Archive for January, 2014

Please call your Rep and tell them you support the following two bills, if you do. Both of these bills are supported by the 10th Amendment and should help slow down federal agency overreach on regulating our daily lives here in Missouri.

From our friend Stacy Shore:

As the EPA and their push to regulate all air and water in our country continues to infringe upon our rights, please help support these very important bills.  There will be a hearing at 8:00 am on Thursday, February 6th on HB1302.  PLEASE try to be there.  I have been told not to be surprised when the Sierra Club shows up to fight this bill. They have already shown up in opposition.  We need to be there to support it.  It seems so simple.  Yet, this bill accomplishes so much. 

My representative supported this bill.  I am so grateful that she has advocated for the citizens of Missouri to be able to keep their homes and businesses warm in the winter with wood.  Know this…if the EPA has their way they will try to shut down wood burning as a way to reduce the “carbon footprint” left behind. This bill will make that a violation of our STATE law.  As I drove home from a speaking engagement last week from southern Missouri I saw countless chimneys billowing smoke as Missourians warmed their homes on that cold morning in January.  We must stand to preserve our way of life.  It is sad, and unbelievable that we would even need such a law, but that is where we are.


Section A. Chapter 1, RSMo, is amended by adding thereto one new section, to be
2 known as section 1.450, to read as follows:
1.450. All Missourians have the right to heat their homes and businesses using
2 wood-burning furnaces, stoves, fireplaces, and heaters.

Another INCREDIBLE bill that enforces STATE RIGHTS and our 10th amendment will be heard that same day:  


Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the state of Missouri, as follows:
Section A. Chapter 1, RSMo, is amended by adding thereto one new section, to be
2 known as section 1.345, to read as follows:
1.345. 1. Any federal regulation or rule promulgated as a result of an executive
2 order of the President of the United States repugnant of the Constitution of the United
3 States or the Constitution of Missouri shall be declared invalid in the state of Missouri.
4 Such regulations and rules shall be considered null and void and of no effect.
5 2. It shall be the duty of the general assembly to adopt and enact any and all
6 measures as may be necessary to prevent the enforcement of regulations and rules issued
7 by a presidential executive order.

Please help us spread the word and be there for these two worthwhile hearings that preserve our 10th amendment and our rights as a state.

Very briefly, we just want to give our thanks to everyone who braved the cold to come out to our meeting last night at ConnXtions in Mountain Grove. Despite being 2• it was very well attended with roughly 140 people present to hear Kaye Beach speak and to see the awards given to Congressmen Jason Smith and Billy Long and Lt Governor Peter Kinder for their excellent work against the National Blueway program and the White River National Blueway designation in particular.

There were a myriad of elected officials involved in the fight against the Blueways. Our County Commissioners, State Reps and State Senators all deserve to be recognized and thanked for their efforts against this program. We are extremely grateful for the good men and women who strive to stand in the gap for us at the more local level. Thanks to you all!

We are deeply encouraged that the Dept of Interior actually abandoned the program, and that simply would not have happened without the effort put forth by the area’s US Congressmen. Yes, we know it will be back, and actually already is, but this was a major victory for not just Missouri and Arkansas but all other states with “waterways”.

Ozark Area Network’s Ed Button was there along with other media to cover the event, and we thank them for their attendance and coverage as well. Here is the video provided by Ozark Area Network of the awards to Kinder, Smith and Long:

The paramount issue is that everything the government tries to do ultimately comes down to one thing…..The consent of the governed. If we refuse to provide our consent by either remaining silent or willingly going along with plans that are antithetical to our disposition and the Supreme Law of our land, they cannot continue to go forward in a wrong direction.

We thank everyone who stands up in the fight for freedom and decency. Were it not for you and your dedication to the principles of liberty, we would be incapable of halting any action. Thank you for loving liberty and standing with us against governmental overreach!

Here is an update from Ron Calzone on a very important piece of legislation in the Missouri General Assembly that is attempting to put the 10th Amendment to actual effect in Missouri:

The first of two senate hearings for SB 613 was held between 3:00 and 4:00 Tuesday afternoon and it went very well.

There were NO witnesses against the bill.

Three lobbyists for the medical community testified for informational purposes, expressing concerns about Section 571.012.3 (Page 10, lines 8-12). They are concerned, particularly, about any law that keeps doctors from documenting anything in their own records. A solution to their concerns is being worked on.

That was the extent of the opposition to the bill. There was no one there to claim that the bill violates the Supremacy Clause, There was no one there to claim we have to bow and stoop to federal officials. There were no Chicken Littles there to say, “This has never been done before, and we’re going to wet our pants!”

In summary, I am more encouraged than ever about our prospects of crossing the finish line early this session. It’s early, though, and anything can happen, so we need to continue with a full court press.

We need to make a VERY STONG showing at the hearing on the 28th! Please come, even if it’s just to fill the hearing room or testify with a short “me too” — you don’t have to make a speech to be effective.

And if you can’t come to the hearing please fill out a witness form, if you haven’t already (one per person, please). The larger the stack we deliver, the louder we speak!

Please spread the word, too!

Please click on the blasted link and watch the youtube video. I have tried for 15 minutes and what usually works to post a video is just not working. I’ll pass on any further aggravation as I have sufficient quantities of it on a very regular basis.

Wednesday, 22 January 2014 20:18
January 22, 2014 — (TRN ) — In stunning testimony, under Oath, before the U.S. House of Representatives, House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, a former executive of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) revealed the EPA’s goal is to “modify the DNA of Capitalism.”  Put another way, the entire “Global Warming” crusade has been a complete lie from the start — to attack the free market system —  and the people telling this lie KNEW it was a lie when they started telling it!  This former EPA executive is now on his way to jail.

TRN has obtained the Certified Transcript directly from the federal government and now it is published here for all the world to see.

A former high-ranking EPA official who recently was sentenced to prison for fraud told lawmakers last month that, before he left the agency, he was working on a “project” examining ways to “modify the DNA of the capitalist system.”

The startlingly blunt comment was included in newly released transcripts of John Beale’s deposition before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. One group that is frequently critical of the Obama administration’s energy policy, the Institute for Energy Research, said the claim is a “smoking gun” that reveals the administration’s true intentions.

Beale’s credibility is not exactly ironclad. He was sentenced last month to 32 months in prison for bilking taxpayers out of nearly $1 million by pretending to be a CIA agent.

But, in the transcripts, he spoke in great detail about meetings he supposedly had with EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy, back when she was heading the Office of Air and Radiation.

Beale said they started meeting in mid-2009. At a lunch, he claimed his “fabricated story about working at CIA came up,” but that they also discussed various projects. Beale recalled telling her about a project he wanted to work on, which he described as “green economics.”

He argued that environmental regulation was reaching its “limits” because “the fundamental dynamic of the capitalistic system is for businesses and individuals to try to externalize all costs.” So he said he began working on his plan.

This, he said, involved “coming up with specific proposals that could be — could have been proposed either legislatively or things which could have been done administratively to kind of modify the DNA of the capitalist system.”

Beale said this “is not new” and has happened “tens of times” in the history of capitalism.

“It’s not a God-given system that was created once and never changes. It changes all the time,” he said. He said McCarthy was aware of the project and “we met frequently to talk about it and had actually quite deep discussions.” He said, though, that the project was eventually “scrapped.”

He also claimed the project began under the George W. Bush administration.

But, at a time when oil and gas companies are complaining about crushing EPA regulations, the IER seized on the comments as proof that the administration is pursuing a power grab.

“This is the smoking gun. For years, we have been saying the real agenda behind this administration’s energy and environmental policies is the just what President Obama has said it is: to fundamentally transform America,” Senior Vice President Dan Kish said in a statement. “In his testimony under oath, Beale, perhaps unwittingly, has laid bare the administration’s end goal. The President’s policies are not about carbon, they are not about coal, they are not even about energy and the environment. … These policies are not about energy, but power.”

In releasing the 263 pages of documents, the leaders of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee did not comment on that section of the transcript. They focused instead on the fraud Beale committed by lying about working for the CIA.

“This is an egregious example of fraud on the highest levels of management at the EPA,” Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., chairman of the committee, said.

Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Md., top Democrat on the committee, said Beale “spun an elaborate web of lies” to fool his EPA supervisors.

The EPA has not responded to a request for comment.

Beale’s case was one of the more bizarre schemes run against the government in recent memory. Beale’s trickery began more than a decade ago and was largely a scheme to collect unearned pay over roughly 13 years — essentially by saying he needed to take off one workday a week for CIA missions.

In the committee documents, Beale acknowledged this was a “fantasy.”

SOURCE:  U.S. House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Transcripts (Click to read from the government’s own web site.)

Some of you may recall the issue that arose several years ago regarding gold bouillon being gold plated tungsten. Seems like the Fed’s have emptied out the vaults in typical goldsmith fashion. If you know the history of money and fiat script, I apologize for reitterating the short explanation here.  What happened was people put their gold on deposit with one who had armed men protecting the vault. They were given a receipt for the gold on deposit. Since it was easier to carry paper around, they began to trade the paper allowing the recipient of the paper to go to the gold reservoir and withdraw the amount of gold indicated on the paper receipt. Before long, those issuing the receipts and receiving the gold figured out that they could issue more receipts than there was gold and, voila, we had artificial currency creating inflation until there was a bank run, at which time it became apparent that the amount of “gold” in circulation on paper vastly exceeded the amount of gold actually in existence.

Here is an article regarding the actual gold that is supposed to be in the US vaults and what is happening because Germany requested a fraction of the literal gold they put on deposit with the US back:

Fed’s Dirty Little Secret: “The Gold Isn’t There… Exists as Paper IOU’s”

The assumption by global depositors who have entrusted their national savings with the Federal Reserve and US Government has always been that when they request to repatriate their holdings the Fed would simply open the vault, access said assets and ship them back to where they belong.

That’s exactly what Germany expected would happen last year when the country requested that the Federal Reserve return about one-fifth of their gold reserves. But that’s when things got really dicey. The Fed announced that Germany’s gold would be returned… but it would take seven years to get back home.

The response to Germany’s request turned heads all over the world and raised concerns that the Federal Reserve had squandered its gold holdings. But this isn’t the only red flag that was raised. Public pressure reached such levels that the Fed was forced to take steps to maintain confidence in its operations, so it started shipping gold to Germany. Except it turns out that the gold being sent back to the Bundesbank wasn’t actually German gold. It contained none of the original serial numbers, had no hallmarks, and was reportedly just recently melted.

The implications are earth shattering and hit the very core of the problems facing America today. The whole system as it exists is just one big paper IOU.

In this must-watch interview with Future Money Trends, Jefferson Financial CEO Brien Lunden weighs in on Germany’s gold, what is happening at the Fed and what other central banks are doing right now. Brien also shares his thoughts on where the gold market is today, what to expect in coming years as gold supplies tighten up, how mining companies like Brazil Resources are taking advantage of the current environment, and how to profit from gold in coming years.

Full transcript and interview)

For the reply to be that it would take seven years for this Gold to be sent back to you, your Gold to be sent back to you, was an obvious admission that the Gold just isn’t there.

Yes, it’s an admission that the German reserves were not still sitting there in the vault in the same form that they were sent there after WWII. They were not the original Central Bank Gold bars, same serial numbers etc. It’s an admission that at some point since then, that Gold has been used for other purposes.

So the dirty little secret here, is that a significant portion of central bank Gold reserves, including the U.S., don’t exist now in their original bar form. In fact, they exist as IOU’s, paper IOU’s, from the very banks that were bailed out in 2008 by the Federal Reserve.

So the Gold isn’t there, and the secret that they’re hiding is that it’s been replaced by IOU’s, and importantly those IOU’s are for Gold that was borrowed at much lower prices.

The Fed, through their recent actions, has essentially admitted that the gold stored in their vaults isn’t really there. Just as our government refuses to be openly transparent to with the American people, the Fed has resisted all calls to open their books (and vaults) to impartial third-party accountants for review.

The whole system, it seems, is now operating on IOU’s. Be it consumers, banks, the Fed or even the US government, all of the US dollars being exchanged are nothing but worthless pieces of paper, because given the lack of transparency at the Fed, we have to assume that the physical assets supposedly backing all this currency have already been spent.

Are we wrong in making this assumption?

If you were to store some emergency funds with a friend who promised to get them back to you whenever you asked, and then you ask and are told it’ll be a few years before he’ll get you the cash, what assumption would you make? That your friend has the money on him right now, or that he’s used it for other purposes and doesn’t really know exactly when he’ll have it available for repayment?

Our entire consumer economy, as well as the credit worthiness of our nation, is built upon confidence. It’s took decades to get America in a position where our country’s monetary issues and services would be trusted by the international community. It’s taken just a few years for that confidence to be lost.

It’s now only a matter of time before our creditors and global investors pull the plug on the whole thing.

Here is an update from the group representing Mr. Brandt against the US Federal Government in from of the Supreme Court. Very important case in process here!



January 22, 2014

Dear Ms. —-

I have just returned from the appearance by Mountain States Legal Foundation (MSLF) before the Supreme Court of the United States on behalf of our Wyoming client, Marvin Brandt.  Now that I have finished the work that piled up during my time in Washington, D.C., including fundraising efforts for 2013, I want to report to you on the arguments.

By way of background, in 1875, Congress passed the General Railroad Right of Way Act of 1875, which provided for conveying easements to railroads to lay railroad track to permit the settlement of the West by private citizens.  It was clear at that time that the right granted to the railroads was an easement and NOT a partial fee with a right of reversion to the federal government of the right of way after the railroad ended its use of the easement.  In fact, from the time the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) first adopted regulations regarding the act in the 1800s until today, that is, as recently as November 2011 (the date of the most recent Solicitor’s Opinion on the issue), the DOI has treated the right of way as an easement when conveying land to settlers.  In 1942, the Supreme Court was presented with the question of whether the right of way was an easement or a partial fee in which the federal government retained an interest.  The Solicitor General (SG) spent almost the entire brief arguing that it was an easement.  The Supreme Court adopted that argument almost verbatim and rejected other arguments by the SG that were inconsistent with the holding that the right of way was an easement.  Meanwhile, Congress made no changes in the 1875 act in response to either the actions of the DOI or the ruling of the Supreme Court.

As a result, everyone in the country–lawyers, landmen, and title insurance providers–recognized that if the federal government conveys to a private party lands encumbered with an 1875 railroad right of way, when the railroad abandons its use of the right of way, the former easement is absorbed into the title owned by the private landowner.  That is, the land is no longer encumbered by the easement and is owned outright and totally by the landowner and NOT the federal government.  The patent received by our client, Marvin Brandt of Fox Park, Wyoming, provides that his land is encumbered by the railroad right of way and that the federal government retains no interest in the property.  Now the federal government, after 140 years of arguing otherwise, asserts that when it conveyed the right of way to the railroad it was NOT an easement, but a partial fee in which the federal government retained the right of reversion, that is, it could get it back.  This partial fee with right of reversion that the federal government argues exists and has existed since 1875 is unknown to the common law and property law in this country.  In fact, the concept is not just alien to the common law, it is a sleeping Frankenstein monster created by the federal government and its allies in States, municipalities, and land-grab groups that, if allowed to awaken as a result of a Supreme Court ruling against Marvin Brandt, will eject people from their land and even their homes.  As several justices pointed out during the argument, the federal government argues that, contrary to all knowledgeable expectation and 140 years of actions by Congress, the Court, and the Executive, millions of landowners will be displaced or have their titles to their land rendered in doubt.

There was some media coverage of the case:

My article on the case appeared in the Washington Times the day before the argument:

Because cameras are not allowed in the Courtroom, artists capture their view of the proceedings.  Here is that of Art Lien (you may click on it to enlarge it):

To sum it up, the argument went very well for MSLF and its client.  I expect a 7-2 ruling (with Justices Breyer and Kagan joining the 5 normally right-of-center justices) and would not be surprised with a unanimous ruling given Chief Justice Roberts’ penchant for unanimous rulings and the lack of any ideological passion in the questions posed by Justices Ginsburg and Sotomayor.  The transcript is online here:

As MSLF’s Vice President and Chief Legal Officer, Steve Lechner, made clear in his opening, the ruling sought by the federal government would:  1) overturn the Court’s 1942 ruling in Great Northern, which interpreted the 1875 General Railroad Right of Way Act, which is at issue in Brandt; 2) overturn the Court’s 1979 ruling in Leo Sheep, which held the federal government does not acquire property by implication, or as I would put it, by stealth; and 3) reverse 140 years of policy by the federal government including acts of Congress, consistent actions by the Executive, specifically the Department of the Interior, and a ruling by the Supreme Court in 1942.

As a result, the federal government was under constant attack during its argument for:  1) reversing its position, which the Court wholeheartedly embraced, in Great Northern; 2) not providing case law support for its new position, adopted after 140 years of viewing the grant in question as an easement; and 3) subjecting thousands and perhaps millions of landowners, who had relied on the federal government’s actions for 140 years, to the seizure of their property and on this point the federal government was hammered for not knowing how much land would be affected by the Court’s decision.  Declared Justice Scalia, “[Y]ou should know how much land the United States owns.  It’s incredible that–that there’s no record in the Interior Department or anywhere else of what land the United States own. You claim you own these thousands of acres, and you say we’ve not kept track of it. We just know where it’s going to go, but we don’t know what we own.”  (pp. 51-52)

The attack on the federal government started early—the fedderal government’s attorney got out two sentences–with Justice Alito:  “Mr. Yang, I have to say I think the government gets the prize for understatement with its brief in this case. You have a sentence in your brief that says, ‘We acknowledge that there is language in this Court’s opinion in Great Northern and in the government’s brief in that case that lends some support to petitioner’s contrary argument.'”  Then Justice Alito quoted four subject headings from the government’s brief in Great Northern, which argue forcefully that the grant is an easement.  (p. 24)

Justice Breyer was very troubled by the possibility that someone would wake up with a bicycle path through his house (p. 36), especially given the proper reliance on Great Northern for over 70 years.  “Can you imagine or explain to me why a property lawyer worth his salt since 70 years ago or more, 1942, wouldn’t have read [Great Northern] and advised his client, who was buying the land, if the railroad abandons it, it’s yours,” asked Justice Breyer.  (p. 32)  “[B]ecause the lawyer would think–when he reads the case of Great Northern … it’s an easement.”  (pp. 36-37)  Justice Kagan later jumped in, “Well, I’m just suggesting that after Great Northern and then you’re given this patent, which is unequivocal and does not reserve anything, why anybody would think that they haven’t gotten the whole ball of wax is a mystery.”  (pp.40-41)  As I noted already, the desultory and perfunctory questions by Justice Ginsburg and Sotomayor cause me to believe that they will join the other justices in the majority opinion.

I will let you know when the Court rules, which should be long before June.  In the meantime, Happy New Year and thank you for your support.  Best, Perry

William Perry Pendley, Esq.
Mountain States Legal Foundation
2596 South Lewis Way
Lakewood, Colorado 80227
303-292-2021; FAX 303-292-1980