Constitution: Original Intent Vs Living Document - Ed Vieira

Edwin Vieira, Jr. - four degrees from Harvard: A.B. (Harvard College), A.M. and Ph.D. (Harvard Graduate School of Arts and Sciences), and J.D. (Harvard Law School) - discusses original intent and living document interpretations of the Constitution of the United States of America from the documentary "FIAT EMPIRE - Why the Federal Reserve Violates the U.S. Constitution."

The entire film, Fiat Empire, can be accessed at http://www.FiatEmpire.com or directly at Google Video at http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5232639329002339531&hl=en

"This Telly Award-winning documentary on the Federal Reserve System was inspired by the well-known book, "The Creature From Jekyll Island" by G. Edward Griffin, and features presidential candidate, RON PAUL.

To order a high-quality DVD or VHS tape (by mail) with up to 160-minutes of additional interviews, go to http://www.FiatEmpire.com/screener. To get instant downloads in a range of qualities, go to http://www.mecfilms.com/mid/ppv/ppvhome.htm and select from the "Documentaries" menu.

Find out why some feel the Federal Reserve System is a "bunch of organized crooks" and others feel its practices "are in violation of the U.S. Constitution." Discover why experts agree the Fed is a banking cartel that benefits mainly bankers, their clients in need of easy money and a Congress that would rather increase the National Debt than raise taxes.

Produced by William L. Van Alen, Jr., the 1-hour documentary is a co-production between Matrixx Productions and Cornerstone Entertainment and features interviews by, not only G. Edward Griffin, but Congressman Ron Paul (R-Texas); MOVIEGUIDE Founder, Ted Baehr; and constitutional attorney, Edwin Vieira (4 degrees from Harvard). FIAT EMPIRE was written and directed by James Jaeger and narrated by Kris Chandler. Associate producers are Ted Pollard, author and former Commissioner of Radnor Township and James E. Ewart, well-known author of MONEY.

Use a DVD for personal screenings and a VHS tape for free public and private screenings.

For more information on FIAT EMPIRE visit http://www.FiatEmpire.com or the mirror site at http://www.mecfilms.com/fiat. For various political, economic, sociological, media-related and philosophical essays by James Jaeger and others, visit UNIVERSAL ISSUES at http://www.mecfilms.com/universe.

For new films and updates on Matrixx Entertainment's activities, visit http://www.mecfilms.com/update.htm

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• constitution
• original
• intent
• living
• document
• Edwin
• Vieira
• Ron
• Paul

[Twisteddreamer78]

Actually what Original intent refers to is the literal meaning of the words in the constitution. For example. When it says in the second amendment for example that this right shall not be infringed upon. We believe that it means literally......That the Government does NOT have the power to infringe on those rights. Got it?

There are several elements in the constitution that go against my preferences but I accept them as part of the whole Constitution which is the supreme part of the land.

[danwk7]

because in their Utopian view of the world, there needs to be equality of outcome, not equality of opportunity. In order to effect social change in society according to their sense of morality, they need a strong powerful central government where the power is taken from the hands of the average man and the taxpayer, and given to political experts who "know whats best" for the majority of men in the community.

[MrHalified]

@MrHalified opps! Wages were not was. 

[MrHalified]

@MrHalified (continued) In Eisner v. Macomber (1920) the Court held: "Income may be defined as the GAIN DERIVED from capital, from labor, or from both combined, PROVIDED IT BE UNDERSTOOD TO INCLUDE PROFIT GAINED THRU A SALE OR CONVERSION OF CAPITAL ASSETS. Emphasis mine. In order words, if you labor and increase the worth of your capital assets and then convert them to cash, that labor which increased your worth would be taxed. This "labor" does not mean "wages" as I understand it.

[MrHalified]

@MrHalified (continued) It is also my understanding that the Federal Government may tax the wages of any of its employees or those subject to Federal Jurisdiction, such as in Washington D.C. or territories--or if one worked for the railroad, for example, as these were all created/chartered by the Federal government. I am uncertain about this, but it makes sense. I have to investigate it further. Not that it matters. Congress and the courts do as they please, it seems.

[MrHalified]

@MrHalified Wages were not "income" even though ordinary people tend to think of it that way. Wages was considered an even exchange. You trade an hour of your life for an hour's wages. No profit; no gain. If you invest your wages in a bank and receive interest, then you have capital--that interest is then "income." But they have played on our ignorance and fear of their brute force to soak the working people.

[MrHalified]

@psxwarrior Actually, the 16th Amendment doesn't say "tax the population." It says that Congress no longer has to apportion certain taxes. "Income" had/has a specific meaning. The case this Amendment was trying to address (Pollock)said that one had to consider the source of GAINS or PROFITS (income) and if you had to apportion the source of the income (for example a tax on land), then you also had to apportion the GAIN or PROFIT derived from it. No new taxing power was given under the 16th.

[psxwarrior]

@Twisteddreamer78 Yeah, like how the 16th Amendment says tax the population, but it doesn't say use the dollar. I take that to mean we still gotta use gold and silver. After all, that was never repealed. They need to collect gold and silver as the tax. Sorry for the necropost, but I had to respond.

[lexscripta1]

@danwk7 Spoken like a true idiot.

[bradwatson7324]

I'm getting the education I should have gotten from school here on YouTube.

[bertly71]

With this batch of current professional politicians running our country, only the self interest of their respective political parties matters.

[anewgift4u]

I love how Dartmouth college discussion on the Constitution has comments disabled? Rockefeller sign on the front of the podium should state for the students stating "a deliberate steering away from those self evident truths expressed in the "Declaration of Independence and the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Congressional Investigation 1954 Reese Committee.