INTRODUCTION TO THE CONSTITUTION

The American Form of Government

Libertarian, Michael Badnarik teaches a class on the Constitution. If you like Ron Paul and follow his message of freedom, this is a MUST WATCH!!! Most of what you think you know about the United States is wrong. Think you own your Car? Think its your money? Why do we have to register your car and get plates? Think you own Your property? He explains the differences between rights and privileges.

01 Badnarik Constitution Class

02 Badnarik Constitution Class

03 Badnarik Constitution Class

04 Badnarik Constitution Class

05 Badnarik Constitution Class

06 Badnarik Constitution Class

07 Badnarik Constitution Class

Badnarik 1st Amendment pt.1

Badnarik 1st Amendment pt.2

Badnarik 2nd Amendment

Badnarik 3rd Amendment

Badnarik 4th Amendment

Badnarik 5th Amendment pt.1

Badnarik 5th Amendment pt.2

Badnarik 6th Amendment pt.1

Badnarik 6th Amendment pt.2

Badnarik 7th Amendment

Badnarik 8th Amendment

Badnarik 9th Amendment

Badnarik 10th Amendment

Rattling the Cages


Constitutional Law by Carl Miller.pdf

Carl Miller

Constitution Carl Miller 1 of 3

Constitution Carl Miller 2 of 3

Constitution Carl Miller 3 of 3


Please support our endeavor, help keep NLA on the web,
Donate $5.00 or more a month, and become a Premier Member, Thank you.

Comments

Lairm4you's picture

I ask that because I like in person learning for I do better.  

Lairm4you's picture

Is there going to be a constitution class ever in like Pendleton Oregon 97801?  It would be cool to have one if possible or have it in Milton Freewater Oregon.  I would for sure attend.  I'm trying to get my hands on the pocket book of the constitution.  

sam1ee's picture

Any one that has watched this video... Has any one else besides me tried to look up the Supreme Court cases or the USC 18 references that Carl Miller used? Carl Miller said that if we are to take this seriously... we need to do this. Now I ask, Did Carl Miller lie to us, mislead us, or intentionally check to see if we are doing this?
Carl quotes 18 U.S. Code § 2381 at 23:35, but he isn't quoting it.
It says, "Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States."
The one he is actually quoting is 18 U.S. Code § 241
"If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; or
 
If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises of another, with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so secured—
 
They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death."
 
I think we need to pay attention and read the actual laws and Supreme Court cases... So we can actually stand on solid ground when we are defending the US Constitution.

Napalm's picture

I believe Carl Miller was citing older laws.  Most of the cites he reads in the Am. Jurisprudence volumes have been changed.  These kind of things happen often when lawyers get wind of an argument that really hurts their conspiratorial efforts.  Think Black's Law 4th vs. 5th Edition, right?  In 18 USC 2381, they had to get rid of the death penalty.  Why wouldn't they be scrambling to get rid of the possibility of being defined in court as someone who needs to suffer the death penalty for treason?But yeah, I found issue when I go to read US v Bishop 412 US 346, which he says defines willfulness as, "an evil motive or intent to avoid a known duty or task under the law with immoral certainty."  I can't find that anywhere.  Other than that, I'd say everything else Carl says is right on at least at the time.

Fourth Branch's picture

President Trump's Executive Order regarding Immigration is premised on the Immigration and Nationality Act(INA). He is enforcing the Law.  Last week a three Judge Panel ruled against President Trump enforcing the Law and in doing so attempted to block enforcing the law. Their decision was politically motivated, not based on the Law and as such the decision itself is unconstitutional and illegal.
 
Article VI II states the U.S. Constitution, and all Laws made in pursuance thereof shall be the supreme Law of the land. Clause III requires Officials in both of the United States and of the several States shall be bound by oath or affirmation to support this Constitution.
 
Article I Section VIII Clause IV delegates to Congress the power to establish a uniform rule of naturalization. Clause XVIII delegates to Congress the power to make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing enumerated Poweers and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.
 
The INA is premised on Article VI Clause II and Article I Section VIII Cause XVIII. Congress, thorugh the INA, vested the power to enforce the INA with the Executive branch. thereofer Preisdent Trump was not violating any laws.
 
The Judges by their actions did violate all the above mentioned provisions. Consequenlty they acted in bad behavior with their ruling. They are subject to removal from the Bench through impeachment. Article I Section III Clause I gives the House of Representatives the Power to initiate Impeachment proceedings and as stated by Alexander Hamilton in Federalist Paper #66.
 
Amendment I in the Bill of Rights gives the People the unalienable right to petition the Government for a redress of Grievances There is a petition being circulated for such a purpose in lieu of the above mentioned facts. Exercise your unlaienable Right and let your voice be heard by clicking on the link below to sign a Petition calling for the House of Representatives to initiate Impeachment proceedings against the three Judges on the 9th Circuit who made the unconstitutional ruling.
https://www.change.org/p/tell-u-s-house-of-representatives-impeach-9th-u...

Aresposito55's picture

Finished both courses. Whats next to learn. I want more.

earthgeek's picture

http://usuncut.com/news/united-nations-just-made-major-announcement-dako...

NEWS
The United Nations just made a major announcement on the Dakota Access Pipeline
 | October 28, 2016

71435
SHARES
FacebookTwitter

 

North Dakota is moving forward with construction of its DAPL pipeline despite a representative from the United Nations explicitly calling on the United States to halt it.
Victoria Tauli-Corpus, the UN Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples, issued a press release last September that was officially issued by the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) in defense of the Sioux Tribe and its allies:

“The tribe was denied access to information and excluded from consultations at the planning stage of the project and environmental assessments failed to disclose the presence and proximity of the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation.
“The United States should, in accordance with its commitment to implement the Declaration on the Rights on Indigenous Peoples, consult with the affected communities in good faith and ensure their free, and informed consent prior to the approval of any project affecting their lands, particularly in connection with extractive resource industries.
“I urge the United States Government to undertake a thorough review of its compliance with international standards regarding the obligation to consult with indigenous peoples and obtain their free and informed consent. The statutory framework should be amended to include provisions to that effect and it is important that the US Environmental Protection Agency and the US Advisory Council on Historic Preservation participate in the review of legislation.”

Tauli-Corpus also said the US should defend those protesting the construction of the four-state-long pipeline, saying “The US authorities should fully protect and facilitate the right to freedom of peaceful assembly of indigenous peoples, which plays a key role in empowering their ability to claim other rights.”
Dozens of peaceful protesters were arrested by heavily armed police in riot gear yesterday, with officers deploying potentially ear-damaging sonic cannons in an effort to get the crowds to disperse. In one other instance, improperly licensed mercenaries working for the pipelinedeployed attack dogs on the protesters.
Special Rapporteurs are appointed by the UN Human Rights Council and are tasked to point out human rights concerns as they develop around the world. While these experts are not official UN staff, their work can lead to the UN taking a greater interest in a developing human rights situation.
Nathan Wellman 

Bradley Amendment's picture

Is the CONSTITUTIONAL CLASS on CD?

Bradley Amendment's picture

Are De FACTO Child support Guidelines CONSTITUTIONAL? Are JUDGE acting as DE FACTO PROSECUTORS LEGAL?

kingdolan77's picture

I have certified copies of all 6 of Alabama's constitutions

MTOakey's picture

Incredible course and subject matter !!!
I have scoured the interwebs and have only been able to find two places where one can READ the manuscript Badnarik mentions at 29:50, "U.S.of A. the Republic is the house that no one lives in" because the site he mentions is no longer running. AND the site listed in the "About info" above is also incorrect... it is now www.nationallibertyalliance.org
So, what I have done is recompiled the original document he mentions here, the entire book, and created a .pdf document for download which can be read by all readers and Kindle and can be printed, 2up, both sides = 15 sheets of 8.5x11 folded in half.
Here is my link: http://1drv.ms/UFUqV0
Educate yourself & Enjoy!
NLA may make the document available directly also...

Allan Hampton's picture

Everything mentioned in this article about what government is doing is correct and all of it is either unconstitutional or a usurpation of power.

The federal government cannot amend the Constitution.

The Declaration of Independence has no bearing on, or value to, the Constitution, nor on Rights, nor on Citizen's Duty in Citizenship.

The 14th Amendment is unconstitutional, if not on the words written in the 14th, then on Supreme Court decisions, and federal laws under the 14th.

I didn't see a mention of "Pursuance thereof" of Article VI, Clause 2. Nor did I see mention of Marbury v. Madison; which bears out Pursuance thereof.

Citizen's and the Supreme court do not have the power to legislate.

Citizens only Constitutional input, of force, into the federal government is via the ballot box, to elect, or not reelect Incumbent, Representatives of the House in Congress every two years.

Citizen's have the exclusive Right to use the power of the ballot and jury boxes.

U.S. government usurpation "continues" only with the complicity of the House in Congress, House usurpation (corruption) "continues" only with the complicity of citizen Voters.

All of U.S. citizens Rights did not come from God.

The original Constitution delegated the federal government no power regarding Citizens, Freedom, Rights, and Religion.