Abe and the Babe
As another Lame Cherry exclusive in matter anti matter.
In this twilight's last gleaming of America in the 2020 leftist cementation of the United States into Webster Griffin Tarpley's revelation from the cartel that the United States would be a split democratic party of communists and socialists, and the unfolding of this is Trump's National Socialism pitted against the Obama Marxism, the Lame Cherry asks you the question of "What is a President?"
For those who relish the genocide of the American Race, Birther Hussein Obama was their perfect holocaust master race, as in Obama, an outlaw presidency, became the house of a despot, in all of the levers from George W. Bush's faith based charities to Lyndon Johnson's welfare, became weaponized as the IRS against the Tea Party, as what Obama's community organization really was, was a cancer being injected into every community. Foreigners were being dumped in, using taxpayer funds, to produce a conglomerate slave class, which was in 4 plex rewriting of zoning laws and loans, to deprive Americans of their own communities, and implant non American control of every neighborhood in America.
Does the Constitution grant such power to a President? No it does not.
Yet laws were written by lobbyists, by conglomerates, which are the levers of the cartel, created an entire unchecked and unbalanced system operating outside the legislation of Congress or the oversight of the courts. A President had an entire mandated system, which could be moulded not for what it was said to be designed for, and instead became a lethal weapon depriving Americans and criminalizing American by the police state.
The American mind has been so brainwashed, that it no longer is capable of understanding what is Constitutional and what is criminal. In that, the Lame Cherry could rail against despot presidents, but it would not educate any of you to the reality of what a President is.
In that, it is far better to provide an example in an American Icon, the Niggerhead President of Abraham Lincoln.
The term Niggerhead is not racist. It is historical for those who were against slavery in the abolitionists. Mr. Lincoln was a radical, as he ignored the Constitution, made war on Americans and was a criminal at large, but having the military, the politicians and the financiers all drooling over the eradication of Southern lands, and political control, the Lincoln crimes were legalized.
I am not here to condemn Lincoln, as I disagree with him. What Mr. Lincoln though provides as a presidential example, is that Abraham Lincoln still would not cross the lines of obliterating the Constitution as others have. The Constitution is what drove Lincoln.
In the following letter from 1863 from President Lincoln to Albert Hodges, Lincoln explains a great deal of what a President is.
Lincoln begins by stating that he is against slavery as it is wrong. He then states that the presidency does not give a President absolute rights to officially change laws or the Constitution, to fit his bias, judgments or prejudices.
I have never understood that the Presidency conferred upon me an unrestricted right to act officially upon this judgment and feeling.
In short, Lincoln stated, that just because Franklin Roosevelt wanted Social Security, he had no right to stack the courts or extend the depression, as Obama did, to inflict Obamacare upon Americans by penalty.
Lincoln defined that the Oath of Office did not indulge his judgments on slavery to end it.
I understood, too, that in ordinary civil administration this oath even forbade me to practically indulge my primary abstract judgment on the moral question of slavery.
No President can confer rights on others with Congress in Donald Trump amnesty or the papering of foreigners as slaves, to make them future citizens. Lincoln adhered to this as he warred against the South. That adherence was to protect the Union as President from disunion, but to make citizens of foreign slaves, Lincoln stated this had to be done by the Constitution in an Amendment.
The preserving of the Constitution could not survive while the nation was divided, as a divided nation, defined there was not a Constitution.
I did understand however, that my oath to preserve the constitution to the best of my ability, imposed upon me the duty of preserving, by every indispensable means, that government --that nation --of which that constitution was the organic law. Was it possible to lose the nation, and yet preserve the constitution?
Abraham Lincoln was one of the most astute Constitutionalist in understanding the Great Experiment for what it was. This is not a general rabble term of dispensing understanding on Lincoln which was not there. Abraham Lincoln was the most accomplished Constitutional interpreter who has ever held the presidency, and in definition, he has surpassed the legislature and the courts in understanding what the Constitution was, especially for the presidency.
Lincoln understood that the ends did not justify the means. Destroying Americans in community organized overthrow of Obama does not justify the promised utopia which has never been achieved in communism.
Lincoln was most concerned that measures to end slavery or free the slaves which were illegal, would become lawful. It was why several times Lincoln overturned and forbid Union officers from freeing the slaves.
The first instance was General John C. Fremont in Missouri, who freed the slaves in his department. Lincoln understood that the military had absolutely no authority to steal a citizen's property, and then make that property a citizen. If the military code was allowed to supplant the Constitution, any General could issue any order and the pattern would make it constitutional, when it was not.
I felt that measures, otherwise unconstitutional, might become lawful,
When, early in the war, Gen. Fremont attempted military emancipation, I forbade it,
Abraham Lincoln in the upheaval of civil war, discovered his military was creating American law. What was a war for the preservation of the Union, was quickly becoming the bias and prejudice of generals to make this a war to end slavery.
There is an interesting genius in this of Abraham Lincoln, in 1862 AD in the year of our Lord, he used a legal Constitutional gambit, in order to arrest the emancipation movement which was getting out of presidential control, and in that Lincoln advocated the border states begin buying slaves or to the point, compensating slave owners of the loss of their property.
This is Constitutional and is how the issue should have been ended, but in the genius of Lincoln in the body politic, he know the financiers were not going to pay money they lusted over to Southerners compensating them. Lincoln knew the abolitionists hated the Southerners and were not going to reward them for once holding slaves. This greed and hatred of the Northerner's was exploited by Lincoln to stop military control of emancipation, and returned it to the Constitution as Lincoln always stated it needed to be addressed.
Lincoln stated that Congress could not pass a law on slavery, nor could the President end it, as it was a Constitutional issue, and only a Constitutional authority would preserve the Union.
When, in March, and May, and July 1862 I made earnest, and successive appeals to the border states to favor compensated emancipation, I believed the indispensable necessity for military emancipation, and arming the blacks would come, unless averted by that measure. They declined the proposition; and I was, in my best judgment, driven to the alternative of either surrendering the Union, and with it, the Constitution, or of laying strong hand upon the colored element. I chose the latter
As Lincoln's hand was being played out by events overtaking him, he was forced to choose between surrendering the Union or making a presidential move to end slavery, which was causing the division. This is what brought about the Emancipation Proclamation, which was against the will of the majority of Americans, both North and South.
Even in that emancipation though, Lincoln stated it did not end slavery. That may not register with the simple mind reading this, but emancipation according to Abraham Lincoln's definition was an action based upon presidential powers in war. Lincoln could free the slaves in that limited authority, in war states, but he could not end slavery. That reads like mincing words as one can not have slavery if the slaves are free, but slavery was not ended everywhere, only in specific instances and conditions.
It is sobering to read the following that Lincoln seized the slave issue, not as an issue of freedom, but an issue of war, to add to the Union work force and military, and deprive the slave from Southern uses.
In choosing it, I hoped for greater gain than loss; but of this, I was not entirely confident. More than a year of trial now shows ... a gain of quite a hundred and thirty thousand soldiers, seamen, and laborers. These are palpable facts, about which, as facts, there can be no cavilling. We have the men; and we could not have had them without the measure.
In the closing of the letter to this Southern American, Abraham Lincoln admits that as President, as all politicians and judges, that they are all limited in authority to do anything, compared to God. Lincoln puts this in Divine terms of God working things out, but in that Lincoln admits that the Constitution places absolute limits which can not be infringed upon by any President, and for the reason which Lincoln addressed. No President has the authority Obama "change what they believe in", no Jimmy Carter seizing vast swaths of Alaska lands for Carter parks, no Donald Trump can with Congressional spending bills make foreigners out of Americans.
What Abraham Lincoln defined the presidency was one of limits and the Constitution is greater than any President. That statement is uplifting, but it requires even a despot like Lincoln to have his words arisen from history to condemn all those occupants of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue who have not had the self control to limit their actions for their Obama racism, Bush bias or Trump prejudice.
If God now wills the removal of a great wrong, and wills also that we of the North as well as you of the South, shall pay fairly for our complicity in that wrong, impartial history will find therein new cause to attest and revere the justice and goodness of God.
America was blessed by God, with 4 American Presidents at key junctures of history in George Washington, Andrew Jackson, Theodore Roosevelt and Ronald Reagan. Lincoln was murdered before his emancipation could have deported the Negro to Panama liberty to dig the canal there without disenfranchising Americans.
America is in dire need of a Constitutional President in this juncture of America's demise, as the seeds of despotry have sprouted and are being tended to the great harm of Americans.
Abraham Lincoln juggled fire and was consumed by the little flame of Jefferson revolution. He supplanted States Rights for Federal mandate, and the Rights of the American were vanquished for the inferno of the consuming flame of the foreign implant.
When that flame is removed from the hearth of the Constitution, by any President, Congress of Judge, it becomes a devouring force of a political inferno.
The elections of 2020 are no more about this, than the elections of 1864 were. This is the issue of the election though, and only this poor orphan girl is educating you of this.
Once again, another Lame Cherry exclusive in matter anti matter.
Nuff Said
agtG
DOCUMENT: LINCOLN LETTER TO ALBERT G. HODGES,
APRIL 4, 1864116
My dear Sir:
You ask me to put in writing the substance of what I verbally said the other day, in your presence, to Governor Bramlette and Senator Dixon. It was about as follows:"I am naturally anti-slavery. If slavery is not wrong, nothing is wrong. I cannot remember when I did not so think, and feel. And yet I have never understood that the Presidency conferred upon me an unrestricted right to act officially upon this judgment and feeling. It was in the oath I took that I would, to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States. I could not take the office without taking the oath. Nor was it my view that I might take an oath to get power, and break the oath in using the power. I understood, too, that in ordinary civil administration this oath even forbade me to practically indulge my primary abstract judgment on the moral question of slavery. I had publicly declared this many times, and in many ways. And I aver that, to this day, I have done no official act in mere deference to my abstract judgment and feeling on slavery.
I did understand however, that my oath to preserve the constitution to the best of my ability, imposed upon me the duty of preserving, by every indispensable means, that government --that nation --of which that constitution was the organic law. Was it possible to lose the nation, and yet preserve the constitution? I felt that measures, otherwise unconstitutional, might become lawful, by becoming indispensable to the preservation of the constitution, through the preservation of the nation. I could not feel that, to the best of my ability, I had even tried to preserve the constitution, if, to save slavery, or any minor matter, I should permit the wreck of government, country, and Constitution all together. When, early in the war, Gen. Fremont attempted military emancipation, I forbade it, because I did not then think it an indispensable necessity. When a little later, Gen. Cameron, then Secretary of War, suggested the arming of the blacks, I objected, because I did not yet think it an indispensable necessity. When, still later, Gen. Hunter attempted military emancipation, I again forbade it, because I did not yet think the indispensable necessity had come. When, in March, and May, and July 1862 I made earnest, and successive appeals to the border states to favor compensated emancipation, I believed the indispensable necessity for military emancipation, and arming the blacks would come, unless averted by that measure. They declined the proposition; and I was, in my best judgment, driven to the alternative of either surrendering the Union, and with it, the Constitution, or of laying strong hand upon the colored element. I chose the latter. In choosing it, I hoped for greater gain than loss; but of this, I was not entirely confident. More than a year of trial now shows ... a gain of quite a hundred and thirty thousand soldiers, seamen, and laborers. These are palpable facts, about which, as facts, there can be no cavilling. We have the men; and we could not have had them without the measure. I add a word which was not in the verbal conversation. In telling this tale I attempt no compliment to my own sagacity. I claim not to have controlled events, but confess plainly that events have controlled me. Now, at the end of three years struggle the nation's condition is not what either party, or any man devised, or expected. God alone can claim it. Whither it is tending seems plain. If God now wills the removal of a great wrong, and wills also that we of the North as well as you of the South, shall pay fairly for our complicity in that wrong, impartial history will find therein new cause to attest and revere the justice and goodness of God.
Abraham Lincoln
agtG
