PostHeaderIcon Reinstate Now

Saturday evening, we attended a presentation regarding a relatively new, grassroots effort to reinstate our Constitutional Republic using a bottoms-up approach. Details can be found at I will share more regarding this as I learn more (a local group is holding weekly lectures to teach us how we can each participate.) In the meantime, please check out the website and offer your own opinions. From what I can tell so far, this group is focused on actions that can be taken now and by folk like us.

Note that this effort is being led by a number of people who have my respect, including Tom Woods (Nullification and others); G Edward Griffin (The Creature from Jekyll Island and others; “Sheriff” Richard Mack (founder of the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association and author of a number of books dealing with the role of the sheriff under our Constitution, gun control, and similar issues).

Troy L Robinson

10 Responses to “Reinstate Now”

  • Troy, don’t get your hopes up, be cautious, and don’t commit to doing anything foolish. If there is any size to them, you can almost count on FBI agents attending your meetings. I have not made it all the way through that website yet; but so far I have not found anything new. This seems to be a reincarnation of the sovereignty movement I explored 20 years ago, concurrent with the militia movement, which were growing at the time of Ruby Ridge and Waco, until their sudden death in the aftermath of the OKC bombing false flag operation.

    Expect to learn about Admiralty law, gold fringed flags, the UCC, adhesion contracts, and how to extract oneself from the status of a corporate citizen of the Federal government, while remaining a citizen of your State. You will probably learn how the 16th Amendment was never properly ratified, that ‘income’ technically does not include earnings for labor, and that it only applies to corporate citizens anyway, not a sovereign citizen. You may learn that your vehicles don’t belong to you if you register them, because the State retains the title. Some are taught how to get away without registering your vehicles, that one has the right to travel without license plates, and how to beat a ticket for doing so. It is all heady stuff, and most of it is technically quite true.

    The problem is that one cannot participate fully in this society, if one does everything necessary to achieve all of this freedom. Opening a bank account is executing an adhesion contract with the corporation that is the Federal government, so one may not utilize banking services. What if one wishes to travel overseas and needs a passport? Yes, one can beat the ticket for driving without plates; but the cops don’t know that and will write the ticket anyway. Who wants to spend so much time in court, even if one is sure to win? Trying to avoid income tax is what attracts the attention of the FBI, and at the meetings I attended, they didn’t even try to conceal their identity. They showed up in suits and ties, looked completely out of place, talked to nobody, and took copious notes during the presentations.

    I soon concluded that there were much easier and less risky ways to avoid excessive taxes and avoid most contact with the government. I followed Harry Browne’s advice, kept such measures to myself, and have since enjoyed a remarkably free life in an unfree country, without joining a movement to challenge the awesome power of the Feds, forcing them to get on my case. I look forward to finish exploring the site, as I admire the Patriots you cite too. Perhaps they have polished up the program and at this stage of the decay of our system, such desperate measures are warranted; but at the moment I remain skeptical that enough citizens could be talked into doing the needful, to actually pull it off. â—„Daveâ–º

    • Troy says:

      You surely know what you are talking about as some of what you mention has already been discussed. Our meetings are 12-20 people only and most, like myself, too old to matter.

      I do not plan to take any action other than listening a bit (actually, the first presentation was a bit boring).


      • Good. Yes, being an old fart does have its advantages, when contemplating contumacy. No harm in listening and learning, it is the dangerous leaders they would target, to nip something like this in the bud. I can imagine it would be boring, since you are way ahead of most in understanding the actual nature of our Constitutional republic, and the notion of individual sovereignty. 🙂 â—„Daveâ–º

    • Troy says:

      Regarding the “gold fringed flags”, I heard someone talking about that about a year ago. He indicated that the fringe somehow represents a loss of sovereignty or some such. A bit of research showed it all to be bunk. Seems the gold fringe is for ceremonial occasions (a bit of dress-up as it were). It adds some eye candy but no meaning.


      • I am not sure I would agree that it is totally bunk. It is an issue of Admiralty Law. As I understand it, an Admiralty court requires the fringe. It has been 20 years, and I remember reading all about it, but not the details… â—„Daveâ–º

        • Troy says:

          This from the Army Study Guide

          About the Gold Fringe on the American Flag

          Gold fringe is used on the National flag as an honorable enrichment only. It is not regarded as an integral part of the flag and its use does not constitute an unauthorized addition to the design prescribed by statutes.

          Records of the Department of the Army indicate that fringe was used on the National flag as early as 1835 and its official use by the Army dates from 1895. There is no record of an Act of Congress or Executive Order which either prescribes or prohibits the addition of fringe, nor is there any indication that any symbolism was ever associated with it. The use of fringe is optional with the person or organization displaying the flag.

          A 1925 Attorney General’s Opinion (34 Op. Atty. Gen 483) states:

          “The fringe does not appear to be regarded as an integral part of the flag, and its presence cannot be said to constitute an unauthorized additional to the design prescribed by statute. An external fringe is to be distinguished from letters, words, or emblematic designs printed or superimposed upon the body of the flag itself. Under the law, such additions might be open to objection as unauthorized; but the same is not necessarily true of the fringe.”

          It is customary to place gold fringe on silken (rayon-silk-nylon) National flags that are carried in parades, used in official ceremonies, and displayed in offices, merely to enhance the beauty of the flag. The use of fringe is not restricted to the Federal Government. Such flags are used and displayed by our Armed Forces, veterans, civic and civilian organizations, and private individuals. However, it is the custom not to use fringe on flags displayed from stationary flagpoles and, traditionally, fringe has not been used on internment flags.


  • Troy, it is hard to believe; but we didn’t have the advantages of Google or Bing 20 years ago. It is doubtful that the author of your submission from the Army has a clue regarding the underlying issues involved in the question. I will stipulate that most lawyers and judges today probably don’t either. Fortunately, the search engines work for both sides. I suspect I read the following research 18 years ago, when it was first circulating among Patriot BBS sites. If not, I read several others like it:

    While it gives an explanation of the symbolism of the yellow fringe, let’s not get hung up on that rather minor point. Please read the whole thing carefully, for what was a real eye-opener at the time, explaining why and how our Constitution was negated by bringing Admiralty Law ashore, and how those who acquiesce to its jurisdiction as 14th Amendment citizens, lose all of their individual sovereignty, effectively becoming subjects. Concurrently it explains why Congress is no longer constrained by our Constitution’s enumerated powers clauses. It is really quite thought provoking… and sobering… â—„Daveâ–º

    • Troy says:

      Well, the thing was a hard read because it was poorly written. I little doubt the parts about our being thrown into bankruptcy but came away unconvinced that an adorned flag has anything meaningful to do with it. The thieves and bankers (I know, redundant) do not need flags to do their vile work. All they need is our “need” which they have helped to create.


    • Troy says:

      Also, the writer never explained who the “king” in this case might be. Do you know?


      • This was not intended to explain the concept to the uninitiated. It is more of a research paper on the legal legerdemain involved in establishing Admiralty Law to create a second Federal government entity, which is not restrained by the Constitution.

        The ‘King’ is a metaphor for the ‘sovereign’ reigning over subjects. In this case, it is the U.S. Corporation (as distinguished from the federation of individual States established by the Constitution), not a monarch or dictator. Its subjects are those who are 14th Amendment U.S. corporate Citizens (as distinguished from those who hold American citizenship solely by virtue of being a citizen of one of the States, as per the Constitution. Of course, one can be both; and by way of adhesion contracts (such as bank accounts), most of us unknowingly are. â—„Daveâ–º

Leave a Reply

Political Spectrum
Political Circle

Think Up/Down not Left/Right

Internal Links