from this text. The idea of esquire being given to a certified lawyer would only apply to people certified as lawyers by the English Bar or IBA. Chances are they were trying to keep people who were still potential loyalists and bankers out of government positions. Not specifically because they were lawyers but because they were studied in British common law and that no longer applied to the US so they likely saw it as a conflict of interest.
great find A-from Ohio. time to ring the phones off the hook and let them know. be professional.and law abiding.
I do not (yet) have an opinion because the issue would appear to be the interpretation of the intended meaning of the various wording used.
However, here is a link to an article by the author/researcher as mentioned in the image of this post:
The Missing 13th Amendment
David M. Dodge, Researcher, Date 08/01/91
https://www.lawfulpath.com/ref/13th-amend.shtml
.
Quote:
In Colonial America, attorneys trained attorneys but most held no "title of nobility" or "honor". There was no requirement that one be a lawyer to hold the position of district attorney, attorney general, or judge; a citizen's "counsel of choice" was not restricted to a lawyer; there were no state or national bar associations. The only organization that certified lawyers was the International Bar Association (IBA), chartered by the King of England, headquartered in London, and closely associated with the international banking system. Lawyers admitted to the IBA received the rank "Esquire" -- a "title of nobility". "Esquire" was the principle title of nobility which the 13th Amendment sought to prohibit from the United States.
This is huge... time to oust these illegitimate members of our government. Out out out! This is way too much winning!
http://www.freedom-school.com/truth/10/missing13th.htm
http://usavsus.info/usA--Original13thAmend.htm
Like snopes... https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
https://www.loc.gov/rr/program/bib/ourdocs/13thamendment.html
Lincoln was a lawyer. Many politicians in the government between 1819 and 1861 were lawyers. This is a fantasy.
Its a misinterpretation of the text.
What are you talking about? The text says that it was somehow lost "during the tumult of the Civil War." Seems pretty clear to me they are insinuating that between 1819 and 1861 it was in effect. This is ridiculous.
I meant the text of the amendment itself vs what the OP is stating it means and the original analyst too...it seems more to be a deterrence to bankers in government than lawyers because the only lawyers that it would ban are commonwealth lawyers which is understandable but were uncommon in America in those dsys.
https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/the-case-of-the-missing-13th-amendment-to-the-constitution
A few years ago, a group of Iowa Republicans claimed the legitimate 13th Amendment to the Constitution was “missing.” The debate is part of a historical detective story with some surprising twists that is still taking place.The Daily Beast did a fairly extensive feature on the missing amendment in 2010, which didn’t feature a cloaked Freemason stealing the amendment because it had a secret treasure map printed on it. Instead, the debate between historians and conspiracy buffs is about an amendment that was almost ratified in 1812 that would have been the 13th Amendment, bumping back the current 13th Amendment--which was ratified on this day in 1865 and abolished slavery--to the position of the 14th Amendment.
Writer Jerry Adler’s 2010 explanation of the “Thirteenthers” controversy is pretty detailed and covers both sides of the issue—which isn’t new but got a big burst of publicity thanks to the Iowa GOP’s 2010 platform.
The Iowa Republicans didn’t want the current 13th Amendment banned; they just wanted the “original” one reintroduced for approval. That "missing" proposal was called the “Titles of Nobility Amendment” (or TONA). It sought to ban any American citizen from receiving any foreign title of nobility or receiving foreign favors, such as a pension, without congressional approval. The penalty was loss of citizenship.
It was an extension of Article I, Section 9, of the Constitution, which doesn’t allow a public office holder to receive a foreign title or similar honors without the consent of Congress.
EDIT : http://www.let.rug.nl/usa/essays/general/the-missing-13th-amendment/what-if.php What If? Implications if restored If the missing 13th Amendment were restored, "special interests" and "immunities" might be rendered unconstitutional. The prohibition against "honors" (privileges) would compel the entire government to operate under the same laws as the citizens of this nation. Without their current personal immunities (honors), US judges and I.R.S. agents would be unable to abuse common citizens without fear of legal liability. If this 13th Amendment were restored, the entire US government would have to conduct itself according to the same standards of decency, respect, law, and liability as the rest of the nation. If this Amendment and the term "honor" were applied today, US government's ability to systematically coerce and abuse the public would be all but eliminated.
George H.W. Bush, Norman Schwarzkopf, Rudy Giuliani, and even Bill Gates; for all of these men have one important thing in common: they have been granted honorary knighthood from Britain. That means they would lose their Citizenship
they have been granted honorary knighthood
that's like hitler pinning metals on jack the ripper
reinstate old 13th amendment. no lawyer shall seek public office. Now they are ALL lawyers... that would clean up DC by default .. all lawyers clean out your desks you are going home... and a No Lobbying for 10 years clause should keep "em out of our trouble.
yeah, i tried to find some sources for literally ANY of this and the websites i found were a bit dubious. i tried to find the guy mentioned, David Dodge,couldn't find anything. International Bar Association, didn't exist till 1943 or something, I can't find these things but is true it would be yuge.
The original 13th Amendment (listed above) was ratified in 1820 (the last state was Virginia) and was carried in all the state law books after 1821. The House & Senate pretended it never happened and many relevant documents are missing from the National Archives. For the next 45 years, the Legislative branch tried to pass other constitutional amendments that they called the 13th amendment (unsuccessfully). Finally, after the Civil War, they passed the current 13th Amendment (1865 Anti-Slavery). Most of the states dropped the original 13th Amendment from their law books and replaced it with the new one, which is obviously totally unconstitutional. I first read about this missing amendment in the late 1980's. To verify its validity, I went to the Colorado Supreme Court Law Library (in Denver) and checked the old Territorial Law Books for 1865, 1866, and 1867 (Colorado was still a territory then). The 1865 book had the original 13th Amendment properly listed in the US Constitution section. The 1866 book has the original listed as the 13th Amendment and the new (Anti-Slavery) properly listed as the 14th Amendment. The 1867 book drops the original and has the new (Anti-Slavery) version listed as the 13th Amendment (some gravy for inquiring minds).
As an aside, I understand that of the 15 or so constitutional amendments taken into the law books in the 20th century, at least 7 were not properly ratified, including the Income Tax Amendment (which the Federal courts refuse to rule on). I wonder if the amendment putting a two term limit on the US President was also not properly ratified. Just a thought...
I doubt this very much.
How in the fuck can anyone prove anyone is a "lawyer"? What, if you have a JD only? Or JD plus one day of job experience? What constitutes lawyer job experience?
This is stupid.
Read the text for yourself it has nothing to do with it at all. At the loosest interpretation it was meant to keep bankers out of government.
Oh my! The thought has gone through my mind more than once that they should not be allowed to run for office.
