ENEMIES AGAIN! PART 2
by Walter Giddings
August 28, 2022
Greetings Kindred and fellow sheep and outright rescues of the Great I Am, God of our Fathers through the shed blood of Jesus Christ our Kindred Redeemer. Who in their right mind would ever desire to become enemies of Jesus Christ, the Righteous?
Luke 19:27 But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither and slay them before me.
“Slay them before me.” Is this the Second Coming? Has the time of the Lamb ended? Does Jesus Christ come as the greatest warrior and terrorist in the History of this planet to judge the wicked? Is covenantbreaking wickedness? Who are the covenantbreakers? Were our forefathers who framed the Republic covenantbreakers or are we, generations later, the covenantbreakers? Has Jesus Christ the Righteous been dethroned as the King of America? Are the Lights of the Republic still on, but hardly anybody is home? Can someone or some group enter upon this land and destroy The Covenant of Perpetual Union who were never party to it? Or do those who were never parties have to trick us into abandoning The Covenant of Perpetual Union? Do we give tacit acquiescence to their scheme?
Psalms 94:20 Shall the throne of iniquity have fellowship with thee, which frameth mischief by a law?
Has “the throne of iniquity” gained fellowship with us? How possible is it for the throne of iniquity to have fellowship with us? Do sheep think wolves in sheep’s clothing are pastors? Do sheep think wolves in sheep’s clothing are shepherds? Who are the wolves? Are wolves better shepherds than men?
Who within the sound of my voice or within sight of the text of this message, has concluded that our forefathers who framed the Republic were better Christians than we ever thought to be? Is that really true? Were our forefathers who framed the Republic better Christians than we ever thought to be? Does that question wound American pride?! Is it easy for us to take a ride on pride?
Our 1st lesson, The Birth of America, was the 1st in the series of lessons entitled The History of We the People. I said that we would tell you about the 2nd time we were declared to be the “enemies of the state”.
We have had a very storied History! The Congress of the Republic lost its quorum and brother began killing brother at the outset of the not-so-civil Civil War.
As secessions of the confederate states multiplied around the Inauguration of Abraham Lincoln, the Congress of the Republic lost its quorum and the Republic ceased to function! Did God rescue us from killing each other? Did God rescue us from killing each other in 1865? President Lincoln was assassinated. President Garfield, the only preaching pastor elected President of the United States of America, was assassinated 1881. President William McKinley was assassinated in the beginning the 20th Century.
In 1913 the enemies of our God and country enacted a windfall of tyrannical measures: the 16th Amendment, the 17th Amendment, and the Federal Reserve Act.
Patient study of these events will reveal the 16th and 17th Amendments to be ratifications by fiat, and the Federal Reserve Act to be enactment by fiat! The effect of the 14th, 15th, 16th and 17th Amendments and the Federal Reserve Act was to radically loosen the chains binding our elected federal officials to specific performance on behalf of We the People. The Constitution and first 13 Amendments reserved power to us. With two exceptions, the remaining Amendments were aggressive progressive grants of power to what became a much more centralized national government. Where before the federal government served the states under The Contract of Government to represent the States of America on the international stage to all the other countries of the world, the States of America disunited by The War Against the States became servants to a centralizing federal government.
Question: Does a righteous father chastise his own children for obeying him? Do children honor their father and mother by obeying them?
Even so, does our Heavenly Father bless us, his sons and daughters, when we obey Him? When we become Covenantbreakers, breaking the American Covenant of Perpetual Union, does the God of our fathers become increasingly desperate to gain our attention, as our manners, increasingly with each passing year, “become corrupt and vicious” [Benjamin Franklin]? Did our forefathers who framed the Republic cut the American Covenant of Perpetual Union with the God of the Bible to “guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government”? [Article IV, Section 4, the Constitution for the United States of America].
“I have so much faith in the general government of the world by Providence that I can hardly conceive a transaction of such momentous importance [as the framing of the Constitution] ...should be suffered to pass without being in some degree influenced, guided, and governed by that ... beneficent Ruler in whom all inferior Spirits live and move and have their being.” --- Benjamin Franklin
Did Benjamin Franklin believe God intervenes in the affairs of Adam? Indeed, if the serpent had every right to intervene in the Garden and beguile Eve, would Our Heavenly Father have every right to intervene in the affairs of Adam? Is the God of our fathers a God of equity and jurisprudence?
Should we confess our sin and the sin of our fathers, the sin of breaking the American Covenant of Perpetual Union? Without that confession will we continue failing to enter into repentance before our righteous Heavenly Father?
What kind of measures would the God of our fathers enact to bring us home again to seek forgiveness and pardon for our covenantbreaking?
Would our Heavenly Father permit His enemies, and the enemies of our country to become the rod of our correction to the end that we might once again become Covenant keepers? What might God permit His enemies to do?
Does it seem strange to a world of unbelief that God would use His enemies to correct His wayward children? Is Lucifer the enemy of God and God’s children? Does God make full use of that rebel angel as the chief prosecutor in the Court of Heaven? Does Lucifer’s title of Satan mean adversary? Are court proceedings adversarial proceedings? Are court cases titled as adversarial proceedings? Take for example Roe versus Wade! Or God versus Job! Or God versus Lucifer.
Does Revelation prophesy that God will execute sentence upon Lucifer?
Revelation 12:10 And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is castdown, which accused them before our God day and night.
“The accuser of our brethren.” Does God use Lucifer as chief prosecutor?
What might God do in response to The Posterity wallowing in unrepentant Covenantbreaking? Would the God of our fathers place us under arrest for breaking the American Covenant of Perpetual Union? Are The Posterity “in ward”, awaiting trial on charges of breaking the American Covenant of Perpetual Union?
What happened after 1913? When Congress reconvened in 1914, they found the Federal Reserve Act enacted on the signatures of Senate leadership and President Woodrow Wilson when Congress had left for Christmas worship! With each passing year , Congress “progressively” enacted, piece by piece, amendments to the Federal Reserve Act consisting of provisions deleted in 1913 by the House of Representatives to make the Act more palatable to their constituents.
In 1916, Wilson’s campaign pledge not to involve America “in a foreign war” resulted in his reelection. After his inauguration, Wilson urged Congress for a declaration of war! Congress enacted, October 6, 1917, the Trading with the Enemy Act. Few of its provisions seemed unusual. After all, America was in a foreign war … a world war! The American soldier’s mission commanded him to make the world safefor “democracy”. Is democracy a trojan horse term, signifying an abandoned Republic, whose lights are on, but with hardly anybody Home?
The language of the Trading with the Enemy Act began with this title: “An Act to define, regulate, and punish trading with the enemy, and for other purposes.”
The period of direct involvement of U.S. Armed Forces in World War I ran from April 1917 until November 11, 1918. Congress enacted the Trading with the Enemy Act October 6, 1917. Senate Report 93-549, Emergency Powers Statutes, 93rd Congress, November 19, 1973.
In order to punish Trading with the Enemy, the Act must define who our enemies are ! How did The Congress of World War I choose to define the enemy ? In Section 2, Subdivision (c), of the Act, there appears this exclusion: “other than citizens of the United States.”
This exclusion is mentioned twice on the same page, in the middle, and at the bottom. The Act includes a specific exclusion for citizens of the United States twice. Why did the World War I Congress choose to define the enemies of the United States by exclusion? Was it too difficult to identify the enemies and all caught assisting them?
Does the power to exclude also include the power to include? Who sees a potential problem here? Did the World War I Congress intend to set some sort of precedent that could be used later? Could that Congress have chosen to use the language of precise inclusion and avoid the language of exclusion?
Shall we take a look at the 2nd example of exclusion in the Act? Section 5(b) of the 1917 Trading with the Enemy Act states:
“That the President may investigate, regulate, or prohibit, under such rules and regulations as he may prescribe, by means of licenses or otherwise, any transactions in foreign exchange, export or earmarkings of gold or silver coin or bullion or currency, transfer of credit in any form (other than credits relating solely to transactions to be executed wholly within the United States)”.
Do we see that citizens, and the transactions of citizens made wholly within the United States, were specifically excluded from the War Powers granted by this Act to the President? Does the power to exclude include the power to include? Did the World War I Congress intend to set some kind of precedent for future use?
From where do the War Powers of Congress source? Turn to Article I, Section 8, Clause 11 in the Constitution:
[The Congress shall have Power ...} To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;
Is this the War Powers clause of the Constitution? Does the power to declare war include the power to declare who the enemy or enemies are?
In 1921 Chief Justice Hughes took judicial notice that the Trading with the Enemy Act of October 6, 1917 remained on the statute books with Congress declining to repeal that War Provision :
“The Trading with the Enemy Act, originally and as amended, is strictly a war measure, and finds its sanction in the provision empowering Congress ‘to declare war, and grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water’ Const. Art. I, Sect. 8, cl. 11.” Stoehr v. Wallace. S.Ct., 1921., page 241.
On Saturday, March 4, 1933, Franklin Delano Roosevelt was sworn in as President for his first of 4 Terms. In his first inaugural address FDR preached martial rule:“If I read the temper of our people correctly, we now realize as we have never before, our interdependence on each other; that we cannot merely take, but we must give as well; that if we are to go forward we must move as a trained and loyal army willing to sacrifice for the good of a common discipline, because without such discipline, no progress is made, no leadership becomes effective.”
Does the Chinese Communist Party [CCP] have all citizens “sacrifice for the good of a common discipline”? Do the invisible elites and the visible rulers they put forth “sacrifice for the good of a common discipline”, or just the Peons? Without “our interdependence on each other” can Socialism to Communism thrive? Is “a trained and loyal army” a euphemism for “a trained and loyal” Navy out on the high seas under Admiralty Jurisdiction enforcing Maritime Law? Did our forefathers who framed the Republic complain that King George extended over them “an unwarrantable jurisdiction”? “No progress is made.” Without Socialism to Communism does progressivism die a welcome death? Without Socialism to Communism can tyrannical leadership become effective? In the 20th Century did our rulers replace the Ten Commandments with the Ten Planks of the Communist Manifesto? Did FDR “read the temper of our people” correctly?
“We are, I know, ready and willing to submit our lives and property to such discipline because it makes possible a leadership which aims at a larger good.”
“Submit our lives and property to such discipline” [Martial Rule]?
“ ... the larger purposes will bind upon us all as a sacred obligation with a unity of duty hitherto evoked only in time of armed strife.”
“Armed strife”?!! Is “armed strife” war? Did FDR invoke War Powers?
“ .. I assume unhesitatingly the leadership of this great army of our people, dedicated to a disciplined attack upon our common problems.
“This great army of our people.” Did FDR institute under the national emergency Martial Rule? Does the gold fringed military flag of the President fly in every summary court martial courtroom in every county of our land?
“ ... in the event that the national emergency is still critical, I shall not evade the clear course of duty that will then confront me.
I shall then ask Congress for the one remaining instrument to meet the crisis --- broad executive power to wage a war against the emergency as great as the power that would be given me if we were in fact invaded by a foreign foe.” Documents of American History. Edited by Henry Steele Commager, Columbia University. New York: F. S. Crofts & Co., 1944. CROFTS AMERICAN HISTORY SERIES. Dixon Ryan Fox, General Editor.
The next day, on the Sabbath, March 5, 1933, President Roosevelt issued Proclamation 2038, calling for an extraordinary special session of Congress, on Thursday March 9th 12 Noon. At that extraordinary session, FDR presented a bill; an Act to provide for relief in the existing national emergency in banking and for other purposes.
“Be it enacted by the Senate and the House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the Congress hereby declares that a serious emergency exists and that it is imperatively necessary speedily to put into effect remedies of uniform national application.”
Was the Rule of Necessity required to enact this legislation? Does a maxim in the Common Law read “Necessity knows no law”?
The Act of March 9, 1933 states in Title 1, Section 1:
“The actions, regulations, rules, licenses, orders and proclamations heretofore or hereafter taken, promulgated, made, or issued by the President of the United States or the Secretary of the Treasury since March the 4th, 1933, pursuant to the authority conferred by subdivision (b) of Section 5 of the Act of October 6, 1917, as amended, are hereby approved and confirmed.”
The Act of March 9, 1933, Chapter 1, Title 1, Section 48, Statute 1, 12 USC 95 (b)!!!
“Heretofore or hereafter taken, promulgated, made or issued.” Does “heretofore” mean the President exercised powers before they were legislated? Quo Warranto, by what authority? Does “or hereafter” mean preapproved and preconfirmed?!!
The Act reads “pursuant to the authority conferred by subdivision (b) of Section 5 of the Act of October 6, 1917, as amended”. Is that the Trading with the Enemy Act? Did the Act of March 9, 1933 amend subdivision (b) of Section 5 of the Act of October 6, 1917, the Trading with the Enemy Act? Do we recall Section 5 (b) in 1917 contained an important exclusion?
“other than credits relating solely to transactions to be executed wholly within the United States.”
Section 2 of The Act of March 9, 1933 reads:
“Subdivision (b) of Section 5 of the Act of October 6, 1917 (40 Stat L. 411), as amended, is hereby amended to read as follows,
“During time of war or during any other period of national emergency declared by the President, the President may, through any agency that he may designate, or otherwise, investigate, regulate, or prohibit, under such rules and regulations as he may prescribe, by means of licenses or otherwise, any transactions in foreign exchange, transfers of credit between or payments by banking institutions as defined by the President and export, hoarding, melting, or earmarkings of gold or silver coin or bullion, or currency, by any person within the United States or anyplace subject to the jurisdiction thereof. The Act of March 9, 1933, Section 2.
Do we see the phrase that excluded wholly domestic transactions is gone?! It is replaced by the phrase, “by any person within the United States or anyplace subject to the jurisdiction thereof”. With the inclusion of domestic transactions and U. S. citizens into the Trading with the Enemy Act, is the same thing done that King George did to his English citizens in the colonies? Enemies again!
Does anything escape God’s notice? Is God omniscient (meaning all-knowing)? What was God doing with all of this? Without substance, without specie, without gold and silver coin, are we transacting, occupying, with the mammon of unrighteousness?
11 If therefore ye have not been faithful in the unrighteous mammon, who will commit to your trust the true riches?
12 And if ye have not been faithful in that which is another man’s, who shall give you that which is your own.
Is it true? In order for us to be “faithful in the unrighteous mammon”, does the “unrighteous mammon” have to exist?
Do we have a second witness that we have lived all our lives as enemies of the state? In the first session of the 93rd Congress, on November 19, 1973, the Senate Special Committee on the Termination of the National Emergency published Senate Report No. 93-549. The Title of that Report reads:
EMERGENCY POWERS STATUTES:
Provisions of Federal Law
Now in effect delegating to the Executive Extraordinary Authority in Time of National Emergency
November 19, 1973---Ordered to be printed
Mr. Mathias (for Mr. Church) as co-chairman of the Special Committee in the Termination of the National Emergency submitted the following:
(Pursuant to S. Res. 9, 93d Congress )
Senate Report 93-549 begins with the Introduction, Section A, A Brief Historical Sketch of the Origins of Emergency Powers Now in Force:
“A majority of the people of the United States have lived all of their lives under emergency rule. For 40 years, freedoms and governmental procedures guaranteed by the Constitution have, in varying degrees, been abridged by laws brought into force by states of national emergency.”
“For 40 years”. Senate Report 93-549 is a GPO Publication of 1973. Where does 40 years before that place us? 1933!!
“ .. And, in the United States, actions taken by the Government in times of great crises have --- from, at least, the Civil War---in important ways shaped the present phenomenon of a permanent state of national emergency.”
“From, at least, the Civil War”!! “A permanent state of national emergency”!! Who here has ever heard of this?
“To what extent the founding Fathers adhered to this view of the executive role in emergencies is a much disputed issue.” Senate Report 93-549 page 2.
The Senate Report gives the 2nd witness to FDR’s initial actions in office, March 1933: “In his first important official act, Roosevelt proclaimed a National Bank Holiday on the basis of the 1917 Trading with the Enemy Act--- itself a wartime delegation of power.”
New Deal Historian William E. Leuchtenburg wrote: “After only 38 minutes debate, the House passed the administration’s banking bill, sight unseen. Ibid., page 4.
Who knew?! Enemies again!
“The Trading with the Enemy Act had, however, been specifically designed by its originators to meet only wartime exigencies. By employing it to meet the demands of the depression, Roosevelt greatly extended the concept of ‘emergencies’ to which expansion of executive powers might be applied. .. In time of crisis the President should utilize any statutory authority readily at hand, regardless of its original purposes, with the firm expectation of ex post facto congressional concurrence.” Senate Report 93-549, 1973. Page 5.
“Regardless of its original purposes”?!! “With the firm expectation of ex post facto congressional concurrence”?!!
“No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.” Article I, Section 9, clause 3. The Constitution.
With respect to Emergency Power, WHY does Senate Report 93-549 urge whoever is President to “blab it and grab it”?! Did Congress enact law? Or is this public policy? When, or how, did we go from law to public policy?
Who among us has studied this in American History? In graduate School, Ph.D., college, high school, grammar school? Or how about home school? Does home school include courses on basic principles of our law? Does home school teach the meaning of law and public policy and how to distinguish between the two? Why not? Does home school teach the meaning of De Jure and de facto and how to distinguish between the two? Why not?!!
“Because Congress and the public are unaware of the extent of emergency powers, there has never been any notable congressional or public objection made to this state of affairs. Nor have the courts imposed significant limitations.” ...
Did Senate Report 93-549, in 1973 make some in Congress aware? What was done?
“ .. Too few are aware of the existence of emergency powers and their extent, and the problem has never been squarely faced.” Senate Report 93-549, 1973. Page 6.
How do U.S. citizens fare today? Are they still enemies? Do those who cross the southern border in direct violation of federal statutes get treated better than U. S. citizens? Would the invaders be stupid to become U. S. citizens? Are they here to replace us and our forefathers who left the Republic to become U. S. Citizens under the 14th Amendment? Do public policy statutes apply only to U. S. citizens? Does the Common Law apply only to citizens within The Republic?
Why has the covenant God of Israel judged U. S. citizens? Is The Great I Am God of the Bible chastising us because we have disobeyed Him?!! On the first weekend after the U. S. Supreme Court overruled Roe v Wade and turned matters back to the States, two crowds of protestors and demonstrators surrounded the State House in Indianapolis. The demonstrators, vastly outnumbered, praised our heavenly Father for giving us the opportunity to end baby murder in Indiana. The protestors chanted “We want Molech!” repeatedly.
Who is Molech? The Word of God calls Molech the abomination of the Ammonites. He is a wicked angel, a false god. The worship of Molech commands the sacrifice of sons and daughters to him. Is there anything new under the sun?
2 Kings 23:10 And he defiled Topheth, which is in the valley of the children of Hinnom, that no man might make his son or his daughter to pass through the fire to Molech.
Who is “he”? One of the greatest revivals for God’s people in Israel occurred when King Josiah ruled the House of Judah. He put a halt to baby murder! May the God of our fathers take away also our reproach!
Earlier, I posed a question: Would the God of our fathers place us under arrest for continuing as 14th Amendment U. S. citizen covenantbreakers ? Are we willing to repent of our covenantbreaking and separate ourselves from Mystery Babylon? Are we willing to cease from partaking of her sins that we receive not of her plagues? Do we long with hearts full of simmering zeal to return to our forefather’s Covenant of Perpetual Union as constitutional citizens under the Republic where Jesus Christ is still the King of America and the President executes righteous laws instead of public policy until our Savior returns? Have we, as U. S. citizens, seen that we are in ward awaiting trial for breaking the Covenant of Perpetual Union?
Does our Heavenly Father pass laws against repentance? Do the enemies of the God of our salvation have an incessant, nagging, irrepressible fear that God’s family on Earth will in their captivity and tribulation go to their knees in deep contrition and REPENT?! Would the seniors among our God’s enemies anticipate that very possibility? Are they better students of HIStory than the sheep are? Do the wicked want to risk being prosecuted for treason and face death or exile? Is this 14th Amendment U. S. Citizen scheme based entirely on our tacit acquiescence? In how many legal entanglements have we, in our ignorance, bound ourselves?
What will happen to us if we ignore our great fault ? Does covenantbreaking fill the Covenant God of Israel with indignation and kindle His wrath?
23 I lifted up mine hand unto them also in the wilderness, that I would scatter them among the heathen, and disperse them through the countries;
24 Because they had not executed my judgments, but had despised my statutes, and had polluted my sabbaths, and their eyes were after their fathers’ idols.
25 Wherefore I gave them also statutes that were not good, and judgments whereby they should not live;
26 And I polluted them in their own gifts in that they caused to pass through the fire all that openeth the womb, that I might make them desolate, to the end that they might know that I am the LORD.
“Wherefore I gave them also statutes that were not good.” Have we just followed the history of a statutory scheme that is not good? Are we experiencing this day  judgments whereby we cannot live?
Have the enemies of the God of the Bible been more crafty than King George III was? The King openly declared our fathers to be enemies of the state! Have God’s enemies secretly declared us to be enemies of the state? Why has God allowed the wicked to triumph over us?! Is it because we are still departed from the Covenant of Perpetual Union? Why would the Covenant God of Israel hide from us what His enemies have been doing to us since 1933? Or, did God’s enemies count on us being sheep ? Did FDR, as a wolf in sheep’s clothing, say: "If I read the temper of our people correctly, we now realize as we have never before, our interdependence on each other ... The first inaugural address of Franklin Delano Roosevelt March 4, 1933.
How did we go from independence to interdependence? Were we very adroitly herded since the inception of The Federal Reserve in 1913 ? Did FDR, as one of those very adroit sheepherders, know he could change the name of communism to interdependence, and fly it right past the eyes and ears of blind, deaf sheep?
There is another March 4th, but it is lesser known than the March 4th 1933 of Infamy. It is the date of President Andrew Jackson’s farewell address:
“You have the highest of human trusts committed to your care. Providence has showered on this favored land blessings without number, and has chosen you as the guardians of freedom, to preserve it for the benefit of the human race. May He who holds in his hands the destinies of nations make you worthy of the favors he has bestowed, and enable you, with pure hearts and hands and sleepless vigilance, to guard and defend to the end of time, the great charge he has committed to your keeping.
President Andrew Jackson. Farewell Address. March 4, 1837. James D. Richardson. (U.S. Representative from Tennessee) Ed., A Compilation of the Messages and Papers of the Presidents 1789-1897, 10 vols. Washington, D.C., GPO, published by Authority of Congress, 1897, 1899.
“Sleepless vigilance”. How well have we done with that? Have we gone from a government preserving “the free exercise” of the Christian religion to a tyrannical mania that paints a bullseye on the backs of every Caucasian, especially those whose fruit is Christian? The television show “No Good Deed” is short for the longer expression “No Good Deed goes Unpunished”! Are we far better Rip Van Winkles than we are vigilantes? The deliberate use of the word vigilante calls to our attention the poisoning of our social discourse.
President Jackson called We the People’s attention to the great charge Jehovah God has committed to our keeping! Have we kept it?!! Are we mature enough to discuss the road to bring forth fruit meet for repentance?
Does our keeping bring to mind two other well shared quotes from our forefathers who framed the Republic? When Benjamin Franklin emerged from the Constitutional Convention which concluded its work September 17, 1787, an elder lady asked, “What kind of Government have you given us?”
“A Republic, ma’am, if you can keep it.”
With respect to The Constitution for the United States of America Washington said: “... its only keepers, the people.”
With respect to The Dominion Trust in Genesis 2, God said:
Genesis 2:15 And the LORD God took the man and put him into the Garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it.
Is there anybody here that does not know what happened to that?! Anybody here think they have done better than Adam?
Luke 19:27. “mine enemies”.
Psalms 94:20. “frameth mischief by a law.”
Benjamin Franklin : “government of the world by Providence”.
Revelation 12:10. “the accuser of our brethren”.
The Trading with the Enemy Act. October 6, 1917.
The Trading with the Enemy Act. Section 5 (b). “transactions wholly within the” U.S.
The Constitution. Art. 1, Sec. 8, cl. 11. (war powers).
Stoehr v. Wallace. S.Ct. 1921. p. 241. “Trading with the Enemy Act”.
FDR 1st Inaugural Address. March 4, 1933. “interdependence”
Ibid., “a larger good”.
Ibid., “a unity of duty”.
Ibid., “great army of our people”.
Ibid., “broad executive power”.
Ibid., The Act of March 9, 1933.
Ibid., “the authority”.
Ibid., Section 5 (b) amended.
Luke 16:11-12. “the unrighteous mammon”.
Senate Report 93-549, 1973. “emergency rule”.
Ibid., “permanent state of national emergency”.
Ibid., “national bank holiday”.
Ibid., “sight unseen”.
Ibid., “ex post facto”.
The Constitution. Art. 1, Sec. 9, cl. 3.
Senate Report 93-549, 1973. “unaware”.
Ibid., “the problem”.
2 King 23:10 no baby murder.
Ezekiel 20:23-26 “statutes that were not good”.
1st Inaugural Address FDR “interdependence”.
President Andrew Jackson. Farewell Address, March 4, 1837. “sleepless vigilance”.
Benjamin Franklin. “a Republic” to keep.
George Washington. “only keepers”.
Genesis 2:15 “to keep it.”