Staff Writer, DL Mullan
History/ Government
______________________________
Does
voting matter? Some Americans believe voting is an essential part of one’s
civic responsibility. While other Americans do not think that voting does
anything at all. Both perspectives have their pros and cons.
Voting
used to mean: one person one say. Now, voting is used by the elite political
class to manufacture consent. Voting is also a way to pull consent away from
politicians and agendas the People do not wish to follow. It is just a matter
of perspective.
So
what do we do as a nation? Vote the better of two evils? Or, do we just stop
voting when the direction of the country goes off course?
Some
uninformed person is always going to vote. That is the nature of our world.
Voting is going to happen, so why not vote against the system? Vote against
career politicians. Vote against any agenda that takes rights away from any
group or individual.
The
elite class understands the rules of public administration: agendas must be
made public in one way or another, consent must be granted, and the People must
be dumbed down in order for the voters to play the cyclical nature of the
elite’s consent game.
Round
and round, we go. Nothing ever changes for the better; no matter what we do. It
is time for a change, how about you?
Let’s
take a look at the events, laws, and agreements that have led America into
its present precarious predicament:
When
our nation was founded in 1776, the new government understood that the People’s
liberties, freedoms, and rights had to be secured from this political theater
called manufactured consent.
In
the original Constitution, federal and state powers were enumerated as well as
balanced. The House of Representatives were elected by popular vote: “The House
of Representatives will derive its powers from the people of America” (Federalist
No 39). Senators were appointed by their respective states:
The Senate of the United States shall be composed of
two Senators from each State, chosen by the Legislature thereof, 3 for six Years; and each Senator shall
have one Vote (Constitution, Article I, Section 3).
James
Madison in the Federalist No. 39: The Conformity of the Plan to Republican
Principles confirmed that in order to protect state’s rights, and the rights of
the ordinary citizen, one of the bicameral institutions must reflect that
origination:
“The Senate, on the other
hand, will derive its powers from the States, as political and co-equal
societies; and these will be represented on the principle of equality in the
Senate” (Federalist No 39).
Later
the 17th Amendment changed how Senators were elected.
AMENDMENT XVII
Passed by Congress May 13, 1912. Ratified April 8,
1913.
Note: Article I, section 3, of the Constitution was
modified by the 17th amendment.
The Senate of the United States shall be composed of
two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and
each Senator shall have one vote. The electors in each State shall have the
qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State
legislatures.
When vacancies happen in the representation of any
State in the Senate, the executive authority of such State shall issue writs of
election to fill such vacancies: Provided, That the legislature of any State
may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the
people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct.
This amendment shall not be so construed as to affect
the election or term of any Senator chosen before it becomes valid as part of
the Constitution.
In
this manner, the power of the states were diminished for the majority rule of democracy
instead of retaining the ideals of a balanced and equal republic. This instance
was not the first time the Constitution, federal powers were altered in favor
of centralization.
Within
73 years of the Federalist papers, the Civil War began. The landscape of our
nation changed especially with General Orders 100, the Lieber Code. President
Abraham Lincoln’s famous doctrine, which placed the United States under Martial
Law after the southern “Rebel” states walked away from the Union due to the
federal government’s overreach of power.
Section
I.1 of the Instruction for the Government of Armies of the United States
in the Field (General Orders 100, Lieber Code) states:
A place, district, or country occupied by an enemy
stands in consequence of the occupation, under the Martial Law of the invading
or occupying army, whether any proclamation declaring Martial Law, or any public warning to the inhabitants, has
been issued or not. Martial Law is the immediate and direct effect and
consequence of occupation or conquest. The presence of a hostile army proclaims
its Martial Law.
Martial
Law was enacted by executive authority. General Orders 100 as well as the
suspension of Habeas Corpus was a clear violation of the Constitution’s
separation of powers. Yet, the executive branch’s obstruction of the rule of
law not only continued but has further abridged our liberties and Constitution
ever since.
When
the Civil War first erupted, President Lincoln worked with the power he did
maintain. Under the original, organic Constitution without the constituted
federal legislature of all the states, Congress, what he retained was his
station as Commander in Chief.
That
is why President Lincoln with the assistance of Francis Lieber constructed the
codification of the laws of war. This doctrine is why Executive Orders hold
weight. Why we are still under Martial Law today.
Since
President Abraham Lincoln was assassinated before he could fulfill his plan:
bring back the southern states into the Union by force and sanitize the
southern states’ constitutions to fit with the rest of the Union,
he was unable to resend the General Orders 100.
Many
Presidents laud their affection for President Lincoln. How they will govern
like the former president. How they will bring the nation together.
Contemporary
presidents leave out many facts in their bid to win over the American people
like Marital Law, annual states of emergency legislation, and the suspension of
the original, organic Constitution, Bill of Rights, federal and state
governments. So a vote for President Lincoln and his successor is a vote for
endless wars and enslavement.
Quite
ironic.
After
Lincoln’s
presidency ended with that fateful shot, the politicians of the time sought
control by ignoring the Founder’s vision for this country. Future politicians
of the time passed legislation that took the nation further away from its republican
principles like the Act of 1871. Since the incorporated municipality of the District of Columbia had
already been established decades before, the reason for this new incorporation
was to create a corporation separate from the government itself.
This
private corporation, masquerading as the United States of America, adopted the
original Constitution and Bill of Rights with a couple of exceptions. First,
the original thirteenth amendment, which had been ratified, was erased from
history. Second, the Constitution and Bill of Rights became fluid. The phrase
heard today is: a Living Document. That means whatever interpretation can be
conjured for the good of the elite ruling class, who control the government
from behind the scenes, becomes the new law of the land. Hence the
contradictions seen in the 20st Century’s judicial case law (Erie
Railroad Co. vs. Thompkins, 304 U.S. 64, 82 L. Ed. 1188) where Common Law is no
longer applicable as well as in the 21st Century’s public sphere between
what the Bill of Rights dictates versus political hot button topics such as gun
control, privacy rights, and warrantless searches.
Until
the elite controlled power structure can chip away all the liberties that are
assigned to every living human being regardless of class, creed, gender, or
religion, the manipulative game of manufactured consent will continue.
Unalienable rights are not bestowed and therefore cannot be taken by any
government, law, religion, or tradition. Rights cannot be stolen; rights must
be relinquished.
That
is why manufactured consent is very important to the elite ruling class. If the
public can be manipulated to blame others in the world for their problems, then
asking the People to surrender their rights becomes rudimentary. Once someone,
anyone, stands up and refuses to consent, the elite have to create social
strife in order to bully the public into submission.
The
elite love silence. Silence is acquiescence to their agenda. So the elites can
move forward and condemn the world population to whatever immoral and unethical
plan that is on the table from population control, surveillance, world wars,
terrorism, mass migration, sustainability, climate engineering, global
taxation, and genetic manipulation of genomes.
For
over one hundred and fifty years, the People of the United States have been maneuvered
into this hyper-elitist, paranoid, chattel-driven, oligarchic, police state
structure that is seen today. The opposite of what the original, organic
Constitution and Bill of Rights had intended. The United States was supposed to be a
beacon of hope in a world full of tyrants, not a militaristic pawn hell bent on
domesticating the world for the profit and racketeering of a very few.
That
is the crux of Martial Law and why we must challenge every aspect of federal
expansion of powers especially in terms of the executive branch.
By
this avenue, the People have a way to take their country back from the foreign
powers that rule it by: educating themselves on actual historical data, becoming
public servants themselves, voting against manufactured consent, and holding a
Constitutional Convention.
A
Constitutional Convention should have certain items on its agenda to free the
People of the United States
and the world from the elite clutches of one world governance. One the
original, organic Constitution and Bill of Rights of the United States need to be restored.
The state legislatures and governors need
to reseat their original jurisdiction Senators
Manufactured Consent 13
to
the Senate of the United
States’ Congress. First and foremost though,
General Orders 100 needs to be rescinded so that the United States of America can
reclaim its lawful authority once again. That would lead to the dissolution of
the corporate government by repealing the Act of 1871 (the District of Columbia
Organic Act, or DCOA) and rejecting all remaining foreign entanglements. The
People again would be in control of their destiny.
As
for education, the American people must delve further into the corruption and
treason that is the corporation: the United States. America has
some big problems, namely, its inability to represent or defend its own people
as well as its reliance on foreign money and interests. Combined, these threats
undermine the very Constitution, the corporation is supposed to uphold by its
adoption into its bylaws.
Rather
than be true to its founding principles, the United States corporation protects
its foreign puppeteers and its own power base. By doing so, the United States
corporation betrays the Constitution and the American people.
In
the ultimate act of treachery, the corporation passed the Trading with the
Enemies Act in 1917, 50 U.S. Code Chapter 53, and the act was amended in 1933,
which defined the role of the People as enemies of the corporation. The People
have become the enemies of the United
States, incorporated.
Again
the past is prologue. These acts and future proclamations derive from the Alien
and Sedition Act of 1798. Politicians loyal to the British Monarchy wanted a
show of force against anyone aligning with foreigners for an anticipated battle
with France.
These acts:
increased the residency requirement for American
citizenship from five to fourteen years, authorized the president to imprison
or deport aliens considered "dangerous to the peace and safety of the United States"
and restricted speech critical of the government.
Although
this led to a populace revolt in Congress, this legislation was the hallmark for
later acts to be used against the People. If the government can make
associations and transactions criminal before, during, or after hostilities
with another country, then a government is dangerous to its People indeed.
President
Franklin Roosevelt accomplished this goal with the expansion of the Trading
with the Enemies Act in 1933 by declaring Americans enemies of the corporation
and seizing their assets without due process of law. The pretext was a run on
the banks and depletion of the gold reserves for the nation.
President
Roosevelt’s Proclamation 2039 read in part:
Whereas it is provided in Section 5 (b) of the Act of
October 6, 1917 (40 Stat. L. 411), as amended, "That the President may
investigate, regulate, or prohibit, under such rules and regulations as he may
prescribe, by means of licenses or otherwise, any transactions in foreign
exchange and the export, hoarding, melting, or earmarkings of gold or silver
coin or bullion or currency . . ."; and
Whereas it is provided in Section 16 of the said Act "That whoever shall willfully
violate any of the provisions of this Act or of any license, rule, or
regulation issued thereunder, and whoever shall willfully violate, neglect, or
refuse to comply with any order of the President issued in compliance with the
provisions of this Act, shall, upon conviction, be fined not more than $10,000,
or, if a natural person, imprisoned for not more than ten years, or both . .
.";
Now, Therefore I, Franklin D. Roosevelt, President of the United States of
America, in view of such national emergency and by virtue of the authority
vested in me by said Act and in order to prevent the export, hoarding, or
earmarking of gold or silver coin or bullion or currency, do hereby proclaim,
order, direct and declare that from Monday, the Sixth day of March, to
Thursday, the Ninth day of March, Nineteen Hundred and Thirty-three, both dates
inclusive, there shall be maintained and observed by all banking institutions
and all branches thereof located in the United States of America, including the
territories and insular possessions, a bank holiday, and that during said
period all banking transactions shall be suspended. During such holiday,
excepting as hereinafter provided, no such banking institution or branch shall
pay out, export, earmark, or permit the withdrawal or transfer in any manner or
by any device whatsoever, of any gold or silver coin or bullion or currency or
take any other action which might facilitate the hoarding thereof; nor shall
any such banking institution or branch pay out deposits, make loans or
discounts, deal in foreign exchange, transfer credits from the United States to
any place abroad, or transact any other banking business whatsoever.
A
dangerous precedent was established in Proclamation numbered 2039 as well as
the proceeding one, Proclamation 2040: Bank Holiday. The corporation was now
the conqueror of the American people.
Still
do not believe so? Then how many licenses do you need to get through the day?
According
to Section 3a and 3b of the Trading with the Enemies Act, the United States makes unlawful: “Trading in United States
with enemy or ally, or for benefit thereof, without a license.”
Americans
need a driver’s license to move freely about the territory. A business license
is necessary to create an income and provide jobs to others. How about a
license to practice law, medicine, or psychiatry? How about the need for a
National ID? The list of licensure is endless.
Without
a doubt, the American way of life is in deep trouble when freedoms are
regulated by the issuance of licenses for a fee.
In
addition to the other acts of obstruction to the rule of law, Congress then enacted
the War Powers Act of 1933, which concentrated more executive power. In 1973
the Special Committee on the Termination of the National Emergency was convened
to see if the act was even still necessary. The Report from this committee states:
Over the course of at least the last 40 years, then,
Presidents have had available an enormous - seemingly expanding and
never-ending - range of emergency powers. Indeed, at their fullest extent and
during the height of a crisis, these "prerogative" powers appear to be
virtually unlimited, confirming Locke's perceptions. Because Congress and the
public are unaware of the extent of emergency powers, there has never been any
notable congressional or public objection made to this state of affairs. Nor
have the courts imposed significant limitations.
The
report goes on to explain:
Since March 9, 1933, the United States has been in a state
of declared national emergency. In fact, there are now in effect four
presidentially proclaimed states of national emergency: In addition to the
national emergency declared by President Roosevelt in 1933, there are also the
national emergency proclaimed by President Truman on December 16, 1950, during
the Korean conflict, and the states of national emergency declared by President
Nixon on March 23, 1970, and August 15, 1971.
These proclamations give force to 470 provisions of
Federal law. These hundreds of statutes delegate to the President extraordinary
powers, ordinarily exercised by the Congress, which affect the lives of
American citizens in a host of all-encompassing manners. This vast range of
powers, taken together, confer enough authority to rule the country without
reference to normal Constitutional processes.
Under the powers delegated by these statutes, the
President may: seize property; organize and control the means of production;
seize commodities; assign military forces abroad; institute martial law; seize
and control all transportation and communication; regulate the operation of
private enterprise; restrict travel; and, in a plethora of particular ways,
control the lives of all American citizens.
Extraordinary
legislative expansions of executive power are on record and have increased with
each passing Presidency. The checks and balances of the original Constitution
have been breached as well as the contract between the corporation and the
People. In these consecutive legislative surrenders, increasing influence of
executive authority has produced startling examples of the failure to adhere to
the Constitution or even the courage to curtail Martial Law in any way, shape,
or form.
Thus
both the Trading with the Enemies Act and the War Powers Act by their breadth led
to the modern day laws like the Patriot Act, NDAA indefinite detention clause,
and mass surveillance as allowable under corporate rule.
The
corporation continued its assault on the American people this time on the
international stage. The corporation known as the United States signed treaties and
agreements that gave away its presumed sovereignty and the rights of the People
to govern themselves.
Today’s
international agreements have the Lieber Code as their foundation for the
codification was misused to usher the United States into the 1874 Brussels
Conference and the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907. This led the future United States of America
to accept further compliance to foreign interests. In the 20th
Century, those major acts were: the Bretton Woods Agreements and the ensuing
treaty with the United Nations.
The
Federal Reserve Act of 1913 allowed for those agreements by laying more of the
groundwork. The Act of 1913 reads in part:
An Act to provide for the establishment of Federal
reserve banks, to furnish an elastic currency, to afford means of rediscounting
commercial paper, to establish a more effective supervision of banking in the
United States, and for other purposes (US Code, p. 251).
With
this act and the National Banking Act of 1933, the United States Treasury was
handed over to the private central bankers. Whereas the Constitution makes the
responsibility clear that the Congress is:
To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of
foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures; (Article I, Section
8).
So
without an Amendment to the Constitution, how is Congress allowed to privatize their
duties as the stewards of the Treasury and surrender the agency to a foreign
corporation? Neither aforementioned acts accomplish this task. The acts only
create law, not amend it.
Which
brings us to the Bretton Woods Agreements of 1944, this international agreement
approved by the Congress as a congressional-executive agreement (CEA) and not
specifically a “treaty” created the International Monetary Fund and the World
Bank.
The United States Code (USC) Title
22 § 286 states:
§ 286. Acceptance of membership by the United States
in International Monetary Fund.
The President is hereby authorized to accept membership for the United States
in the International Monetary Fund (hereinafter referred to as the
"Fund"), and in the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development
(hereinafter referred to as the "Bank"), provided for by the Articles
of Agreement of the Fund and the Articles of Agreement of the Bank as set forth
in the Final Act of the United Nations Monetary and Financial Conference dated
July 22, 1944, and deposited in the archives of the Department of State. (July
31, 1945, ch. 339, § 2, 59 Stat. 512.)
A
CEA is allowable in lieu of treaty ratification when an agreement is not binding
in perpetuity. Thomas Jefferson stated about agreements:
It is desirable, in many instances, to exchange
mutual advantages by Legislative Acts rather than by treaty: because the
former, though understood to be in consideration of each other, and therefore
greatly respected, yet when they become too inconvenient, can be dropped at the
will of either party: whereas stipulations by treaty are forever irrevocable
but by joint consent let a change of circumstances render them ever so
bothersome.
CEAs
can only cover matters which the Constitution states that is within the powers
of Congress and the President to legislate or execute. Yet there have been
conflicts with this form of “agreement”.
When
the Migratory Bird Act of 1918 conflicted with the Tenth Amendment and states
rights, the Supreme Court weighed in on one of these congressional-executive agreements
in the case State of Missouri v. Holland, United
States Game Warden.
The
judgment of the Supreme Court concluded that the Supremacy Clause, Article VI, Clause
2, made international policy above the concerns of individual states and therefore
gives CEAs the ability to abridge state laws, the freedoms of the People, by amending
the Constitution through treaties, agreements, and acts on the international
stage.
The
long way around but the foundation is again set. Congress has used “acts” to
maneuver around the Constitution and states rights. Acts such as the Federal
Reserve Act, The National Banking Act, and now the Bretton Woods Act shows a
history of ignoring the Constitution for a pragmatist’s view of constructivist law
instead of the original interpretation of it.
Since
the United States transferred
assets to the IMF, some have argued that the other provisions in the Bretton
Woods Agreement have created a quitclaim action over the corporation known as
the United States.
Public law 48 Stat. 342. 31 USC, Supp. IV, § 822a-c states the “Secretary of
the Treasury is directed to use $1,800,000,000” to pay the subscription fees to
the IMF, plus an additional $950,000,000. In order to pay the IMF, the Treasury
used public-debt transactions.
To
further explore the scope of the entanglements, the Bretton Woods Agreement Act
stated: “provided for É as set forth in the Final Act of the United Nations.” An
odd phrase since the United Nations Treaty with the United States that is recorded happened
on December 20, 1945, five months after the Bretton Woods Conference.
Under
these financial acts, agreements, and treaties of the 20th Century,
the corporation known as the United
States ceased to exist, as it was known, if
the quitclaim is to be asserted. A quitclaim is:
A quitclaim deed is a release by the grantor, or
conveyor of the deed, of any interest the grantor may have in the property
described in the deed. Generally a quitclaim deed relieves the grantor of
liability regarding the ownership of the property. Thus, the grantor of a
quitclaim deed will not be liable to the grantee, or recipient of the deed, if
a competing claim to the property is later discovered. A quitclaim deed is not
a guarantee that the grantor has clear title to the property; rather it is a
relinquishment of the grantor's rights, if any, in the property.
For
instance, the original owner of the corporation known as the United States was the actual government of the United States of America.
After the agreement under Bretton Woods, the IMF became the owner of the
corporation known as the United
States, in which all rights were
relinquished. The United States, including its Treasury, are now owned lock,
stock, and barrel by Great Britain’s Bank of International Settlements (Central
Bankers), which just happens to own the IMF.
Welcome
back to the British Monarchy.
So
when someone states that our corporate government is a foreign entity, that
person is correct. The above acts and agreements make that reality all too
clear: the United States
is a foreign controlled entity. Therefore by default, the corporation known as
the United States
has many conflicts of interest: one, between the foreign central bankers and
corporate monopolies that control it and two, with the rest of the nation and
the People it is supposed to represent.
Our
so-called government is for all intents and purposes a front for any elite (e.g.,
banker, monarch, and bureaucrat) power broker to use as that person or entity
sees fit and calls it America.
The dummy corporation and its officers are more interested in what elites can do
for them than protecting the rights of the American People. The opposite of
Truth, Justice, and the American way has become standard issue. Our
Revolutionary War efforts have succumbed to the tyrants our Founders fought
against through the failings of dictatorial executive power.
What
are the rebels and free thinkers to do about this whole mess? How are we to
disengage ourselves from the unlawful, illegal, and illegitimate foreign
occupation of our suspended government? Is there a nonviolent resolution ready
for the taking?
A
Constitutional Convention would resolve much of the imbalance by reinstituting
states rights. What America
needs is a tabula rasa, clean slate, to start over from scratch. In the
interim, Americans must contend with the question that began this treatise: Does
voting even matter at this point?
Since
the United States
corporation adopted the Constitution and Bill of Rights, save one, voting has
become a means of controlling the populace and the government message, not an
exercise in freedom. So to that end, no, voting does not seem to matter.
However
we must not get caught up in the minutia, we must explore the wider canvas. There
seems to be some weaknesses in the foreign corporate strategy that appears to
be exploitable: consent, voting, and patriotic political candidates.
When
the People back individuals for office who expose the fraud of our governance
and laws, the politicians who play king-makers all of a sudden demonize,
ridicule, and attack the People’s choice. Why?
If
the elections are already rigged, why would the establishment revolt against a
populace uprising at the voting booth?
When
the ruling elite place their political puppets in elections, the voters are
corralled into voting for the elite’s agenda thereby giving their reluctant “consent”.
A choice between two elite controlled candidates is manufactured consent, but
consent to the illegitimate foreign corporate agenda nonetheless.
With
consent of the governed, no matter the lies spewed and allegiances unkept by
the political establishment once voted in, the People acquiesce to the mistake
of voting in the victor. The elite have their consent. The People feel
responsible for the ensuing mess. No rebellion or uprising is feared by the
corrupt ruling elite.
If
a nationalistic or populace candidate gains strong support, the elite’s puppets
jump onto the nearest media show to explain how the People are powerless and
voiceless in the election of politicians. To that end, political parties have
become the talking heads for the corrupt global elite establishment who hold America in
perpetual Martial Law. Thus the political king-makers have made themselves
obsolete as the People are now wise to the evolving deception to stagnant their
motility and compromise their liberties.
In
the wake of ping ponging a populace between two foreign corporate sponsored political
parties that are only loyal to the elite oligarchic, monopoly power structure,
the People should vote… them all out of power. If the chink in the armor is to
cast a vote in the opposite direction back to liberty, then cast away, but be
forewarned:
If
a politician takes any corporate money, do not vote for that politician. If a
politician takes money from a political party, do not vote for that politician.
If a politician espouses a religious preference, do not vote for that
politician. If that politician has dual citizenship with any country, do not
vote for that politician. And, so on.
The
establishment will use any lie, dirty trick, or religious dogma to their
benefit at the voting booth. Just as a compromised candidate and associated
political party will use any means necessary to create fear, distrust, and even
controversy in order to control the political narrative and manufacture consent
for the elite’s destructive policies of total foreign dictatorial control
through local means.
Ignore
their rhetoric and vote in patriotic candidates who are awake to the depressing
facts of our conquered nation. Always speak out against encroachments on rights
since silence is compliance with regards to the elite’s agenda of domination. Thus,
votes can become the rejection of manufactured consent.
The
People can return to their founding principles if the People remember what it
is to be free. A free nation creates laws based on hope for the future. A free
People vote to expand liberty and rights for all.
To
that end, Americans need to reinstitute their founding government by electing
officials outside the elite power structure’s elections. That would help the United States
reclaim its original jurisdiction. A Constitutional Convention would assist in uncoupling
the United States
from its corporate holdings, elite agenda, and foreign interests.
Manufactured Consent 25
Americans
greatest strength is educating themselves and others about the historical
deviation that is taught in schools in order to dumb the People down into
accepting foreign corporate rule. The elite have set forth their agenda in the
public sphere over the decades. It is time the People realize the deception and
learn what has been hidden from generation after generation of Americans.
Until
the United States
is unencumbered from the damage inflicted upon the nation by decades of corrupt
policies, laws, and executive orders, the nation will continue to be embroiled
in wars, debt, and social strife.
The
People must be vigilant and continue to refuse their consent. Consent is the
only reason that the United
States has lost its grandeur and credibility
in the world. And, consent is the only way the People are going to return to
the Golden Age of Life, Liberty,
and the Pursuit of Happiness.
If
you vote, vote wisely.
Sources:
The
citations listed below are from the original source materials.
63rd Congress (1913,
December 23). Federal Reserve Act. Retrieved from: http://uscode.house.gov/ statviewer.htm?volume=38&page=251#
65th Congress (1917,
October 6,). Trading with the Enemies Act. Retrieved from: http://uscode.house.gov/
statviewer.htm?volume=40&page=411#
79th Congress (1945, July
31). 22 U.S. Code § 286 -
Acceptance of membership by United
States in International Monetary Fund.
Retrieved from: http://uscode.house.gov/
statviewer.htm?volume=59&page=512#
79th Congress
(1945, July 31). Bretton Woods Agreement. Retrieved from: http://uscode.house.gov/ statviewer.htm?volume=59&page=512#
Committee on Foreign
Relations (2001, January). Treaties and Other International Agreements: The
Role of the United States
Senate. Retrieved from: http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/
awcgate/congress/treaties_senate_role.pdf
Constitution of the United States,
The (1788, June 21).
Jefferson, Thomas (January
18, 1791). Report of the
Secretary of State to the President quoted in The Jeffersonian
Cyclopedia (1900). Retrieved from:
https://books.google.com/books?id=2D0gAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA879&lpg=PA879&dq=%22exchange+mutual+advantages+by+legislative+acts+rather+than%22&source=web&ots=gou7KSMAqs&sig=xNN6ME3nb0tM0eLIhFU30piw6a0&hl=en#v=onepage&q=%22exchange%20mutual%20advantages%20by%20legislative%20acts%20rather%20than%22&f=false
Madison, James (1788,
January). The Conformity of the Plan to Republican Principles For the
Independent Journal. Federalist 39.
Queen Elizabeth. (2012,
August 4). Law: Legal Notice: Bank of International Settlements. Retrieved
from: https://sites.google.com/site/australianimperialcrowncorp/
home/bank-for-international-settlements
