Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2025 Poal.co

1.3K

Memorize this. This is your authority.

Ex Parte Milligan, 71 U.S. 2 (1866)

Neither the legislature nor any executive or judicial officer may disregard the provisions of the Constitution in case of emergency.

ANYONE who declares the suspension of Constitutionally guaranteed rights (to travel freely, peacefully assemble, earn a living, freely worship, etc.) AND OR attempts to enforce such a suspension within the 50 independent, sovereign, states of the United States of America is making war against our Constitution and therefore the people.

They violate their Constitutional oath and, thus, immediately forfeit their office and authority and their proclamations may be disregarded with impunity.

Memorize this. This is your authority. Ex Parte Milligan, 71 U.S. 2 (1866) Neither the legislature nor any executive or judicial officer may disregard the provisions of the Constitution in case of emergency. ANYONE who declares the suspension of Constitutionally guaranteed rights (to travel freely, peacefully assemble, earn a living, freely worship, etc.) AND OR attempts to enforce such a suspension within the 50 independent, sovereign, states of the United States of America is making war against our Constitution and therefore the people. They violate their Constitutional oath and, thus, immediately forfeit their office and authority and their proclamations may be disregarded with impunity.

(post is archived)

[–] • 16 pts

Well, thanks for solving that. I'll just yell "ex parte Milligan" as the state police are billy clubbing my wife to death.

[–] • 9 pts

You just saw a Supreme court justice push PROPAGANDA information, and go unchallenged, to justify trashing your Constitutional rights.

Your second amendment right is the only one you have left, OR they're going to medically rape your whole family, for as long as they want, whenever they want.

You choose. I already have.

[–] • 3 pts

We're having furious agreement.

I'm saying the appeal to "the right reading of the law" is useless. Rule of law has been suspended.

[–] • 0 pt

Hehhe, sorry patriot, I'm running in 10 threats atm.

[–] [deleted] • 0 pt

Oh you've already chosen? I don't see any news reports of a local man who took up arms against his government. Seems like you've chosen to sit back and take it for now, just like the rest of us.

[–] • 2 pts

Lol.. Ok random new account.

Come on over and mandate I get injected.

I'll be waiting. Also, fuck you nigger and welcome to poal. (Thats our greeting here).

Who do you thinks behind all this? https://duckduckgo.com/?q=jew+media&iax=images&ia=images

[–] [deleted] • 1 pt

You're not going to see those reports. You think they want to plant/water those seeds?

[–] • 15 pts

THIS WILL BE IT FOLKS. If they deem this bullshit mandate stands, no holds bar at that point. You will not be able to go out your front door without a fucking clot shot I'd.

[–] • 6 pts

This is a situation where Might Makes Right.

AKA, why once the guns are taken away, it's all over.

Until then, it's political.

[–] • 2 pts

it's also financial. Fight with your money every way you can before you have to fight with guns.

No one can buy guns, or ammo, or pay for an army without money.

[–] • 8 pts

The interesting thing about having firearms & ammo, is they are rather useful for obtaining everything else you need.

[–] • 1 pt

When SHTF, it’s far less useful to have money to buy guns than it is to have guns to get money (if money is even worth anything anymore).

Guns are #1 priority. Arm yourselves.

[–] [deleted] • 2 pts (edited )

The mistake that everyone makes is letting the enemy dictate terms of engagement.

If they cross this line, then...>>

When you have accurately discerned their intentions and they have taken actions toward that goal, they have crossed the line.

It's always on. Always.

Define "minute men". Did that ever stop?

[–] • 0 pt

When you have accurately discerned their intentions and they have taken actions toward that goal, they have crossed the line.

SethButtstein, the jew, speaks truth.

What is this madness?

[–] • 0 pt

Not what I meant. Not that it matters.

One second to midnight.

[–] [deleted] • 6 pts

You will not be able to go out your front door without a fucking clot shot I'd.

In the cities and left coast maybe but in the rest of the country life goes on much like before. It's hard to imagine they'd be able to pull that sort of shit across the whole nation.

[–] [deleted] • 2 pts

Was any of your current reality easy to imagine, 2 years ago?

[–] • 1 pt

I live in rural midwest and I’m going to have to submit to weekly tests if it goes through, or find another job. Won’t even matter if I quit or force them to fire me at that point, since the Supreme Court will give it all legal cover.

[–] • 6 pts (edited )

The Constitution of the United States is a law for rulers and people, equally in war and in peace, and covers with the shield of its protection all classes of men, at all times {121} and under all circumstances.

No doctrine involving more pernicious consequences was ever invented by the wit of man than that any of its provisions can be suspended during any of the great exigencies of government. Such a doctrine leads directly to anarchy or despotism, but the theory of necessity on which it is based is false, for the government, within the Constitution, has all the powers granted to it which are necessary to preserve its existence, as has been happily proved by the result of the great effort to throw off its just authority.

Powerful. Ironic given that Lincoln had just done exactly this to forcibly maintain the Union. But powerful nonetheless.

But it is said that the jurisdiction is complete under the "laws and usages of war."

It can serve no useful purpose to inquire what those laws and usages are, whence they originated, where found, and on whom they operate; they can never be applied to citizens in states which have upheld the authority of the government, and where the courts are open and their process unobstructed. 

Easy end-run here. They'll just claim non-compliance means you no longer uphold the authority of the government.

The statement of this proposition shows its importance, for, if true, republican government is a failure, and there is an end of liberty regulated by law. Martial law established on such a basis destroys every guarantee of the Constitution, and effectually renders the "military independent of and superior to the civil power" — the attempt to do which by the King of Great Britain was deemed by our fathers such an offence that they assigned it to the world as one of the causes which impelled them to declare their independence. Civil liberty and this kind of martial law cannot endure {125} together; the antagonism is irreconcilable, and, in the conflict, one or the other must perish.

Do not comply.

Martial law cannot arise from a threatened invasion. The necessity must be actual and present, the invasion real, such as effectually closes the courts and deposes the civil administration.

Mandates cannot arise from a threatened infection.

[–] • 3 pts

Look at zee goyimz thinking they have a way out of this. Now be a good goy and go back to your living cube and eat zee bugs..... wait wait aren't you forgetting something goyimz....that's right, roll up that sleeve, this won't hurt a bit.

[–] • 1 pt

You trying to cut right to the heart of the problem huh?

It's looking like we will.

[–] • 1 pt

None of you will do anything. Calm down. And of the ones who actually do something, they are usually far too mentally ill or retarded to be effective at legitimate change. You just make the world hate us even more.

So just don't.

If you want to affect change, run for office, become successful, build a network of like-minded friends who are the same. Just like everyone else who has power. Anything else will be met with you dead, your family dead or harmed, and your reputation ruined by your enemies in whatever way they want.

[–] • 3 pts

Lol, no jab no job, so take it or else was your reply.

You think the vote is legit, lol.

'Run for office' lol.

Grow up mr naivety, you're not jabbing the kids or me.

[–] • 2 pts

Well, I'm running for office. Working on retiring from the corporate world by making a shitload of money in my own business. Then I'll run for public office. I'm already part of 2 political action committees.

What you doing to change the world besides bitch and moan semi-anonymously on the internet?

Unlike you, I fought the vaccine mandates at my work place. Made presentations, talked to my coworkers, assembled reports, etc. We fought it until the court cases made it impossible to fight.

All I see you doing is being a miserable piece of shit on the internet where you think you're anonymous, insulting people who are like minded, but doing nothing at all to make any difference in anyone's life except ruining your own life and the people around you.

[–] • 4 pts

I'm hardly anonymous. I don't hide behind a vpn. I've had the FBI at my house whining about my posts (thats called intimidation). And I've never said a fucking thing that wasn't true on these forums.

THIS IS A VALID PLACE TO SAY EVERYTHING I'VE SAID. So fuck off if you aren't comfy with it.

Any child could show you the vote is compromised, and your inability to see this has led you to defend a system which now proposes you and your children are subject to medical rape. But your pac will save us?.. Do you understand that too little too late is useless? Are you going to save our children when they force them to jab? Man up bitch. Last thing we need are more politicians.

I'm not moaning. I'm quite decided in what the correct course of action is when they burn the Constitution. You should be shamed by your lack of outrage. You're running for office, I've been buying ammo.

[–] • 0 pt

We fought it until the court cases made it impossible to fight.

So how are you supposed to fight it legally if and when you're denied running for office, or have the vote stolen?

How are you supposed to fight it legally when the courts mandate is to gradually slide toward more and more rulings not in our favor?

Because thats the state's plan.

[–] [deleted] • 1 pt

Why are you ruining a bunch of man babies fantasies?

[–] • 0 pt

A bunch of internet badasses threatening to go to war with the worlds only military super power? Yeah, that won't end well for the internet badasses at all.

Especially since their narcissism prevents them from holding back bragging about 'what they gunna do!" on the internet and social media.

[–] [deleted] • 2 pts

You're not even an internet badass, that would be a step up for you. You're an internet bitch. lol

[–] • 1 pt

glow harder, faggot. you have no shot at winning a war against the masses. none.

[–] [deleted] • 0 pt (edited )

Right, they "ran for office" in Kazakhstan just now, didn't they?

A couple months before that, the Taliban ran the US backed government out on a rail and took all those fancy weapons away.

In the span of a few months, more was accomplished by primitive militants than every politician on earth.

Go suck a ding dong, pussy boy. lol

[–] • 0 pt

Right, they "ran for office" in Kazakhstan just now, didn't they?

Strawman: we do not have a massive Taliban element in the US that is waiting to take over the entire US as soon as US Troops pull out of our contry after a 2 year announcement and agreement is made.

Go suck a ding dong, pussy boy. lol

Even if I wanted to, I can't: people like you are busy sucking all the dicks with your homosexual internet badassery.

[–] [deleted] • 1 pt (edited )

Only because of propagandists like you but that's not going to work much longer.

That fancy hardware didn't save them, did it? It moved from the weak to the strong.

You're all a bunch of a faggy cunts. lol

[–] • 1 pt

They violate their Constitutional oath and, thus, immediately forfeit their office and authority and their proclamations may be disregarded with impunity.

Where does the Constitution say that an official who has violated their oath has immediately forfeited their office and authority, and that all of their past actions are nullified?

[–] • 3 pts

That is a natural principle of authority. I don't need a document to say that when an authority figure attempts to rule outside the scope of their authority they have betrayed their office and forfeited their authority. That's a self-evident principle.

I don't know that "their proclamations may be disregarded" is truly comparable with "all their past actions are nullified". It would seem to me that the first statement refers to the specific proclamation that was deemed to be issued in violation of the oath of office.

[–] • -1 pt

That is a natural principle of authority. I don't need a document to say that when an authority figure attempts to rule outside the scope of their authority they have betrayed their office and forfeited their authority. That's a self-evident principle.

That's not how the law works.

[–] • 4 pts

Actually it really is. Anything codified against such a natural truth is just tyranny disguised as law.

YOU MAY NOT VIOLATE MY CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS. Fucking period.

You're an elected official? You legislate it? You say its legal? You VIOLATE YOUR OATH.

Not only should we disregard them, we should arrest them.

Imagine if we held them to nuremberg law? We'd lose 70% of our doctors.. And all our politicians who followed these insane mandates, based on fabricated data any child could disprove.

How much fucking more tyranny do you need? Will you relinquish your right to work or will you take the dubious clot shot, whenever they tell you to?

Is this a difficult decision?

[–] • 3 pts

That's how all authority works whether it's written down or not. That's exactly what the British government would have said to the Declartion of Independence which appealed to self-evident principles above any codified system of legal code. Law is founded in authority. And when authority is unjustly wielded it is null. Would it change your willingness to exercise liberties if the code book said otherwise?

[–] • 3 pts

At the barrel of your gun apparently. Otherwise, bend over for your clot shot.

This is the final arbitrator of your rights.

[–] • 1 pt

Of course military force can settle a dispute, but you have to choose your battles. If every single thing you don't like is a cause to go to war you're not going to last long or accomplish anything.

[–] • 3 pts

YEah, it's been every little thing I've grabbed my gun for.. You are a fucking hack.

The line has been drawn.

[–] • 1 pt

Get a new username you fucking hobbyist.

They've been crossing line after line. Our country as we know it is gone. Our culture as we know it is gone. They're making laws as we speak to put me and @QuestionEverything and people like us in political prison camps.

This is exactly the time to come to terms with the violence that's being forced on us.

[–] [deleted] • 0 pt (edited )

That is why men must be trained and assembled at all times for this purpose. It's called a militia and it's a constitutional right.

Unfortunately, people have decided they're going to let the feds bully them, tolerated infiltration and being treated like the mafia.

That was grounds right then and there.

The most obvious one was infringement of the 2nd Amendment, every single line has been crossed. Everything in the BoR has been trampled willingly and jack fucking nothing from the alleged "men".

You do have to choose your battles, but at some point, you have to pick one. Can't just sit there for 30 fucking years talking about choosing battles. lol

[–] • 1 pt

If the personal freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution inhibit the government's ability to govern the people, we should look to limit those guarantees.

-- William J. Clinton

[–] • 1 pt

Ol Billy Clinton.. Tyrant wannabe.

[–] • 0 pt

> You CANNOT use the U.S. Constitution to defend yourself because you are NOT a party to it. Padelford Fay & Co. v. The Mayor & Alderman of the City of Savannah, 14 Georgia 438, 520 The most powerful court in America is NOT the United States Supreme Court, but the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. 42 Pa. C.S.A. 502

[–] • 0 pt

So where exactly in the document is this written?

A still image from one page says section 98 of the supreme court's documentation but I've found no section 98.

[–] • 1 pt

It's not a law, its a ruling and opinion. It has the merit of law, since it forms an official opinion of the court.

Do you deny you have inherent rights?

Do you need someone to tell you have inherent rights?

Choose a side.

[–] • 0 pt

Re-read my comment and don't put words in my mouth.

[–] • 0 pt

Ahh, did I misread that.. ?

Carry on Patriot.

[–] • 0 pt

And the sheep said, yawn yawn yawn