Repeal the Eleventh Amendment

My name is Pat Hamer, I am a British Born U.S. Citizen. My perspective of the U.S.A. was based upon claims that the U.S.A. had more liberty, justice and freedom than are present in other countries, even Great Britain. This is commonly attributed to as a result of ending "Sovereign Power" that was preventing justice for Colonists simply understood by the Royal Subjects who are barred from redressing abuse of power crimes committed by the "Sovereign King." Outside of the U.S.A., this is well understood, but in the U.S.A., rocket scientists have not discovered this phenomenon. In Fact, the authors of the Declaration stated that this Sovereign "Despot" [King George III] controlled a conspiracy to enrich themselves by manipulating the courts using "judicial tyranny" and "Mock Trials." They stated that humans have "unalienable Rights," and that, "That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed." If you read on you see this statement, "...unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only." Recently MSNBC Chris Hayes, discussed co-author, Daren Acemoglu's book, "Why Nations Fail." I have never heard what I learned by the events of the following summary. What I learned was that, in the fashion of a diabolical and silent coup, which is synonymous with the modern day jus cogens of the 11th amendment which "relinquished the right of representation..." through judicial protection under the First Amendment redress of grievance;" the revolution was overturned, 19 years after July 4th 1776, and only 5 years after 13 states ratified the constitution, and only 3 years and some change after the Bill of Rights were made affective.

In 2007, my wife and I became crime victims. Though we are entitled to due process under the "Crime Victims bill of rights" under the state constitution, and federal statute, we noticed that we personally were excluded from provision of that right, especially after creating a web site, http://www.preventmurder.org, which criticized elected local officials for negligently treating violent crime resulting in murders with what the Supreme Court calls a "rational basis" to ignore violent crime, or actually be the "cause of murder" [Macias v. Ihde, 9th. circuit 2000] through arbitrarily fundamentally misconstruing victims who were accusing law enforcement of unequal favoring of accused over the victims. The criminal who perpetrated felonies against us, claimed that he was a friend of the D.A., who would fix his many felonies, and they were fixed, but without rational basis or legal "due process" more similar to "mock trials." To support this claim, distinguishing it from possible vexatious theory, A judge was punished by the CJP.ca.gov, James Wagoner. This punishment was for allegations I made in a complaint to the CJP that led to the Discovery that the 11th amendment had cultivated as a constitutional right, for local officials, including Judge James Wagoner.

The federal suit was filed to redress official acts that were arbitrarily and illegally being done through abuse of power, which the federal statutes state are criminally illegal under 18 USC 242, and civil remedy is available under 42 USC 1962, 1983, or 1985. Because these arbitrary acts were punitive and had no legal basis or in other words, were done outside of due process, we had to file a suit, thinking that our federal courts were not acquiescing to this Good Ole Boy type of making up their own laws, outside of the Constitution. When government retaliates for speech surrounding matters of public concern, i.e., "criminal violence," and you can prove that they "conspired," with other officials, who acquiesce or turn a blind eye by inaction, you state a "prima fascia claim," which we did, in our complaint. But after filing the suit, the Magistrate, who we refused to grant "consent" to hear the case, a right we never was allowed to have, constantly threatened to fine us, and treated us like animals or non human forms due to obvious lack of compassion but more sociopathic indignation. During a surgery with complications, the Magistrate ignored a Dr. letter stating we could not perform necessary duties, and forced us to maintain court procedure, while postponing hearings etc.. for himself and the defense attorney. No....he wasn't biased at all!

However, after 3 years and 120 documents, the record in the court, now public record, shows that the Magistrate Judge, Edmund F. Brennan, violated FRCP and barred us from access to "meaningful" court proceedings. The Record shows that the defense "fundamentally misconstrued the actual "substantial motivating factor" alleged by us the Plaintiffs, in our complaint. They willfully failed to respond to our "first amendment retaliation claim, and instead, argued a claim that we never made, and in fact could have not made, because their claim was not provable as they claimed we were filing a complaint alleging that the county and officials would not make arrests. Of course, we objected, even alleging in our objections that arrests had been made, and that these defense claims should be stricken from the record because the defense cannot support them, but moreover, we are alleging a first amendment claim.

However, there was no response to our objections for 3 years and 120 documents on file. The defense in collusion with the Magistrate, who was being funneled civil right claims and dismissing them arbitrarily as if he was on the payroll of the county to do so, simply engaged in "Mock Proceedings" with abuse of power through "Judicial Tyranny" similar to that of the grievances in the Declaration of Independence, 200 years ago. During the same time, another citizen was suing the same Defendants in unrelated allegations similar in civil right claims that we were making. Though we were alleging that officials were allowing vandalisms, murder threats and assault to occur against our employees, and ourselves, and witnesses of this including video evidence and affidavits, and restraining orders, John O'Sullivan was allowed to be murdered, while Magistrate Brennan barred us from a "protection order" knowing that O'Sullivan was murdered while undergoing similar circumstances, and Magistrate Brennan was hearing O'Sullivan's case. When O'Sullivan was murdered, the case against the defendants we were also suing was dismissed. We moved from the county so we would not face the same murder which affectively ends cases against officials accused of not enforcing the law to protect favored citizens who commit crimes.

So basically, after all this terrifying bullying by corrupt officials, we wanted to know what the basis could be, and it wasn't hard to find, it was in the very first defense motions. The defense alleged, So what, even if the complaint is true, we are immune under the 11th amendment." But that is not entirely true, ad hoc decisions that harm citizens abrogate immunity, see U.S. Supreme Court Bogan v. Scott-Harris 1998, and very well explained in the Ninth Circuit Norris v. Santa Cruz, 2010, and the Supreme Court rejected Santa Cruz appeal in 2011.

So now we see that the 2 party system is basically fighting to control power, as we all know, BUT! It's who controls the outcomes of "abuse of power claims" under the 11th amendment. The 11th amendment is the power and authority behind the non democratic practice of the statement that "the ends justify the means." Which basically condones the harming, or collateral damage of arbitrary decisions, of those who support it. Law teaches that the ethics of this practice is divided.

I have been having trouble articulating this dilemma that I find which can be ended by repealing the Doctrine of Immunity, which is the 11th amendment, because there is not much consciousness of this "inestimable and formidable right of tyrants." Possibly because educating the majority who have failed to understand that democracy cannot be claimed by a nation who practice immunizing officials who abuse human rights. So you can imagine the excitement I felt when I found that a Professor wrote about this in a book called "State Immunity and the Violation of Human Rights," a parallel that very few humans can put together.

So I recently had undergone a major surgery removing diseased colon caused by stress related unnecessary irritation, that could have been avoided had I just accepted abuse of power against my family as an act of futility, which it really is. Because of that, I couldn't sleep, and I turned on MSNBC accidently at around 4:00 am. And this group discussion was happening and Marina Citirin rebuked Representative Nadler's typical biased, response, by stating, "the word democracy needs to be defined." I became excited, but cause I knew where it was going. It never quite, got there, well it did, but these activists and journalists, are unaware of an actual switch to turn off the power, and it is non other than stopping abuse of power in its tracks, by removing the fertilization that cultivates corruption, the 11th amendment to the Constitution.

Amazingly, another point, which is a phenomenon, that this Professor Acemoglu identified as "extractive institution." This enlightening, but deficient discussion can be heard at this web site http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/46979738/vp/47221916#47221916. Basically it brings credibility of my claim that the 11th amendment is "extractive institution, of "Sovereign Power" or the "inestimable and formidable right of tyrants" now becoming a "Constitutional Right of Public Officials." I must also state that my logic is flawless, in this identification of extractive institution, and at the end of this discussion, Rep. Nadler claimed that blame was unjustly being levied upon "public officials." No other institution is barred from culling corruption through individual redress through the courts, and public officials have this right that now gauges the possibility of what dirty deeds they can do, as "inestimable," and according the Acemoglu, the use of this extractive institution is used for their own "financial gain."

So this twitter site is the first effort in society to re-engage in a new paradigm shift, originally kick started by the ideas of Copernicus, but more significant. I boldly make this claim, because it emerges only due to the shrewdness, and surreptitious ability of the elite in power during the dark ages, and the codification of the Doctrine of Immunity by Bartolus of Sassoforratus in the mid 1300's, who kept this Doctrine alive. This is inarguable and the over-deterrence theory defending it today was created. This is evident because immunity for officials under the Doctrine was due to a "Devine Right" of Gods Servants, when their abusive power because heinous through inquisitions that sparked common response to redress grievances that were attributed to excusable zealousness, by Gods Servants. To consider them infallible was sacrilegious itself, and also a faux pas that could lead to personal or financial destruction.

Today, as Chris Hayes and his counsel of advisors, on the show in question, reveal that very educated political scientists are not aware of the extractive institution of the 11th amendment the source and cause of all revolutions, "sovereign power," Absolute Power," "Dictatorships!" What kind of human runs for office created by the blood of patriots, only to reinstate the right of abusing power, through what Acemoglu calls extractive institution? "Sociopaths in suits," is another book that may explain the evil men allowed to be rulers over citizens who unknowingly "relinquish" their own liberty, because they do not understand the "Doctrine of Immunity" and the 11th amendment historical paper trail, commonly called the "Chisholm Trail."

Please study this information and realize that repealing the 11th amendment is the Bloodless revolution and contradicts Rep. Nadlers ignorant assertion that "democracy cannot be improved" but by "granting more power to officials like himself, and labor unions."

The Question, "what is democracy" is answered. It is the U.S. Constitution, without the 11th amendment! Repeal it!