Transcripts For CSPAN2 In Depth With KrisAnne Hall 20170807

The u. S. Army veteran and former state prosecutors the author of several books including, liberty first, the path to restoring america, essential stories for junior patriot, and sovereign duty. Author, chris hall, as we sit here in early august, how is President Trump doing . [applause] well, hes a president. And . I teach the constitution as it was intended to be applied. The president s in america has operated outside the realm of their authority. So, to judge trump, for me is not to judge them against obama or george w. Bush, but use the constitution as a standard. Sometimes hes good, sometimes, not so much. So that is how we view what goes on in washington, d. C. Not based on Political Party, not based on personality, but based on the standard by which all americans should hold their federal government. When you use that measuring stick, which president s in your view have adhered to the constitution . Which havent. Its been a very long time since weve had a president that was truly constitutional. You look at article two of the constitution. Host which is . Guest is a delegated authority of the executive branch. When we look at that, we realize how little power the president has, constitutionally speaking i always show my student you look at article one the powers dedicated to congress and the new coach article to dedicated to the president and article three is dedicated to the judiciary. In america we gravitated toward an allconsuming executive what we have now in america is an aberration of what the president to be. We think the president is the leader of america, he is not the leader of america. He was never intended. He was intended to be an ambassador on behalf of the states and Foreign Affairs. You can see that when you look at the powers delegated. He is not the designator of war, he is not the controller of our troops, unless there has been a formal declaration of war by congress. So you ask me we look when was the last time we had a declaration of war by congress . World war ii. Every military action that has been led by an executive has been unconstitutionally done so. So, we have a president whos not allowed to make deals, he can only make treaties. Those treaties are only accepted if there confirmed by two thirds of the senate and are consistent is article six, section two demands with a delegated authority of the executive or legislative branches. So what we have is this expansion of president ial power which is contrary to the intent of the framers. Our framers made the president a very small position relative to the legislative, on purpose. Alexander hamilton wrote a paper we call federalist papers 69. Theres a great deal of discussion about the office of the executive. The designers of our Constitutional Republic were concerned that they had just achieved in independence from a monarchy. They did not want to establish new government and create a new monarchy. It was an option. There was a point in time where people were begging George Washington to be king. Were this close to being the kingdom of america. Our founder say we dont want to go back to the kingdom system again. But how do we ensure the executive does not transmute overtime into the king so the federalist papers 69 is a great source and understanding not only what the power of the executive branches but why its so limited. How do we get to the point of executive orders since world war ii . Is a congresses fault . Ultimately, it wrestled the people. Samuel adam said, no people will surrender their liberties nor be easily subdued when knowledge is diffused and virtuous preserve. But when the people become universities ignorant they will sink under their own weight without the aid of foreign invaders. But we have seen is a decline in the important of the study of proper role and placement of the federal government. People will gravitate toward a more government will always expect more. So, congress has a great deal of responsibility in the expansion of the power of the executive branch by unlawfully delegating authority to the president through legislative acts. We have the people though, good example. The last president ial election. If i have a radio show and a Television Show and i took six president ial candidates we had the green party, we had independence we had republicans, democrats libertarian. So i took their published platform and i didnt compare them with each other is as popular. What i did was i compared each platform individually to the constitutional role of the president. What i found was the promises the president candidates were making were promises outside the authority of the offices of the executive. The president does not have the authority to raise or lower taxes. That is reserved to the house of representatives. The president cannot take care of our troops financially, he can expand troops, or withdraw, that is the power reserved for the legislative branch. I realize all of the promises the president s were making were responses to questions asked by the people, will you do this for us, thats what the whole website thing is. Yes, well do this, making this promise but i think of the people were better educated and understanding of the proper role of the executive we would ask better questions. That are into with a delegated authority so the president. In that vain, president s become who the people want them to be. From your most recent book, you will write and if you will explain this, the Central Government is a creation of the constitution is not, and cannot be a party to the constitution. Let me say that again see dont miss it. The Central Government is not a party to the contract, its a creation of the contract. One thing we need to remember about the formation of the federal government and in the sovereign duty book they covered here in cspan, we go through a timeline, the states are the first creation of the people in that happened on july 2, 1776. From the creation of the states through the authority of the people, the states came together and said we need to form a confederation of states and form a union for Mutual Protection from foreign invaders and we must form this union to be a unified voice and Foreign Affairs for treaties, commerce, peace, war and we need to form an alliance between the states for a more peaceful interaction between the states. The states were formed as independent sovereign governments. When you read the writings through the federalist papers, the ratification you see the terms, state and nation played interchangeably. So when we speak of the state of virginia, new hampshire, rhode island, they also refer to germany, france, and spain estates. But we need to understand is that we created 13 independent sovereign governments with the same authority and political function as germany, france, spain. So we need to come together and make this unified voice, we need to fix the things are not right. Through that we will create a Constitutional Republic a confederation of the states of the constitution will create a federal government. The federal government to not exist until a constitution was ratified. Not only that, there is a precarious moment prior to the ratification of her current constitution where we did not have enough states to ratify. It was a scary moment for those designing the constitution to think we might not have a union at all. If that were to happen in the constitution that ratify, then there would be no federal government. So what we also have to realize is the constitutions contract. Contracts speaking, when you have a contract you have the parties to the contract. Those of the people come together to make the terms of the contract. They negotiate the terms and design the contract. Ultimately they sign it into legal being. The constitution republic, the states or the parties to the contract. There are some who teach that the constitution is the agreement between the people in the federal government, thats not true. You cant be true. We can show false by one thing. How is the constitution ratified . Was it ratified by popular vote . No. It was ratified by three quarters of the state. So the states be in the ratify of the constitution meaning they are the party. Some try to teach the constitutions and agreement between the state and the federal government. Thats a possibility, because the federal government to not exist until the constitution was ratified. You cannot be the party to a contract when you are the product of the contract. So, the only parties that existed that could be the creators of the constitution could be the state. The federal government didnt exist until the constitution was ratified. So the state of the creators of the constitution, the constitution created the federal government, therefore the state of the creators of the federal government. Host so july 2, 1776 until 1783 . Guest 1787. We had the articles of confederation between the but they proved to be faulty on several aspects. When you read the notes to the ratification you learned that the greatest problem to have and with the original articles of confederation was that the federal government was operating outside its boundaries and it to not have enough direction. The greatest problem we had at that time was that the federal government was making an equitable treaty. Theyre making treaties with Foreign Governments in which one state or one set of state had to provide all of the resources and then a separate set of states got all the benefits. The states now form this union having to foot the entire bill that when a minute. This is not what we signed up for, to transfer our while to another state. So were not going to comply with this treaty. Its a big deal. That only is a treaty and agreement, its a contract with a Foreign Government. Source states who are refusing to comply and they were right to resist because they were not suitable for members of the state there are making the Foreign Government mad for breaking the terms of the contract plus the states theyre supposed to get the benefit were mad at the states that wouldnt pay. We have a problem in the articles of confederation. Its about to split and we just got started because were about to go to war with Foreign Government. Which is why we brought together the new convention to create our constitution which is why the new constitution is called the more perfect union. So, when we dissolve the articles of confederation there is no more federal government. The only government that exists or the state. There would have never been a new federal government had not our current constitution been ratified. From your book, not a living breathing document which was published in 2011, you rate that a common refrain these days is that we fell asleep. What that means is our ignorance of the history that brought us our american liberty allowed tierney to sneak up. However, that was not the case for founder. When we take the big picture and i mean, the full scope of the history of our american Constitutional Republic we have to realize that it did not begin in 1787. The liberty was not invented in 1776 and tierney was not invented by george the third. When i teach a class called the genealogy of what we do is take the 700 years of history that give us our declaration and our bill of rights and it is his history that proves to us that our constitution is built upon time tested principles. Theyre not inventions. When you know that history you know there were five documents written. Theyre called the reddish liberty chargers. Within those five documents, you find every aspect of our declaration of independence, and our bill of rights. Not even just in principle, sometime in the language itself. We did not invent anything in our foundational documents. We inherited everything. Is that history that proves to us that our founders actually the surprises everybody, theres nothing new in america. This is not a brave new world. There is a popular belief that the constitution is irrelevant to today because our founders cannot know what we are possibly seen today. But, when you study that history you see that we are just repeating the same scenarios over and over even today. The same stories, its the same people with the same interaction of government just different paces and better technology. History always repeats. The theme is that those who do not know the history are doomed to repeat its mistakes. Host where do you teach . Guest i teach all over the country. This is your number seven for my husband jc, and her son colton who has been traveling with this teaching for seven years. He is 11. He is quite the traveled young man. His bent almost every state in the union to include alaska but not hawaii. Hes praying for that one. His bent to four countries. So i travel around and teach on average over 260 classes every year and over 22 states. We dont solicit for classes, people email us and contact us and say, come and teach us. I Teach High School and middle school, college students, civic groups, business groups, bar associations, Law Enforcement, i have to the legislators of ten states. We will teach anybody. When people find when we teach is that some preconceived fallacies need to fall away. Teaching the constitution doesnt label me in any certain group. What people find is that it doesnt matter on what political side you stand, the constitution is relevant to everyone. I taught a National Conference of physicians and surgeons. That was exciting to hear their comments. These are not people that would not be generally carrying around their pocket constitution. And theyre so excited about what they learned. Thats what we find as we travel and teach. This is an empowering message for all people, and inspirational message that overcomes a feeling of powerlessness that americans have today in view of how their government operates. Host to charge for these classes . Guest we have no speaking fees. Host how do you pay for . Thats a lot of travel. Guest we have airplane tickets, rental colors, food, hotels, weve never had a speaking fee. Weve never required anybody to compensate us for our travel or our expenses. We do this as a mission of our heart. We are not independently wealthy. Weve never received a grant from anyone. But we work solely off of private donations, 20 or 30 bucks here and there and through the sale of the book. We are not out to get rich. Our family is a family missionary. When we are not teaching the constitution of the United States we are missionaries to haiti. The best way heard someone describe what we do is we are missionaries to the people of the United States in defense of the constitution. Thats how we operate. We work solely by faye of her seven years it works. From your website and from your bio, i was raised a democrat, the only thing more evil than satan was a republican in my home. I was an environmentalist, some of my best friends were members of greenpeace and i supported the World Wildlife fund and i was a vegetarian by ideology, not for Health Reasons from his 15 years. I believed in Global Warming and defended it vigorously. I believed in the big bang. I supported abortion and often let openly condemned others for being prolife. I have argued with abortion protesters on street corners and called them names im not proud of. I was not only not a christian, but i practice many other religions include many occult version. I was bitter against god and felt like only ignorant week people needed faith. I was too intelligent and too educated. Guest have come a long way. Host what happened . I didnt have an epiphany moment. You start with the beginning, and my household there is nothing more evil than a republican in satan itself. It was a very politically active household. My father and his father and all his brothers are union people. And so our political ideology came from that. Union born, union fed and when we die were union dead. So there really was no other choice. In that paradigm there is also a very strong work ethic. So if you want to be the right person you need to be, you need to be someone whos willing to work hard and put in the time and effort. My dad is one of the hardest working people i know. He was able to instill that work ethic in may. When it was time to go to college i put myself through school, student loans, jobs and i worked really hard. I graduated with a degree in biochemistry and i did not have i did not graduate with honey delusions of grandeur. I had to work at the bottom and work at. In doing so, i started noticing the paycheck. There are these taxes coming out of my paycheck. Being raised, i was taught that paying taxes is your fair share, to pay for the elderly and the orphans, the disabled, the people who cant take care of themselves. That is im looking around. Im noticing my Community Around me, im noticing the same people who werent working when i went to college are still not working. Not because they cant, but because they choose to make choices not to. I didnt think that the definition of fair. If taxes were about fairness than the people who work hard, who have sacrificed to put themselves in a better place would have to pay less taxes. So i started thinking, i dont have any problem with charity. I have a problem with government tell me i have to be charitable and to whom i have to be charitable too. So i have no problem socially speaking with taking care of the orphans and widows and disabled. I think the people of the community can do that. I dont believe thats the role of the government to take from me and give whoever they choose. Then, when i had a family i began to realize its not the government wiping gnosis and cleaning up sick in the late night, its not the government administering the discipline. Its not the government ultimately concerned on what kind of person my child can become. Thats responsibility that falls on me and my husband. It doesnt take a village to raise a child it takes a family. And when i looked around with the evidence in my community, the children that were being raised by the government and the system were not children who were respectful, who were as a whole, not respectful of their surroundings and of what they had in of the community, you have the individuals but for the most part they did not have the values that my family wanted to have. So i realized, its our responsibility. On that when i gave my life to christ, my whole life, on the seeker of knowledge. Always felt an emptiness inside of me. So, i tried to fill it with lots of stuff. I practiced all kinds of religions to fill that in tunis and me. It wasnt until i had a meeting, spiritual meeting with christ that i realized that only he could fill that emptiness. In learning and that, i realize, finally the proper role of government in the lives of the people. And so, its been a long process for me. In that process ive come to understand that a lot of things i held to be truth and wisdom were just as much based in the faith that i have an even less faith that i have, im sorry, more faith to believe in those things that i do to believe in god now. Have a hip that is 16 years old this may, and when i graduated when i got out of the military, where i met my husband, we moved back to his home town, and the opportunities to be a biochemist in the little rural area we were livingy, were very few and far between. Had to drive over an hour, and thats not like commuting in d. C. Where you sit in traffic for an hour. Mean youre really driving for an hour. And it just became very, very hard to keep up that, and i really didnt feel like that was what i wanted to do anymore. So to fill in the spaces, because im not a person who sits still well, dont just sit, i cant stay at home and do nothing itch had to go out find a job. Started working for a local attorney as a receptionist, secretary, just for something to do. And i noticed that i was doing a lot of his legal writing, and i was thinking, man, im doing all this work, hes collecting the paycheck. This is something i could probably do. And i discussed it with my husband, i was 31 at the time, and i was really sort of intimidated to go back to school at that time, and i said to my husband, is this something this is going to be a huge sacrifice for the family. Well have once again college debt, im not going to be able to work fulltime, have to be away from home, and he was my husband has always been so supportive. His favorite saying is, well do it or die trying. Well give it a shot. I talked to my mom about and it i said, mom, i dont know. Im so old now. Why go back to school . She says, how long does it tike good to install i said three years, she said, well in three years youll be three years older anyway, why not fill it with law school anyway . And so i did. And it was through the encouragement of a friend of ours, who was actually a childhood mentor for my son, he is he was chief of state attorney in our community, tom coleman. He also taught my husband karate in his teenaged years. I sat down and talked to him about this, and it was his encouragement finally that gave me the confidence to go. And when i went to law school, i knew what wanted to do right then and there. I was going to be a prosecutor. I was going to work for tom. Be the guy who wears the white hat and fights the bad guys, and i never had a Job Interview while i was in college. In law school. I never had any ambition to go work for the big law firms. I knew i was going and what i needed to do. So we got it done. I was actually given special permission by the Florida Bar Association in and the university of florida to become a certified legal intern to work for our state Attorneys Office before any of my classmates, because were a small rural community, ands the attorney then, jerry blair, wrote a letter to u. S. Saying we could use her help. And i actually had tried over ten jury trials before i even had my bar license, and it was such an amazing experience for me, and i think that is much to the chagrin of my husband, where my brain started changing. I had a very influential professor, named Joseph Little itch think he is retired now, too. He was my constitutional law teacher, and which is done in the first semester at law school, and he said were not here to teach you the law. Thats impossible. Were here to teach you how to think like lawyers. And then it snapped for me. I dont need to memorize all this stuff i can look up in books. I need to learn how to think, how to make this happen. It was the skill of being a linguist and learning document translation and learning to think like a lawyer, that made understanding the documents that the designers of the Constitutional Republic wrote, and learning how to apply them to the constitution as its supposed to operate. Lets get our viewers involved. This is book tv on cspan 2, and we invite an author to come on and talk about his or her book and their lives. This month its author, activist, constitutional activist, Krisanne Hall. She began publishing books in 2011, foye not a lifing, bringing document came out that year. Bedtime stories for buddy patriots came out. Liberty first, the path to restoring america came out the next were. Essential stories for junior patriots . 2013. The most recent book is sovereign duty which came out in 2014 and theres a new Childrens Book out as well,. Two, actually. And too much going on here at the table. Well get to those in a minute. Want to invite you participate in our program this afternoon. 202 is the area code if you want to dial in and talk. 7488200, east and central time zone. 2027488201 for those in the mountain and pacific time seasons. Now, if you cant get through on the phone lines but want to make a comment, we have social media ways of getting hold of us and that includes twitter, book tv, leave a comment there or join our Facebook Page at facebook. Com booktv. Youll see. Krisanne hall at the top. Well begin taking your calls in a few minutes. How did you decide you wanted to write a book . Thats a really great question, because i cant even remember actually sitting down and thinking, well, lets write a book. When i look back over the last seven years, it all seems a bit surreal to me because this is not the path i chose. It was it feels like a path that was chosen for me, that we simply said, yes, well do this. And so its funny, i think i would ask my husband if he remembers, but i saw a need. I think one of the things that i do i moon i think every individual has a gift, a unique gift in what they do. And one of the things i do is i connect dots. I am a dot connector. Im able to look at a picture and see how it comes together, and then able to explain that in a way that people understand. Instudying the constitution, not just simply what i learned in law school, because i learned as i started studying that we dont teach the constitution in law school. What we teach is constitutional law, which is has unfortunately become very different from the constitution. Our constitutional law classes teach that our judges and lawyers know more about the constitution than the men who wrote it, and that after all it was written over 200 years ago, was written over 200 years ago, so i cannot possibly be relevant today. Solyndra started reading what the designers of the constitution wrote in the history that a bill to and realized that errand understanding of the constitution stems from an ignorance of that history and a lack of a vision. It is where we get this idea that the constitution is a living breathing document. And there are different meanings of that. So i mean the people who believens the constitution is amendable by the Supreme Court opinion or legislative facts the or the need of the modern times obviously the constitution can be amended under very strict terms but there is a group of people in america who believe it is not a contract but a guideline for what we try to follow but i realized that understanding only comes when you extract the history in the foundation for what our constitution was built with started to connect the dots, obvious all of this is with the and the principles on which it is based in the ramifications are not unforeseen consequences the warnings to a said we need to put this in writing so other people can understand this. Are you in favor of the Article Five Convention . Iraq that is interesting because i think that oversimplifies that there is no yes or no answer. When i teach i dont mean to throw your question back you but you ask we are you in favor . Seventythree opinions i dont think they are necessarily relevant in the application but i am more concerned of how article five is intended to operate how those designers of the contract envision this contract . And how will that operate in light of todays vision of how it is supposed to operate . So the sovereign to the book has a whole chapter of that i also did a weeklong series on my radio show where i highlighted that as well where we talk about the Article Five Convention. You write the framers anticipated the need to amend the constitution as the awareness of liberty expanded and our need for government diminished it appears clear they thought it was needed but not to be taken lightly this is the quotation from Thomas Jefferson i am not an advocate for frequent changes of laws and constitutions fading moderate imperfections are to be born with because then once we accommodate ourselves to find practical means to correct them but i also know they must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. Absolutely. And it continues to make the analogy that to force a man to wear the same coat that he wore as a child would be the same as forcing Society Constitution that a war at its inception. Es so it is not living breeding . No. There is a contractual manner in a specific term under which that modification is tos take place it is not based on a whim or on modern trend or whoever is in political power this ideology taking control it says this is how we do this and it is the only way it can be done you cannot modify constitution terms by interpretation which does not needer to be interpreted it is not written in chinese it needs application and a contract so article v lays out those terms and if were going to have the convention is that modern day . James madison was concerned because he thought it actually says the only reason we are able to have this convention is because we just came from a bloody revolution and the horrors that we have seen by keeping the delegates minds focused on liberty and from personal gain or political gain and he says but i am concerned about a convention into the future of up motivation how do we keep those delegates focused and to be the people that made the problem . So when answering the question fhould we have Article V Convention the the answer must be based on the applicationen as it is intended. Why . What is the purpose . Will we have a convention to expand a the liberty of the people and limit the government even more . Please clarify the difference with the Supreme Court for instance like immigration as so many of us just see common sense that those books about the constitution theyre not supposedd to make the law in you are very smart so tell us that they make it themselves . Think you for your time. Guest that is a great question. When were talking about the role of the federal government and the acts that they create there are certain lines of questioning that must reassert is that authority delegated to the federal government to exercise that power . And are they exercising that within that delegated authority . With health care there is noor authorization or delegation to the federal government to exercise authority over health care that is the power to be reserved to the states. James madison who was named the father of the constitutionit also the fourth president wrote federalifederali st 45 and he explains that delegation and separationnd of power between the states and federal government. The power is delegated to the federal government are few and defined those that remain are numerous and in different those powers will be exercised on x journalist objects were in peas and foreign commerce and continues to say those are reserved to the states will include all of the powers of life and liberty in the property the internal order and prosperity of the states. Has not beened delegated by reserved to the states. Health care is the internal order and operation of the state and the property of the people which means it is very distinctly reserved for the states for the Supreme Court does not have a delegated d authority to expand the power that was delegated to the federal government they themselves are limited by the terms of the constitution because the Supreme Court is a product of the supreme constitution itself the modern Supreme Court has jumped outside and created a power to determine the power the federaler government and what is interesting our founders anticipated the court system to do that and made comments where that is not appropriate. So health care is not a power delegated to the federal government therefore not a power the Supreme Court can grant or sanction we have three branches. Threeee parts. Legislative executive and judiciary. Judiciary is part of the federal government. Of we continue to allow part of the federal government to define the power of a whole then we have an arbitrary government not bound by the constitutional standard whose only limitation of power is what it designs for itself and if that is the case we must admit we are now a big dinner republic. Host right in the path of restoring americas many time constitutional law class is distort and destroy the proper understanding and shift its authority. Right. That isrt part of that and mooring of the constitution and if you study the history , 700 years of government with a limited monarchy that was created by a anglosaxon community community, there is a trend of government consuming more power in in mentioned earlier in the history class those that create the constitution and the bill of rights but the fourth document is the preamble that the root of all this mischief to subvert the fundamental laws of liberty of our kingdom so what they really say we have been marching government 600 years in reseed the pattern of activity whose only purpose can be identified and that was the first death of government to take money to expand the power of government so when you have a court system not bound by the terms of the law but only bound by the ideology ideology, you can change the law without rewriting it. There is something about human nature the way we are hard wired we trust judges to bee fair and impartial. They are not influenced for personal gain or greed the you put all of the black world and you are shielded from that but history says that is not true and it is the court system that is tied to the government first to start doing the of vitter ink bidding of a government. Host the next call comes from utah good afternoon. Caller i am a former civics teacher and a big supporter of what you teach about the constitution. Multiple studies revealed 90 of all federal activity in those expenditures are unconstitutional or criminal so what is the duty according to the framers of every state legislature of the federal governmentl activities which violate those individual rights of the people . Also can you talk row be unconstitutionalu. Nature that is the most destructive Supreme Court decision in history that gives the federal government the power if they choose thosee laws. That is a fantastic question it is so much there it will be hard to address it but simply i will say this is the whole reason the answer to that question is why rewrote the book sovereign duty why i teach my state sovereignty class James Madison wrote federalist 52 there are two distinct spears in government the state in the there and he explained that in federalist paper 45 for perot what we have lost attachment to is the greatest check and balance on federal power to explain his writings the greatest check and balance is not the federal government checking himself but the check of the states on the government jefferson says if it looks on with apathys that is a euphemism for washington to say we will become colonies and a kingdom rather than the governments in a Constitutional Republic and aat great czech and balances the authority of the state to the governor and the attorney general and the local representatives in their promise to uphold the constitution of the United States to say to the federal government this power they you are exercising is outside the power we delegated to you to the constitution. Remember the federal government is a creation of the states the states are the master of the federal government and our framers hamilton, madison, jefferson , all of these understood it is the role in the duty of the states to control its creation to say we will remind you you have been delegated this power alone what youre trying to do is not delegated power. And since you are stealing the power from the states than the people is a lawful exercise which makes it nall and void. Hamilton says this federalist 78. Jefferson says it quite a of medicine says even the power of the judiciary cannot be above that because the states created the judiciary so the proper response of those who designed the check and balance is the state as individuals to say this is the of lawful exercise. Therefore it is null and void to us and we will not comply. James madison called interposition the role and led to devastate twostep between them lawful exercise of power by the federal government and jefferson explains called it nullification that a power exercised by the federal government not authorized by the constitution therefore urge all and 08 hamilton expressed. It in 78 to say no law contrary to the constitution can be valid so simply this states stepping up to say as your creator we have a responsibility to cure rights and liberties so that you dont become a kingdom again and we will reserve our power and limit your powers of the and Constitutional Authority is nil and void we see that happening today in america the states that have legalized marijuana arnold fein federal law. To nullify but there is no way within the constitution to delegate to allow the federal government to regulate plants or anything that we consume or inhale. That is a power created by the Supreme Court in a Supreme Court case that said because wheat could possibly be a matter of commerce and we have this Commerce Clause therefore is a power of the federal government to regulate the control of wheat and through a that they have the slippery slope so now we include marijuana. It does not have the authority to expand the powers that is what makes us a Banana Republic even the executive legislative or judicial no part can expand beyond constitutional limitations so this is the ultimate check and balance to say you are not authorized to regulate so as sovereign states we will operate based on the principles of the people of our state and legalize it. Host do you still practice law . I do not to. I have the inactive status that means i still have my barn number but i dont keep cases when you teach to a hundred 60 times i cannot take the case it would not be fair to my client and as much as imus the court room because i really do moustache and as a prosecutor i have more trials than most lawyers will have a mayor tire their entire career i had more than professors would never have but i do miss the court room with the advocacy but i really feel a passionate need to do what were doing now. Ca host from your book is says krisanne h hall is an attorney and former prosecutorhi fired after teaching the constitution to the teapartier groups. Guest when i started to learn about the constitution and realizing the difference between how the courts operate and have a constitution dictates they operate and how people see theirpp government as opposed to how the government is supposed to operate, i felt something stir in me that fire that says this is not right. So i started talking about it and we have a Supreme Court justice in florida named fred lewis at the time he was a chief justice and the reason why i wrote that book. He took a poll of floridians without using any resources or lookinge up just off the top of your head name all five with birdies of the First Amendment and he found out that only 2 percent of the people polled could name all five and that really disturbs me because here is the thing. If you dont know your rights have you know, theyre not already gone and how we i defend your liberty if you cannot define that . So federalist started a program called justice teaching were lawyers and judges volunteers to go into the classroom to teach on the First Amendment and that is how i got started teaching in middle schools and high schools and that bothered me this is the kids and adults cannot eliot a five liberties of the First Amendment. So then the news traveled when i was working as a prosecutor we had a unique opportunity that came into play at the samee time to adopt our son and im not able to have children so wanted children we had the chance to adopt colton. Excited about being a mom i wanted to stay home and be with my son. And the second unique opportunity came to work for a law firm that specifically focused on First Amendment law. And i could be a digital employee that it is to a halfhour is from my house i could stayay home and be with my son for the first two years of his life and still do what i do and that is where my passion really, really started to develop the study of constitutional law so this was a glaring a warm so in that position with a private law firm i was also a traveling across america representing people who were arrested for handing out fliers for in public protesting or holding rallies that the government did not know because they understand the constitution. I instructed schools and School Boards how to maintain the rights of theca student because students have a right to freedom of speech and freedom of expression within the Public Schools even the u. S. Department of education recognizes a student in a publicschool can have Bible Studies and write about their fate is relevant to the subject than handout religious materials in between classs the school will allow them to where superman on their shirt then they can wear jesus as well. We were busy advising the schools on that. When my term with a constitutional law firm and a web back to work and word got around what i was doing professional the the local school board asked me to come and speak to them they wanted to hold a meeting before the meetings will want to make sure they were compliant with the rights of we advise them how to include all religious indication invocation and include everybody has a Public School you collect taxes from everyone you have to reflect everyone in the community or it is theft and tyranny. So started to get invitations from private civic groups. Come teach us about this. So there is the weakening of the need a constitutional understanding. I was working for the state attorney who did not agree our was teaching the constitution or call for who i was teaching it to. This is all of my own time. I didnt do anything to interferebo with my a jobber talk about work he simply said you can work for me or do this at and after practicing First Amendment law realized that was not the right decision i had to make. Long story short here i am. And as valuable a rule i thought i had in the Prosecutors Office i wanted to retire their even my boss at the time said i was a top notch prosecutor kasai london with the same type of passion but i really believe what were doing here reaches so many more people with a greater impact on the future as well. Host virginia at thanks for holding please go ahead. Caller god bless you. And also cspan for having this forum also thinks to Krisanne Hall for her militaryta service and your Ongoing Service to this t country. I am a veteran myself but polite her to comment on to things the american Indigenous People and how the constitution can help them with the broken treaties you saw what happened at standingk rock and also how she got our ministry started in haiti i would like to help in that regard. That would be powerful thank you. Thank you very much for your service as well. What we have to recognize this is the results of the of blurred lines of our government that American People do not constrain the federal government to its power generally but it does things it should not be doing and not precisely what it should be. What we have forgotten is the native Americans Communities are sovereign governments they are not part of the United States. We allowed the Indian Nations to be sovereign nations within our borders and we did so by treaty that is how the federal government can make a treaty with the Indian Nation is like making a treaty with france or germany but the problem is that america is not keeping with the treaty were violating the contract with the native American Communities him that proper understanding how the federal government is supposed to work is essential to make sure it is doing what it promises and they think we do lead to a service by saying got government is mitt shore congressman better feeling to uphold these treaties with these four nations for a nation it is sure congressman who was not keeping the promises the president s over a decade not keeping these promises and we as a people do not understand our federal government doesnt have the authority to invade the borders of an Indian Nation than we have the authority to invade canada or mexico or france or germany. Is the dissolving of these lines of jurisdiction that have become some of the greatest problems we have had to control the federal government for crimping full you asked about our mission to haiti if you want to know more j. C. Hall. Org. Were very unique through a group called islander in evangelistic ministries and retake sail boats from florida to haiti to deliver humanitarian aid help with the independent development of communities supporting the economy locally rather than bringing stuff whole lot of the problems in haiti people are dumping things into the community especially the u. S. Government like rice haiti is to be one of the largest rice supporters in its region but now because we dont so much local rice farmers cannot compete with three. Free sweeties them to be selfsufficient economically and business minded and help them build independence from the ground up and we are christian missionaries to bring the gospel to help build a church rebuild the huge church and a little fishing village on a Little Island off the coast there was such a blessing it was very large. Cinderblock structure with a tin roof and completed right before Hurricane Matthew hit cities are little villages with no water the women have to walk till miles with a 5gallonon bucket every day with no electricity only provided by the generators and with Hurricane Matthew over 500 people from four separate villages and fishing violence takeou refuge in that building that we helped were not governmentfunded. We are faced funded and we love what were doing it you want to be a part of that go to j. C. Called. Org i hope you are blessed. Host somebody is interested in having you come teach a class. My a web site is Krisanne Hall. Com vermont to a lot if you think you want me to teach you contact us now. My assistant does all scheduling as soon as possible but we launched a new form called Liberty First University because over six years we have had to turn down invitations because it is just be. Fifth i am already maxed out we have spent more time in hotels and airplanes than at home. And is a burden on the family so we have had to turn down teaching opportunities because of the schedule. Er so Liberty First University has been dream but now people have b said put something on line so we can learn from you without being here and Liberty First University. Com is that not just somebody with a camcorder or cellphone these are classs were the of the highest institutions teaching constitution, of World History American History government civics philosophy, bill of rights that is historically accurate as if they were teaching it themselves so we have that available starting sitoday. Is a big day. Host from your book the prefers space i will not send my son to government schools that is the sacrifice we have decided to make i need his mind protected more than i need cable but if your child does attend protect them from brainwashing is your duty. Guest this is very sad to say in their breaks my heart as an educator. We have an education in america that is now more politically influenced than ever more ideological influenced the have left behind history in fact, and we teach opinion and Political Correctness and what we want our students to think instead of how to think. That is very disturbing for me and because of what i teach people send me the textbooks to say read this section on American History. Is absolutely mindboggling what were teaching our students today about the foundation of america. My daughter went to college and told me about one of her classs they set spent more time talking Alexander Hamiltons affairs for George Washington than his battle plan in the constitution then who the people were. So we teach that the women who founded america were nonexistent there was no female influence of a Constitutional Republic history books teach they could c not be involved because they were not respected, oppressed, and retreated four end capt. A lower social status. It is so disturbing because i know theseo women. They were respected. My favorite founding mother was the First American woman playwright ever. She roche experienced dial plays that were performed and published in the american colonies with a purpose of poking fun at the British Government. She is also the First American woman historian she rode a three volume set and said i have to write this history because i lived it she did not write it in a way to of those independents that with the true history so much so that after reading her book john adams wrote her a scathing letter because he did not like the way she portrayed certain events but she was an important confidant and adviser especially James Madison and George Washington. Mary kays that some may know her as Molly Pitcher given a Non Commissioned Officer status for her fight in the revolution. People like ms. Cummings whose husbands are all fighting who created their own local militias to guard their families from the british troops that were invading the homes and a burning and stealing and looting and they actually captured to tory infiltrators coming into their community and got important classified documents for our battles of liberty. They were so involved and respected and we deny them and their honor so we can support the ideology it is wicked. America has a new found love for the power of women. We want to champion women for whom they are but with a society like that why would we be championing these women . Abigail adams or Elizabeth Adams . Why arent we recognizing these women who believed so much in the equality of all people that liberty is for all . Theyre willing to sacrifice everything they had so we could achieve that. I think that is terrible i and the history books are ignoring them teaching the constitution was written by a a bunch of rich slave owners they could consolidate powers for themselves ignoring the men and women the black men and women that freed the slaves who became a part of the Liberty Movement to ensure their children were free. America is not unique because of our houses and cars and Economic Opportunities but because they were founded on the principle all men are created equal and that is what they believed our history denies the memory of a freed slave who was a wheeler for the merchant marines the first man to give his life for the battle of independence through the bostonon massacre. These people are not written about ive not pulling this oute of thin air there is so whole fanfare written that says a leader and voice that day the first to die collar viator revolution his hands are clenched at the crown his breath was the first one that liberty stream might flow his first was head of a low but this was the seat of the nation his life should bend honored. They believe read what be honoring him forever. But how many people know that name . Or George Middleton . Or peter salem . Or Phyllis Wheatley . These people who sacrifice their own personal p comfort for a new found freedom so their children could be free. How many know there is a provision among the states if you are a slave by then the slaves were white and chinese and irish and black but the majority of the slave population rate english white the British Government did not want any more they sold their old people their own people if you want to fight for independence you are a free man now the 14th amendment did not make them freed they were free long before that. A cultural change had to happen in the minds and people thate doesnt come through violence and war but teaching liberty in winning it for yourself. Who bader to fight than the person who was a slave . Iey gave perhaps we can talk about it. Host youre listening to a Krisanne Hall offering andis attorney in depth cspan to. The next call from missouri. Caller i lived in northern Jefferson County which is a suburb of st. Louis but my a congressional representative in the u. S. House votes with people halfway across the state in the wake of the ozarks in the entire United States has been so gerrymandered by the Republican Party that there is no way the house will ever be anything but republican. I am really worried about our c democracy from the standpointcr of gerrymandering and what are your thoughts and what we can do about it . Guest if you look at the big picture throughout history woolsey you cannot really. 18 brent one party or the other perks i personally i am very washingtonianan as far as Political Parties are concerned which puts me at opposition with both parties. George washington gave a farewell address and he actually warned against Political Parties there would be the destruction of a liberty in america so what we have now with the gerrymandering across america by both parties equally you are feeling Bad Influence and i would tell you wait a few years and that will probably change as history dictatesat but that is the symptom of a problem and not the problem itself. George washington will tell you that we have become a stoparty system and the American People have lost the indemnity so i wonder often how Many Americans understand democrats and republicans are not Government Agencies their private Corporate Clubs. That is why you have controversy that is what you have their primary elections before the general election primary elections are not civic functions that is where each private Corporate Club with those numbers are to choose who will represent that private Corporate Club in the general election. Now the unfortunate reality we find that with tax dollars with a quasi government function with the taxpayers pay for the election that is supposed to occur within the body of the private Corporate Club we have limited ourselves to two clubs now we have private Corporate Clubs that dictate to us elections, law, politics is part of the reason why we think that the president of the United States is a leader of america because he is less of a representative of theat states and more of a leader of the Political Party. When the one that kennedy to win the believe it is the Political Party. So we have to ensure we get back to their proper role and the proper application of the constitution and maybe then where we could elect candidates based on their qualifications on their character rather then based on their party affiliation. Our motto is liberty first. Principle over party and truth over personality. If we can stick to those three principles. To make sure that principles come first over personalities in order to maintain a just government. If we can gain a proper perspective on who Political Parties are than the people themselves would have better opportunity to control what happens. Host barbara is in huntington station, new york. Go ahead. Caller thank you for your work, chris christkrisanne, and sacrifice involved. I am so excited to hear about liber liber Liberty University because he heard you speak and wanted to bring you back and heard it would take two years before you could come back and speak to us. My question for you today is our founders put the right to religious freedom first of those five freedoms and i am asking how important did they feel religious freedom was to our country and how does coincide and work with the phrase separation of church and state. Guest thank you. That is a wonderful question. The reason it is first is because it is not just a religious right to practice your religion. It is liberty of conscious because our founders knew that if any government could kickitate to you how you think and who you worship then you have no liberties at all. One of our founders who was a delegate in the first state convention was john witherspoon. He was the president of the new jersey college. You should look at his history. He taught so many of who would become our america. He said throughout history you will never see a nation who sacrific sacrificed obtain any religious liberties. If we can be dictated in our thought process, and the most bases of the fundamental rights is our belief, then we will enslave ourselves in our minds to match the dictate of government and enslave our seflz to mind to what we cannot see. It is the worst form of slavery. Self imposed slavely. Unfortunately, because we dont teach the history of our constitution mostly at all, but when we do accurately, we believe that separation of church and state is something that is hystistorically never been. Since the year 300 and through our liberty charters that created our bill of rights, separation of church and state, first codified in the 1100 charters, was a promise that the government would stay out of the church. Henry the first is the team during the authorering authoring says if the government is influencing your church you have an evil and oppressive government. We dont have oppressive government so it is separate. Separation of church and state is not a protection of government but a protection of the church and protection of the conscious and freem of the conscious of the people. It is always meant the government has no business in your church. But it has been only since our most recent misunderstanding, and i think that has a lot to do again, with the way the Supreme Court operates outside of history and application based on personal interpretation and politics. We have come to believe separation of church and state means god has no business in public discussion. That is actually if you look at that, it is a very radical form of belief because the standard has been separation of church and state says the government stays out of your religion and church. That was necessary to make sure people remain free and have liberty. Because we dont understand separation of church and state thing, like i mentioned before, we have Public Schools and administrators who unconstitutionally, unlawfully, limit the speech and constitution. It is understood that our students do not check their right simply because they attend the government school. There is a student bill of rights that is available through the department of education and the Alliance Defending treedm is another organization that created a pamplet and i use and pass out. We have the catholics freedom of religion, liberty council, we have all of these people who are fighting for the understanding of religion freedom. That is what i love about what we do. I am not here to be the defender of all rights. I am an educator. Host one thing we like to do with authors on booktv is ask them to send enwhat they are reading. Our conversations and calls will continue after we look at krisannes hall list. Host Krisanne Hall, what about the constitution . Guest it is the primary sour source. It is because he was delicate. He takes in the discussion and our founders relied on a man named black stone and his understanding of english and apply it to this new form of the Constitutional Republican. It is unfortunate wedont teach that. We traded that for a treaty written by joseph story which is a federal centric and often missed application of the constitutions intent on the power of government. From our Facebook Page, joe eldrid, you seem to be suggesting a continuitey between the declaration of independence and the constitution. But many argue the constitution of 1787 was a betrayal of the revolution of 1776. Do your curses include the work of 19th century and the social constrain constraints. It is specifically designed for this. I limit myself to original source documents which mean when i look, i look for both documents written by the people who lived them. Not the interpretations of what is going on. The caller has valid points but and the foundings founders wrote this. It was important to determine well maybe i agree with this and maybe i dont. Email here. What is your opinion of 2014 standoff in oregon . Do you agree with the idea it was a federal Government Land grab . I think the fact she is asking for my opinion and i appreciate that but when you see moi most important is how would the designers of the constitution republic see what our federal government is doing with land in the west. That is the part that i teach. We have a group of citizens who are exercise their right to petition the government for readdress of their grievancgrie. They have a right to protest as long as no one is hurt and no property is damaged. But we also have to understand the federal government once again has a limited and defined authority in landownership. And National Parks is not a delegated authority in the constitution. T the federal government to form land, and that is article one, section seven the federal government owns property. Magazines and needing this. Section clause 32 further defines the article one clause and says of that property that the federal government owns this is the authority they have over their property. The constitution says it it is not a magazine or people building to run those three. There is no territory held in tru trust. They were saying the property and authority exercises by the federal government. It is specifically very clear and it is very clear. It is only when we leave and extract to wrote those dockms how much they wrote it. It is guaranteeed guaranteed the federal government can write this. He played with the writing on the land government but he was clear it was the government. We said the federal government has no authority over that land. It can never return to the federal government. Host jeff holly, facebook comment. On a hundred years of expansion of the federal government, have we passed the Tipping Point of return without a revolution . Guest that is probably my most asked question every where i go. Are we too far done . Here is the interesting thing, if we had the constitution in history, we would know exactly what we need to do. We would also know that we are not too far done. To be totally honest, we havent even begun to correct the wrongs. Our framers gave us a plan, a course of action to take when the federal government comes outside its limits and defined box. When we teach the constitution there is a history it repeats. They relied on that history as wisdom to create a security in the government. Patrick henry said i have one lamp in which my feet are guideded and that is by experience. Alexander hamilton said experience is the oracle of truth and where its responses are not equivalent they are held to be conclusive. Einstein said if you do the same thing over and over again and expect different results that is the definition of insanity. You know they anticipated maybe with this liberty because with liberty always comes prosperry but with the prosperity stemming from liberty the people might become pacified. In that moment, government will take more power with the permission of the people quite oft often. That is what we do in the book and couldnt put all the steps in place right now. As samuel adams said, the knowledge and virtual of the peop people. The control of the state and local government, and the use of state and local government do is control the federal government. One of the greatest gifts the designers of the Constitutional Republic gave us is the refusal to govern. We have become so federal centric that we now look to the federal government to solve all of our problems. They are the source of the problem and the solving of the problem must occur state and local. I dont teach my opinions but if someone were to ask me in my ideal world people would be just generally concerned about federal election. All of our political influence, support and time would go into the election of state and local governments because that is where all the power exists in the hands of the people. If people just understood how powerful the office of the sheriff is in the defense of our libbert liberty, we could change americas course back to a liberty centric place instead of a federal centric place in just a matter of years. Host and from her book not a living document, krisanne writes a common refrain is we fell asleep meaning our ignorance all allowed tyranny to sneak up on us. Next call comes from peter in renton, washington. Caller hello, my name is peterson. I just want to ask a question. Judges have the authority to determine whether an executive order issued by the president can take affect or not. Guest i think the best way to understand that is determining the position of the Supreme Court. I think we should start off by saying what the Supreme Court does not do. The Supreme Court does not make law. Supreme Court Opinions are not the law of the land. For us to give Supreme Court opinion, the authority of law, we are actually violating one of the most fundamental principles of our constitution republic of separation of power. Law making is reserved to the legislative branch so the laws reflect the people through equal representation. We did not elect anybody on the Supreme Court nor can you unelect anybody on the Supreme Court. What we need to understand is how Supreme Court opinions work. Not how we view them or interpret them to work but how law really works. A Supreme Court Court Opinion is only binding on the people in the courtroom. The parties of that case. And it is only binding on the parties of that case as long as it is consistent with the constitution itself under article six, section two, even the Supreme Court of the United States jurisdiction is limited by the constitution itself. The question is can the Supreme Court determine whether an executive order is lawful or not . The answer is yes, but the questions is what is the Supreme Courts opinion on whether an executive order is lawful or not consistent with the powers delegated within the constitution . So you would ask yourself as the Supreme Court is sitting a judgment over the executive authority. First and foremost, if the executive authority consistent with the constitution . Is the Supreme Court making its opinion based upon the constitution or their own political ideology. The Supreme Court doesnt nullify an executive order. It determines that its activity is inconsistent with the law. It is then up to congress to come and be the check and balance on that. If the Supreme Courts opinion is outside the jurisdiction, it has no authority at all. I wish there was one thing we could change about the way we speak about the Supreme Court. You quite often hear people say the Supreme Court ruled today. Courts dont issue rulings. Kings do. Courts issue opinions. If we understood them in their proper application as opinions that are only binding on the people in the courtroom, and only binding if consistent with the constitution, then we would have a better person of the role in place. Host 7488200 for the east and central time zone. 7488201 in the mountain and pacific time zone. Well also scroll through our social media addresses so you can contact us via social media. Next call from sean in hawaii. Go ahead. Host i hope you make it here some day. I. Caller i just have one dilemma. We were illegally overthrown in 1898 but the resolution passing congress on june 7th, signed by mckinley. We became a territory of the United States, finally becoming a state, the last state in the union. Now hawaiions are still seeing were illegally overthrown from the prior. How do we regain back hawaiian property, rights, land, from the state we are in now a part of . Host sean, are native hawaiians, hawaiian descended people, do they have any extra state rights at all . Hawaii . Caller um, yes and. No its based on blood quantum, but up in the air now because of the interbreeding. Theres only one islandwest live pure hawaiian and the island is privately owned bay family. So we dont have any outside of clinton saying, sorry, when he was president , a formal apology, we have not had any restitution given back to us. Host thank you, sir. Krisan hal, any response for that cal center sunny think one of most valuable things that hawaiians right now can recognize is that hawaii is a sovereign government within the union of the Constitutional Republic. Theyre no longer a territory of the federal government. They exist now within themselves as a sovereign government. The constitution was created the union was created through consent. From its ven inception the only way you became a part of the union was that the state itself consented to be part of the union. In the history of our Constitutional Republic, we invited parts of canada what we now noes canada to become part of the United States, part of our union, and they declined. The only way you legally become a part of the union is through consent. The argument now that i hear is that those hawaiians did not consent but were conquered. But heres the good news. Because you are a sovereign government, because our union exists, in a consensual nature of sovereign government, not a mandate, not a conquer, but you choose to be here, as a sovereign government, you can choose to go longer be a part of us if you dont want to. A lot of people would refer that to secession, and that is an issue that becomes controversial. How can a state secede . No state has the trying secede. Of course extra tate can secede because we did not form this union based on mandate. It was formed on consent. If we would just simply look on a global perspective, the United States of america is quite like the European Union. A union of sovereign governments coming together for their mutual benefit. Great britain, being a sovereign government, a former member of the European Union, decided they no longer wanted to be part of the European Union, and that it no longer saw the benefit of it so they left the European Union. They had the right to do that because they were 0a sovereign government. The union of our states is not created differently than that. Matter of fact the European Union is a picture of the union that we created in the union of our states in our Constitutional Republic. So it has to be a matter of consent, because if you deny a state its liberty to remove its consent, then your state is no longer a state. It is now a colony in a federal kingdom and we are not a republic but a kingdom itself. Host krisan hall, lets Say Something is watching this today and goes to your web site and wants to invite you to speak to a group. School group, civic group, whatever. When is the first available date . Guest oh, i dont know. Youll have to talk to i encourage them to actually fill out the speaking request form because janet host wouldnt be tomorrow or next month. Guest no. No. Probably be 2018. Were coming towards the end of the year, and remember, in november, our Haiti Mission begins. So november and december and the first part of january we are in country in haiti. So you dont have to rush and put something together. We, work in 2018 and build it up and get a good crowd or get what we need to satisfy the School District to be in there, or i have a class that i teach that is specifically geared towards Law Enforcement. A threehour course on the constitution. This is actually one of the a unique course. My course i teach Law Enforcement actually does deal with Supreme Court case law in the realms of first, second, and Fourth Amendment issues. And so if you have somebody that wants know teach that course, you can call me sign up through the form. Janet knows where im going to be. And she has all always tries to block at least a week in a certain location so we can get many, many meetings, and as she is blocking them, there are always open days. So it will be 2018 but it may not be may. It could be april because were already slotted to be in your area for a week. Host next call for kris zap hall from james. Thank you to booktv and cspan. Miss hall, aim a fellow colleague in tampa, florida, i work in real estate law and we appreciate what youre doing for us, ands i said to call screener, which i kind of evolved a little bit during your course of action here, i just want to get your feedback on the overall control of the healthcare issues that we have witnessed over the past week, and also to get your take on being that your mother what you think about vaccinations and it was just on msn today about government is cracking down on parents that refuse vaccination, and thank you for taking my call, and p. S. , jana and i have been in church and if you ever come to tamp passion florida, you have a host ready to host you. Host james, two questions. What is your take on the vaccination issue and the healthcare issue . Caller well, i run several radio shows as well, bank versus utv, big pharma versus utv, and frankly, its like Everything Else that is good, i feel its been usurped. Feel its a Big Pharmaceutical Companies have really taken advantage of money over health. I dont have a problem with someone that is in a profitable business, say, horse and buggy whips, but when youre going to be in the business of Human Health Care or even Animal Health care, i think you need to put the profitability side aside and i will interject to you that we noticed that congress and the house voted last week on the fd as im going to use the air quote extortion on the fda taking kickbacks off or higherend medical equipment, being manufactured and sold, and then taking a tariff off each time a patient is, say, given a cat scan. I dont want to get all nasty here, but at the end of the day, we have been usurped. We have been extorted and its time to give control back to at the people, the local municipalities. I have a lot of people that are encouraging me to run Public Office and some night is say my prayers and ask god to give me strength, and i did do air your shows on my internet tv. Ive been the touch with janet, and in closing on that, im on the fence. If i wore to be elected to office, i would not sway but i think we need to get rid of the good old boy network. Host james, thank you. Guest when were talking about the federal government we must first ask the question, what is the article, section and clause that delegates that authority to the federal government to exercise that power. There is no delegation of authority within the constitution for the federal government to have a food and drug administrationment they have no authority to regulate our food, our drugs, or anything that we consume or grow. This is clearly a power reserved to the states. The interesting thing is, when you study the ratification debates and the chief discussion that was happening, pro and con, of the constitution, the greatest objection to forming the union through the constitution was that the states would lose their sovereignty; that the federal government would become a kingdom and the states would be reduced to tributeary colonies. Is was through the discussion between what we call the federalist and antifederalist papers we understand, especially in the 40s section of the federalist papers, firstist 45, james mad disson is assuring the states, your sovereignty will not be usurped. You will retainure reserved power. Those reserved powers were all the affairs of the lives, liberties, properties of the people, the internal order and improvement and prosperity of the state. Madison was ensuring us assuring these states that the federal government has a very limited and fine power but will never, ever intrude on the Domestic Affairs the states in this way. We know that this must have been accepted to be fact because had this one point, in particular, not be accepted as fact as the driving fact of our Constitutional Republic, those states opposed to the Constitutional Republic would have never ratified. If they had not the assurance theyre powers would be reserved. So the federal government not having policy through the constitution to regulate food and drugs makes the fda an unconstitutional, unlawful exercise of power within the jurisdiction of the state. The federal knowing that, the federal government cannot possess a lawful power to mandate vaccinations, cannot possess a lawful power to mandate health care, cannot possess a lawful power to insert attacks on the people to pay for health care, and i think what you mentioned about the pharmaceutical companies, is another symptom of our federal government out of control. Theres a big argument today against capitalism. Capitalism is not the problem. What we have is corporateism today. We have the federal government picking winners and losers through political lobbying and kickbacks and Fund Offering certain products and certain corporations, but what is really happening in america. So our corporations for most part are not ruled by the Free Market Society because of this unlawful exercise of authority by the federal government. So, that is what we need to do. Youre right, we need to return this power back to the states so the people of the state can make sure that their state reflects their principles and their beliefs. Host facebook comment, dylan the comment im hearing most often from miss hall is we dont teach, et cetera, et cetera. Perhaps the problem is that students or citizens are not interested in learning about the constitution as much as miss hall. These are abstract concepts and sometimes difficult to teach and motivate students to learn. Guest the thing the first thing would agree with is these are not abstract concepts. These are axiomatic truths, and you can only believe theyre abstract concepts because were not teaching the history that proves they are truth. Theyre unavoidable truths. Theyre things that happened throughout history, over and over and over again. Heres not unseen consequence. Theyre exactly walt we note. Like Patrick Henry said, lamp lights or future and our path. Our path and our history is our greatest teacher. Would challenge him to say its not the duty of the student to want to learn. Its the duty of the teacher to make him hungry to learn. We have been dumbing down our students in classrooms filled with mandates and boredom and remember these dates and names, without teaching that these people will lie. Were talking real live tv drama in the 1600s who got brothers killing brothers to become king. We have kings putting people in high towers because they wont pay their taxes. Weve got freedom of speech being interrupted, kings outlawing plays and stuff like that. I think the deficiency is not in the heart of the student but in the pacific of at the passion of the teacher. I teach students from 6 to 96, is my old e student so far, and i teach a firehour work fivehour workshop on saturdays that goes through the history of the constitution, through the bill of rights, i show you where the came from, that the mean, how how our offenders intended them to be applied, where we have gone off track and the solutions to making them right. In those fivehour workshop, five hours of teaching, six hours in a day, i have students of all ages, six, seven, eight years old, who sit and listen and learn in that workshop the whole day. The dont take notes. But they draw pictures about what im talking about. Pictures of me speaking and little pictures of what they learned sparks they get excited about that. One of my favorite i have two favorite stories that it wrote about on my web site. One is about a middle school girl named whitney. I dont remember where i was teaching but was brought into the Public School to teach the history of the constitution, and whitney came up to me with her friend, you know, she is Just Middle School so all intimidated and said i wanted to thank you for coming and teaching us today. We have had other people come in and teach us, but they dont teach like you do. She said its just the way you teach that made me excited about what you were teaching. What we need is passion back in our classrooms. I had a High School Boy which i think is probably my toughest audience, High School Boys. And after teaching the history of the constitution, he came up to me and he shook my hand and said, miss hall, thank you for taking you time to come and teach us. He said want to be in government. I might even want to be president one day. But after what you taught me today, i want you to know that i will never let anybody take my liberty again. Its the teachers job to make the student hungry. This is not just a paycheck. These are not just numbers. These are not just statistics and standardized testifieses. This is the future of america, the minds that will lead america, and they deserve our jut most passion. Host in liberty first you take on john dewey. Guest john dewey my goodness. What the education departments laugh as the founder of the American Education system but he was a signer of the marckist manifesto, the humanist manifesto, and when you read the statements of dewey, and the plan that he had for more than education you have to question why our teaching system would even uphold him as an authoritiment he believed that literacy was overrated, and that illiterate actually led a more happy life and that is was more important to teach children to socialize than it was to teach them how to read and write, science, arithematic and theres an aural on my web site, called stolen education, stolen children, stolen future, which where i have captured an outline of the creation of our modern School System that begins in 1885. And if we are not familiar with the names of thorne dyke, dewey, stanley hall and what their philosophies were and how the drive still today our American Education system, then we cannot know why our students are failing in literacy today. Host again from liberty first, you write, our educational system has become concentration camps of brainwashing and marxist programming. Our students are not only not taught the constitution in and the principles of liberty, theyre constantly indoctrinated that america is the source of all that is evil in the world. Americas founding documents are flawed, its Founding Fathers were big gotted oppressor, the values antiquated. The free market system destructive. Next call for our guest comes from vernon in newport news, virginia. Go ahead. Caller hello. How are you doing, miss hall, thank you for cspan, all three networks. Miss hall, recognize about the state sovereignty and what i was thinking is that if we recognize state sovereignty, state sovereignty justified the segregation laws, state sovereignty justified the secession from the union and state sovereignty justifiesed to the with heavy mel anyone content to be property and not human beings, and therefore, none of that would have been corrected if there had not been the use of or the recognition by a higher level, the other part of government, being the federal government. Thats why i think state sovereignty when i hear states rights, it scares me because ive never seen states rights work for those who are in the minority. I do agree with you that local and State Government is important, and just as important as federal and if not more important. I like to hear your opinion on that. Guest i bet if we talk about the history of that rather than my opinion because what you described is a common misconception about history in and of itself. If you want to know how the constitution was a mechanism to end slavery, theres an article on my web site, titled how the constitution ended slavery. And what we need to understand is that state sovereignty did not condone any of those things. State sovereignty did not condone segue agree gracious, and state sovereignty is not what declared men to be property. That was the Supreme Court who declared men to be property in the dred scott case. The Supreme Court using their errant interpretation of the constitution and misapplication of history, determined in their opinion, that men were property and people picked that up as law. State sovereignty does not enslave. State sovereignty makes free. One aspect of history we dont teach is that during the civil war, free states were nullifying federal law to free slaves. Most people dont recognize that the federal fugitive slave act was a federal law that was being enforced even up into the civil war, and the free states were telling the federal government, we are a sovereign state, you dont have the authority to dictate to us the classification and identification of our citizens. This person is in our state and this person is free. And since this person is in our state, were a sovereign state and is free, we will not recognize your federal law to enslave him. So it is actually the sovereignty of the states that was winning the freedom for all people. Our history likes to teach that specifically black men were not free before the emancipation proclamation, that is not true, denial of history of people like james fortman, and George Middleton, George Middleton formed the African Benevolent society of 1786. He was another only a free man. He was a citizen who owned a not for Profit Corporation to benefit the families, the widows and oar fan orphans of the black soldiers who fought in our revolution. The idea that the civil war ended slavery is also errant because if you look at the law s within the states, the institution of slavery was practically nonexistent throughout the union and only existed in small parts within the individual states. It did not end civil war did not end discrimination either, did not end abuse of the people, as you call it, for people with higher content of mel anyone. If the civil war did that why did king king have to march in a. M. . What we need to recognize today, something that the designers of our Constitutional Republic, black, white, yellow, red, male, female, all recognized is that the concept of liberty is not something that is won by conquer and mar. You do not free through constitution. You cannot plow other field overnight. In order to incorporate liberty into a society it must be a societal change and thats what was happening in america. This societal change that actually said, we the people. We, the people, will make change. It this Constitutional Republic that makes America Great because only in a Constitutional Republic can a Minority Group have a society changing voice. And this is just scratching the surface. Fear in those short period of time ive not gone a really good justice to this but i would encourage you, encourage everybody, to learn the truth about the end of slavery in america, to learn the truth about how liberty is spread and what our founders did to make sure that we were a place built on the principle that all men are created equal. All men are created equal and today by the crater with certain inalienable rights. Host tim from massachusetts go ahead, tim. Good afternoon, guys, folks. Sorry. Cspan, thank you for this opportunity to speak with miss hall. Its really great. I think you scoured a real coup here so to speak. Have tried to educate myself and read and i have a small understanding of what you have of the problems. Thick one of the biggest problem is it voicer apathy or apathy of the public in general and how to get people to understand that their vote does mean something. Think people feel like it the government has no doesnt have a hook into their lives and they dont care about voting. Thought about Different Things and to great to a hear you today. One thing ive wondered about is why since 1908 we have not changed the number of representatives in the house of representatives, and how that is affected the proportion of people whom they represent, and made it difficult for us to have the mechanism to reach people through the state and if we just return to what we had back then, which got changed every 12 years prior or so before that, we would have four time as many people in the house of representatives, and i think we could do that by cutting everybodys salary a quarter, and thats what we would pay people to go in, and i think we would produce a lot of changes, help us fix the problem not having enough parties, and we would need to make other changes to have this happen, and again, think maybe Constitutional Convention might be possible. Might be necessary. So, thank you very much. Id like to hear your dish want to ask one question. What did corporations overcome to become people as so many other minorities have . Thank you very much for your time. Host okay, the size of the house of representatives guest the them and all that stuff. Believe the apathy of the people is a symptom of a great are problem, and the greater problem is the lack of education which results in the people feeling overwhelmed. I dont know about you but what when sigh a project or task that is very big in front of me i have a terrible habit of proapparatus proapparatus nateing the beginning of the probable lamp because it feels overwhelming. If dont try i wont fail. That is what voting has become. We have become so overwhelmed with the out of control nature of the federal government but the fact our congressmen dont follow the constitution. If they even know what the constitution means, and they rarely ever listen to the people and were convinced that lobbyists and their dollars have more control than the people who actually elect our representatives to office. So the real problem, once again, as samuel adams say, the universal ignorance and the debeaked manners of the people. He said well sink underneath our own weight without the aid of foreign invaders and part of the thinkingses is that physical feeling of being overwhelmed because you dont have control. I we can teach the people the power and control they have, well be able to break freeway of the prison of feeling overwhelmed and actually make a difference. Its something you mentioned about the its interesting you mentioned the size of the number of representatives because in my book, sovereign duty, in the chapter on article 5 conventions, we actually in a sort of tangent, address that. For the last 50 Years Congress has been researching how an article 5 convention should work if it should ever be called. And in this research they called together their experts people they claim to be experts, and they gather reports and the Congressional Research survey issues reports. One of the point brought forward was the fact that were supposed to be reapportioning the number of house members. There was even a fight in the 1920s to make that happen. Some states brought forward, hey, this is what you have to do. We havent done it for a long time. We must do that. And i cant recall the name off the top of my head if you rat that chapter you can see it. But one of the special counsel for the for congress at that time used that precedent as a mechanism to say that even if the states want to call a convention, congress does not need to call a convention. He said after all, when the states brought forward the necessary tonight the ford the rea portionment of congress, and congress refused, nothing was ever done. His point was that the states in the power that Congress Holds now through perceived authority, the states have no way to actually force congress to do anything they dont want to do. And because they cant force congress to even follow the constitution, they cant force congress to amend it either. So the point was, who cares if states get together to form a convention . Because congress, if they dont want to they dont have to because the precedent has already been set. This series and assumption of power by congress can only exist because the people have lost touch with the power and the placement of the sovereignty of the states. Host walter, form solisster general, advised congressin 1979 that if the states want to trespass any original limitations on the convention, then they have the fewer do so. Guest uhhuh. Host what is the cover of sovereign duty, the big x . Guest its the roman numeral 10, the 10th amendment was the codification, the reassertion of the sovereignty of the states. It reads see if i can do this by memorythe powers not delegated to the United States nor i always forget that middle clause nor specifically prohibitinged to it by the state are reserved to the states. So, basically what that means is if the power is not specifically delegated within the articles of the constitution, that power is reserved to the states. So the power is the federal government possesses are specifically enumerate, and Everything Else is reserved to the states. One problem is we have lost attachment with the definition of word. The word reserved is a very powerful word. Ill actually implies property ownership, dominion over something to the exclusion of everybody else. And so by reserving power to the states, what were saying is the states have property dominion over this power to the exclusion of all government, foreign or domestic. Host you also talk about the word shall, and shall not. What does shall mean legally. Guest in my 11yearold knows what that it mean. Dont know what is wrong with judges and politicians. It is means what it means. It is a specific and ultimate prohibition. What we have, though, is another human nature aspect that comes in. Throughout time the meanings of words become del lewdded or redefine diluted and redefined. Were actually seeing in legal documents and in legal dictionaries the idea that the word shall and may are synonymous, which is dish dont know linguistically ridiculous to assert that. Always had very distinct meanings. Thats how society goes and comes from the lack of proper teaching. I like to give this example when im teaching. I want to tell people, am here to encourage you, right . Well, when we say encourage, you might get the sort of vision of a cheerleader in your mind. Look at the definition of the word, encourage. It means to infuse with courage. As a former biochemist to infuse means to saturate to the sell you already level. Im veer to infuse you with the courage to do something. A little more than a cheerleaderring are right . Thats why we have to hold tight to standards instead of del luting things into meaningless boxes. Host have you been asked anything by our viewers today that you have never been asked before . Guest no, sir. After six years, you know like i said, we dont just we dont just preach to the choir, all the to the choir does niece education. Were teaching lots of different people and social media brings a real varying set of ideals into the public forum. I think the thing that is attractive about what we teach and the we we teach is were so libertyfocused, we are not politically tied, were not party tied, we are so liberty focused its attractive to all people and inviting. Its not intimidating because im not not going to stream and yell at you because you dont like my political candidate. Were going to have a logical, historical, and factual discussion, and im pretty tolerant of my Facebook Page with discussion because i like to have that public forum but i dont tolerate people would want to come and throw around political epithets and that sort of thing. So, we do try to make our forums very, very inviting for all people because liberty no Political Party owns liberty. As a matter of fact its unfortunate, as washington said, that the institution of Political Parties is usually antiliberty. Thats why Liberty First University is important because its going to be able to reach people in the privacy of their own homes. Dont have to be embarrassed to comb to a meeting where were talking about the constitution, and they can see the universal nature and applicableity of the constitution and liberty. Host in your view or research, what have the Founding Fathers get wrong . Guest if there there is one thing i can point to they missed the mark it was their faith in people to learn lessons of history. They really believed in that quote you gave from jefferson about the amending of the constitution they really believed that with prosperity we would have less war, we would have less conflict. The union would ensure the way the constitution was designed, limiting the authority of the executive, would limit the number of wars were in, that would the union itself would create a peace and prosperity among the states, which would allow the people to spend more time in the development of their understanding of natural law and philosophies and liberties to give them a greater attachment to liberty and to need less government. And i think it was their faith in that progression that missed the mark most. I think that although they hoped that, they also knew that there were certain aspects of human nature that will always play the same way, which i why they always had a plan b. In place, like e the plan to control the federal government when it gets out of control. One of my other favorite found issues, named Richard Henry lee, and i agree with many of the historians he is the writer of a series of antifederalist papers called the letters from a federal farmer, and in that he says that history proves that people will suffer an unavoidable what how did he unavoidable period of inattentiveness. As we become pacified by pros apart, lazy in luxury, come place sent and quiet, history dictates the people women surveil an unavoidable interval of inattentiveness and thats where the Education Needs to come in. Guy has been waiting patiently in fall city, washington. Youre on with kris ann hall. You allude today history as the facts. Im talking get preamble of the constitution. The history of america, the robber barons and the history of labor the country. The preamble says to promote to ensure, domestic tranquility and promote the general welfare. Now, being 80 years old myself, i am familiar with my fathers days and for the 150 years before i was with the democrats took over and the new deal was the only time that was promoted the general welfare, and its been taken back by the robber barons today, and the latest legislation that ive watched go through congress in the last six months has given it back to robber barons and the promote the general welfare is a thing of the past. Guest well. Host response. Guest i think what we need again understand is the meaning of those terms ensure domestic tranquility and promote the general welfare as they were written to mean, not as we interpret them today. To promote to the domestic tranquility was something that was addressed in the first ten sections of the federalist and the antifederalist papers. What they meant by to ensure domestic tran quit by the formation of the union, they believed it would connect the states, these independent sovereign governments together, would connect the states in a relationship that would keep them from warring with each oomph their whole experience is europe, and these neighboring states constantly warring each other because they didnt have a relationship with each other that encouraged domestic relationships, and so to ensure domestic tranquility, the purpose of the union in doing that was to create a relationship between the states where they could not only cooperate but also rely on each other. So, ensuring domestic tranquility was not a power of the government to impose regulation on the state. It was to be a naturally occurring thing that happened through the relationship of the confederation of the states. The general welfare is also a very, very misapplied and misinterpreted phrase in the constitution itself. General welfare has absolutely nothing to do with handing out money to people from a National Level to a from a federal level to a local level. General welfare is not what we describe today as welfare programs. The general welfare clause was Incorporated Interest the preamble as a reminder of the purpose of the powers delegated to the federal government, and it stems from the problem that we had in the articles of confederation where the federal government was making inequitable treaties that benefited one state and the other states had to foot the bill. They said when the federal government exercises its powers as author thyroid the articles in the constitution authored through the articles in the storks it must remember that whenever it makes a treaty, it must take the general welfare of the union of the states in mind. You cannot make a treaty that benefits one of another. You cannot go to work because of one state over another. You cannot declare peace because of the views of one state, ignoring all the others. That general welfare clause was to refer to the general welfare of the states as members of the union, not as a handout to the people on the individual level. Any welfare that was to take place had to take place on the local level, not from the federal to the local. Host liberty first, heres a todo list. Keep the proper perspective. Educate beyond the election. Id and educate candidates, sure and hold halls of power, purge recapture g. O. P. , expand new media, recapture education of children, pray for pastor awakening. Guest i would say that the purge the g. O. P. Would have to apply to all Political Parties as well. I think the reason that we focused on the g. O. P. Because of the g. O. P. s platform is dedicated to the constitution. I wonder how many members of the g. O. P. Have actually read the g. O. P. Party platform, especially 2016, which says we are the party of the constitution, we are the party of state rights, we are the party that will believe in limited government. Problem is, with so many people who call themselves r republiccages who will operate contrary to the constitution, operate contrary to sovereignty of the states, expand federal power and federal realm and theyre not following the platform. Suggest that the governans of political system if were walk with this party paradigm, the people have to be willing to hold people to standards of their party and get rid of. The if they dont. Any republican that votes to have federal health care is operating contrary to the Political Party platform, because federal health care is contrary to the power delegated to the federal government. And in so its the standards that we must uphold but its not pop floor say that. I think pop floor say that and because were so districtly liberty, that puts me at odds sometimes with both parties. But what we need to see is that all liberty itself this most valuable possession we have as human beings. John adams said liberty must at all hazard be supported. Host in essential stories for junior patriots, you have study questions. I thought about making viewers answer one of these ahead of time but i couldnt answer half of them so i didnt want to look like a fool. Guest can you name the five liberties. Host ive one trying, speech, religion, gathering. Guest assembly. Host right to petition. Guest uhhuh. Host and guest guest press. Host that one. Guest the fun thing about petition its not just the right to petition. Its the right to petition for a readdress of grievances and thats something we inherited from the magna carta, clause 61 says that not only do you have the right to petition but you have the right to be made whole based on your petition. Host heres a study question for the viewers to concentrate on. What do you think the antifederal yeas were worried about when the federalist wanted to give the Central Government more power . Theres one for you to noodle on. As we hear from melinda in jersey shore, pennsylvania. Caller hello. I wanted to ask you two questions. The first one is that James Madison says the state power extends to the live, liberty and property of the people and the internal order and prosperity of the state. And the word of founder ands the states compact, what says that theres a limitation to our state and local governments or do we have to comply with rules that directly conflict with our rights . Guest what a beautiful question. Heres the thing. The states were reserved this power because that is the home of the people. Remember, it is not up to government to limit itself, ever. It is the responsibility of the people, as our framers said over and over again, its the jealousy and the vigilant of the people in the defense of their own rights to limit government itself. Every single government must be limited by natural law. Theres a great book that you can read that helps you understand how that is supposed to work. Its called the law. Additionally, Thomas Paynes book, the right man and thomas im sorry James Madisons essay on property and samuel adams essay on the rights of northwestern colonists, all address the aspect of natural law, and to really just sort of answer your question in a nutshell, i want to redirect you to the declaration of independence, because remember the declaration of independence was written to announce and declare the formation of the states by the people. The declaration of independence says, we hold these truths to be selfevident that all many are created equal and endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights and says that to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men deriving their justice power from the consent of the governed. So the single purpose for creating our states, the only reason they exist, is not to create economic improvements, not for national security, not for business regulations. It is to secure our rights. That is their primary and sole rope for existence. Sole reason for existence. Remember our declaration of independence continues and says that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these means the securing the rights of the people it is the right of the people to alter, abolish, jefferson with right they have a duty to do so. So the reason that the states were reserved this power is because that is where the people had the most control. You have more control over your state legislator or your federal congressman . The answer is obvious, more control of the governor or more control of the president of the United States. Obviously you have more control over your local government so they can be have access to more powers because you have more power to limit their exercise of the power. Its when we forget the natural rights we possess by the nature of our creation, and that we trade our liberty for security and comfort, that we find ourselves in a place where your states become gist as tyrannical as a larger government, and so the states do not have the right to be tyrannical. Their only purpose is to secure the rights of the people. Host email knut reynolds from arizona. Im glad i discovered you on booktv. You messengered at one point in you life you had a spiritual conversation with christ would you mind giving more detail how this happened, what form it took, et cetera. Guest my goodness. Wow. Thats very personal. Like i said in the beginning, i was im a truth seeker, and i always felt an emptiness, so i kept trying to fill that emptiness with something. And a series of events happened in my life that made me very miserable. When i broke my hip in the military, the va medical system was very, very bad to me. So bad that we had congress get involved and force them to actually help me and treat me. I was living with chronic pay. Couldnt do laundry, couldnt do anything in the house without being in bed for two days because i had a broken hip but nobody would help me with it. And i think because of my struggles, because of the chronic pain, because of things going on, we were also struggling in our marriage, the family was having trouble we were in church and remember i said that i used to believe that christians were weak, stupid people. And i was too smart for this. Im struggling internally with this faith thing because i thought it was impossible for me to have faith in something i cant see, feel and touch. So we had gotten involved we started attending a church and were listening and i was doing my studying, im a very diligent researchers. And the more i read, the more it started to affect me, and i think we hit that point where i realized, i cant pull myself up by my boot straps anymore. I cant fix what is wrong anymore. And i remember being in church that day and just being so absolutely broken. I just said, look, god, if you who are they say you are, then be real to me that way. And i will let you do whatever you need to do to fix this and i will live my life for you because i believe that you did that for me. And i would love to tell you that everything miraculously angels and choirs and all that kind of thing made everything better immediately but thats not the walk of a christian. But it was through our faith and our understanding of the promises of christ that anything that we go through is for the glory of god for the betterment of ourselves and we can go through this by faith, knowing that theres a bigger plan and a birth picture and that all of the suffering we have today is accompanied by a great amount of joy and peace and happiness, and i never felt that in any other religion. Never felt that peace, never felt that settlement. I never felt that hope