Post 42: See Executive Order

As of last year when I assembled the cabinet I had a realistic understanding that everyone that was selected already knew that for reasons about which I have not been informed that my ability to directly communicate with people on a personal basis has been intentionally obstructed for over four years by the time I assembled the cabinet. I cannot be certain that alleged emails actually come from people that have their account identified with them and any call that has gotten through is NOT able to be followed-up on because I am "phone trapped" into an alleged automated voicemail account -- the voicemails are never returned.

I already knew that it could appear concerning or suspicious -- the manner in which I did what I did -- and I accounted for it accordingly. I did not make any policy recommendations or propose any actions that I did not fully believe I could "back" with my own work and efforts in the last several years -- including in connection with reports filed to state and federal agencies -- and for that reason I had to wait at least a year to "develop" the support necessary to carry out anything that I would have proposed or recommended otherwise. Just because they have refused to return:

• My birth certificate

• My driver's license

• My certifications from school

• My high school diploma

• My high school transcript

• My college transcripts

• My original petitions to the state court, the federal court and the Supreme Court; and

• My original proposed pieces of legislation (including two that I composed in 2022)

does not mean that I "repudiated" or rescinded my own citizenship or constitutional rights. If alleged "government actors" want to enjoin themselves to this conspiracy and deny me representation, then that does NOT mean I am not constitutionally eligible for representation. All of the admonishments to "take responsibility for white supremacy" and "take responsibility for the government" and "take responsibility for coming from a military family" I took seriously. I still do.

I am now legally eligible for the Office of the Presidency. I am eligible to be a Senator. I am eligible to be a Congressperson. In the course of my on-the-record and official challenges to the unconstitutionality of privileging of sects that I contend is what requirement in a bar association is with regards to the judicial branch, I am eligible to serve as a judge, or even a justice. Numerous justices -- both state and federal -- were confirmed to the bench without having a law degree and in some cases without having even a college degree, including more recently than you might think. Had ANYONE talked to me between June of 2017 and June of 2019 I would have qualified to have been determined as "read into law" in order to qualify to practice law in Texas. No one would admit to me that they read anything I wrote or that they surveilled me when I discussed my case reviews and recorded them, or that they stole my recorded case reviews and used them for their own "work products." I understand they were not "practicing" when they did so.

I understand that "cabinet members" have been subject to libel, but I also understand this libel to have already commenced before I identified them for the cabinet. Were they to have told me then I would have supported them in whatever manner I could have so done. I continue to do so. I had anticipated that it could take up to a year to demonstrate that my intentions were sincere and I would not leave anyone "hanging" insofar as I had a means by which to understand the implications of this context. I ALSO understand that there are others abusing their "surveillance powers of the state" that have made libelous counterfeits of us and are using them for CRIME. I also understand that in many cases this had already been ongoing before Jan. 23, 2023.

Most of what I "put out" comes back. I adjust as necessary. I have confirmed that had their been good faith or resources commensurate with the capabilities of myself and the others so identified that amazing things could have been accomplished in a time frame wherein many necessary things were needed. For anyone who was not identified to try to "trump" our efforts via some "personal claim" let me inform you that I understood that unreasonable demands could not be met and that the material conditions to meet more reasonable demands required a specific system and process which I engaged in good faith, that I reported on publicly, but that could not be usurped for "issues" that could not be materially supported in a legal or constitutional manner. And, for the record, trying to extort me into agreeing to engage in illicit or illegal acquisition of narcotics -- ESPECIALLY WHILE I AM IN THE MATERIAL SITUATION I AM IN -- is not only illegal, but I consider it a threat on my life and the lives of others who would otherwise have been engaged with me in good faith.

I will not get into a political discussion about the implications of the Drug War and certain perspectives on "harm reduction." I have already made statements about that and I hold to it. I contend that if you are NOT "on the streets" at this time then you do NOT have any right to try to assume that someone who is is especially predisposed to drug use or will pursue available options for access to drugs. I personally believe that I would NOT HAVE SURVIVED literally or "spiritually" if I HAD agreed to do drugs and I cannot claim a specific "solidarity" with people who do engage drug use just because they are on the street. I do think that leveraging people on the street for drug access by persons NOT on the street should be considered trafficking and if sex or financial extortion and illegal obligations are involved it should be considered a 13th Amendment violation. That includes requiring drug use or "drug abuse assistance" as a requirement for housing, even if it is "couched" as "health care." I am on the record with saying as much during my Presidential campaign of 2020 begun in February of 2019.

I also understand that my efforts at due process are repeatedly used to try to deny me access to basic resources, including legal identification documents. I am repeatedly threatened for not "relenting" on my case and have been for over six years. I keep track of the "costs to the consumer." I will not relent. I am especially disturbed to know the level of conspiracy that went into intentionally obstructing my efforts to appeal by Feb. 23, 2022 AND Aug. 14, 2022 that were used for opportunistic political gains locally while leveraging non-local considerations that have had impacts of actual DECLARATIONS OF WAR and war crimes tribunals allegedly concerning other countries. The "facts on the ground" in the U.S. have changed substantially so far as I have access to understanding, but so too have the "facts on the ground" in my own personal life.

For those who claim this is a "civil rights" matter and that somehow justifies depriving me of due process, let me ask, why simulate that you have military-level authority? Why hold out that you are entitled to rights as civilians that I am denied but also expect to be availed of the advantages that go into the manners in which these obstructive efforts impact the U.S. military abroad or domestically, including the contracting for the DoD and the attendant local economies in Texas specifically, but not exclusively? I already indicated my alarm when President Trump signed the Defense Appropriations Act of 2018 on the day that it was announced that 200,000 youth leaders were in D.C. protesting gun violence. They named that bill after "John McCain" before he died. Was that what made the difference between the summers of 2019 and 2020?

Do people in the military have civil rights?

I have learned in the last year that one of the founding "fathers" of the United States (not a signer of the Constitution) was also one of the founding members of the United States Navy. He was an orthodox jewish man who I understand helped to secure two of the first pieces of civil rights legislation. For what?

1. The right to worship on the Sabbath even while active duty aboard a military vessel; and

2. The right to be free from the punishment of flogging for offenses committed while aboard a maritime vessel.

He actually petitioned Congress for these matters and Congress actually passed laws to support them. Would those be considered "civil rights" bills?

My understanding is that they do.

Has the alleged "civil rights" as property claim scheme been abused in efforts to deny people's right to worship according to their faith (he specifically requested Saturday as the Sabbath and won it) and against "cruel and unusual punishment" under either an abuse of exigent circumstances arguments or because there is an unconstitutional exception made to take from one who was otherwise not in the wrong as alleged "restitution" to one or ones that believe they are due "rights" at the level and the "rate" that the one they have stolen from would have been able to avail themselves of if they pursued it?

Is this behind the "white privilege" and the current context in which we are dealing?

Just because YOU would agree to shoot someone and get away with it because of your male privilege does not mean I get to steal your male privilege and then shoot someone and get away with it. The same thing goes for "compensation" and "race equity" when it comes to understandings of "discrimination."

It has been more than a year. It is four months over a year. You already know my intentions. I stand behind everyone that I first identified. I contend they have done an excellent job. Any "changes" to positions or structure have been addressed as competently as I am capable under the circumstances. If the actual persons of concerned did undertake matters, or if disparaging or libelous representations of me were created outside of what I have publicly posted, then that is part, unfortunately, of the political context we are in. I refused to relinquish my political rights or my comrades just because someone else got away with subjecting me or them to crime up until now.

No one is required to take a "sexual purity test."

No one is required to take a "religious test."

No one is required to meet specific pre-determined standards for "party loyalty" for adherence to MY political commands when it comes to what their political positions are. Their expertise is essential and necessary. As public officials threats against their lives are a matter of concern up to the level of terrorism and are potentially capital offenses.

Everyone has the right to constitutionally vindicate their rights and their political aspirations -- up to and including recommending changes to the Constitution itself and applying EVERY aspect of the Constitution available to them.

No one has or had the right to interfere with us communicating directly with each other or impersonate us to libel us or to attempt to subvert our constitutional rights.

If you accuse me of using the Constitution to defend myself you would be correct. I will also use the Constitution to defend them. You were also entitled to such defense.

But if you try to abide by an illegal and nonconsensual in rem or in personam process, or try to "derivative litigation" us for collection on old deals hooked up, including when we were still minors, then know that attempted mutiny of either a commercial or military vessel is a capital offense.

Do not make the mistake of trying to "drone" me -- especially on the "high sea."

You can feel free to contact me directly any time with any question. You are entitled to your rights to privacy as well as all other constitutional rights, but so too are we.

2:21 pm CST

May 31, 2024

Co-President Charity Colleen "Lovejoy" Crouse