Friday, September 21, 2012

[Victims of Court Corruption] Re: * * * HELP

Bev, I am not guilty of the charge of being an attorney. Many have suggested that I am. As a matter of humor, I once stood before a State Appellate Panel wherein the attorney representing the other side was an Assistant State Attorney General. He shouted to these justices (cough, cough) that "Ron Branson may not be any attorney, but he knows just as much as an attorney, and you have to treat him as if he were an attorney." I acted as though I did not hear what he said.

At no time did I ask for the special consideration that by law must be granted to non-attorneys. I think they just find it embarrassing to be beat up time and time again legally and kicked to the curb by a non-attorney, i.e, a commoner. 

My position is that the Truth is the truth, and whoever position relies upon the truth is the winner, and that is regardless of titles and positions. The truth can never, never, never be defeated!

Ron Branson

Bev Meffert wrote:

Hi Ron, Are u an Attorney?   I am a victim of Fraud by my own county.
From: Ron Branson <>
To:; "" <>
Cc: "Ron Branson -" <>
Sent: Monday, September 17, 2012 5:53 PM
Subject: * * * Is Secession The Answer? * * *


Is Secession The Answer?
Jim Kerr wrote:


I think that one should be careful not to "major on the minors, and minor over the majors." I am in agreement with your below commentary, but think the matter is perhaps a semantical issue.

The word "citizen" is more than a mere inhabitant of a geographical location. He has rights, etc. which come from the Creator, and it is basically a religious issue, at least in a Christian society. I looked up the word "citizen" in my Webster's 1828 dictionary, and it didn't elaborate that well in my opinion, but it was still okay. Webster's 1828: "5. In the U. States, a person, native or naturalized, who has the privelege of exercising the elective franciises, or the qualifications which enable him to vote for rulers and to purchase and hold real estate. If the citizens of the U. States should to be free and happy, the fault will be entirely their own. Washington.

A lawyer, Tommy Cryer and I would chat oftentimes about Secession from the Union, and I aplan writing a booklet on that, but begin with a couple of articles. Edwin Vieria wrote against it (we never met), but if I am to have a "point-counterpoint" view to the thing, I didn't find enough substance to his article. If you are against secession, perhaps you could write a counterpoint. I think this is important to fully discuss the issue. Kind of like the federalist papers, or the anti-federalist papers, though I haven't the resources and ins to accomplish that large of a project. The essence is that if the federal government persists in being a curse upon the people, in that they exceed their authority enumerated in the Constitution, then we should consider secession. The idea is not that we actually do so, but give the feds perhaps three years to change their ways. Tommy suggested that Louisiana and Texas were likely prospects to begin the movement. Other disaffected states could join in, and the media would have a though time ignoring it.

The worsening of the economic depression would make it more difficult to label us as a bunch of kooks, like they tried with the Tea Party. Louisiana controls the mouth of the Mississippi and have all those wonderful natural resources, like gas and oil. Tommy expounded on that quite wonderfully. I would like to know your thoughts, if you were to be of a mind to share them.

Jim Kerr

Is Secession The Answer?
Ron Branson

Jim Kerr, you have inquired of me on the subject of succession, saying, "I would like to know your thoughts, if you were to be of a mind to share them." It is my pleasure to address this issue of Secession from the Union as an option" with you.

Here is the question that must be established first. Are we discontent with the Constitution as given unto us by the Founding Fathers, or is it that we are discontent with the way the Constitution is being interpreted by our courts? I would be the first to say that while we do not have a perfect Constitution, I am not ready to discard it and start over. Yes, I would just love to be on an editing committee to make revisions to our Constitution, but we are hardly in a current state of our nation to attempt that.

I believe our current state is not so much the fault with the words of our Constitution as written by our Founding Fathers, but rather the way our Constitution has been twisted and perverted by the judiciary. For instance, where in our Constitution did our Founding Fathers intend to provide for gay marriage, or a right to kill our unborn, or for the exclusion of God from our nation's affairs? Have we not abandoned God according to Psalms 9:17? "The wicked shall be turned into hell, and all the nations that forget God."

Men may oppose and lie against the truth, but this is not grounds for abandoning the truth and proceed in a search of "another truth." Indeed, we are told of the acts of men in Isaiah 5:20, "Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!" Is this an indication that something is wrong with the "good," or "light," or "sweetness?"

John Adams wrote, "Statesmen, my dear Sir, may plan and speculate for Liberty, but it is Religion and Morality alone, which can establish the Principles upon which Freedom can securely stand. The only foundation of a free Constitution is pure Virtue, and if this cannot be inspired into our People in a greater Measure than they have it now, They may change their Rulers and the forms of Government, but they will not obtain a lasting Liberty. They will only exchange Tyrants and Tyrannies. (June, 21, 1776). Further, he said, "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." The answer is not to forsake those moral values which once made our nation great, but to seek adherence to the restoration of those moral values.

I have spoken time and time again that what we need is not more or other laws, but enforcement of the laws. We already have too many on the books, we need no more. The supreme law of this land is our Constitution. Every public servant is required by the Constitution to raise their right hand and give their allegiance thereto. But few public servants have ever read, must less, understood what the Constitution says. We have reduced this solomn Oath to mere perfunctory words.

We must consider the words of God in Isaiah 1:7, "Your country is desolate, your cities are burned with fire: your land, strangers devour it in your presence, and it is desolate, as overthrown by strangers. .... v.13, Bring no more vain oblations; incense is an abomination unto me; the new moons and sabbaths, the calling of assemblies, I cannot away with; it is iniquity, even the solemn meeting.... v.15, And when ye spread forth your hands, I will hide mine eyes from you: yea, when ye make many prayers, I will not hear: your hands are full of blood."

It is for the above reason God moved upon my heart to write the words found in JAIL4Judges. It is not to overthrow our Constitution, but rather to establish it. In Article I we have the Who, What, When, Where, and the Why of the Legislature. Just so with the Executive (Article II), and the Judicial (Article III). But we lack a Article IV (The People in the forum of the Grand Jury). We are left totally on our own to speculate. There is only one mention of the Grand Jury, and that is in the Fifth Amendment. In that vacuum, we have allowed our "public servants" to rob us of our autonomous power within the forum of the Grand Jury. JAIL4Judges seeks to provide the Who, What, When, Where, Why and How left out of our Constitution.

People are so ignorant. When it comes to the J.A.I.L. Initiative, arguments have been made, but it would take two years before it would take effect. Yes, two years, but consider now how many two years cycles have already gone by the board since its founding in 1995. Let's see, 1996, 1998, 2000, 2002, 2004, 2006, 2008, 2010, 2012. Wow! That's nine opportunities in the past lost. Now, like a carrot in front of a donkey, we are only two years from victory.

They have also argued that the Judicial Accountability Initiative is too expensive. But these same people propose revamping our entire Constitution and starting from new again. It's too bad we do not have some of our Founding Fathers still alive today to testify to us about the cost was was for them to establish our Constitution. Perhaps we could look to their words in the Declaration of Independence to give us a clue. "And for the support of this declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor."

If we must, beyond financially supporting JAIL4Judges, it will be worth it to "Mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor." Like Noah's Ark, there is no other way for us to escape! "For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be." Matthew 24:38, 39.

No, Jim, I am not in favor of junking our Constitution by means of secession and starting from the beginning again. Also I am not in favor or a Constitutional Convention. These are neither cheaper, quicker, easier, nor a better option!

Ron Branson

Recent Activity:
If you have a legal question, or wish to engage in Legal Discussions, then subscribe at:

If you are interested in matters concerning the abuse of the Social Security Number, subscribe at:



Post a Comment

<< Home