Arresting the President
Sone Game Quest #5 : 2007

We announced Sone Game Quest #5 on 20070215. 
Faye Miller of Ohio is the singular winner on 20070221.

The quest in this sone game was this :

We know the source of allowings and the embracings of the
powers and the protections of the President of the United States
rests with the United States Secret Service as the fount of this stability.
Now, the Sone Game Quest #5 is this :
When the President of the United States, and Vice President, et al.,
have committed crimes and high crimes of treachery and treason
in a maliced perfidy, who arrests the president and exactly what is
the proof of law allowing the immediate arrest of the president ?
As the British might say, Who takes the president to gaol ?

Sone Game Quest #5

QUESTION #1

"When the President of the United States, and Vice President, et al., have committed crimes
and high crimes of treachery and treason in a maliced perfidy, who arrests the president?"

ANSWERS :
Provided by Faye Miller of Ohio

The answer is subject to variables, read on for a 3 part answer :

1. Any member of the federal administration or of the military who is able to do so, such as a
U.S.Marshall or a dissenting faction of the military.  Please see answers #2 and #3 below.

It is legally possible to arrest a president, because any person elected or appointed to an office of honor
or profit in the administration or in the military takes the following oath:

"I, [name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States
against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take
this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully
discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God."

Arresting a president, and or a vice president, who has vilolated and broken that oath, is therefore the solemn
duty of any member of the federal administration or of the military who is able to do so."

This is a short list of some of the people who have the authority to arrest the Vice President and even the President.

(Not sure how accurate this list is.)

US Marshal: George B. Walsh
US Court House
3rd & Constitution Ave N. W. Room 1103
Washington D.C. 20001
202-353-0600

U.S. Marshal: Steve Conboy
H. Carl Moultrie Courthouse
500 Indiana Av. N.W. Room C-250
Washington, D.C. 20001

2. NO ONE.  Under certain rules, no one may "simply arrest" a "sitting" president.

A "sitting president" cannot be subjected to indictment and criminal prosecution..

"In 1973, the Department of Justice concluded that the indictment and criminal prosecution of a sitting President
would unduly interfere with the ability of the executive branch to perform its constitutionally assigned duties,
and would thus violate the constitutional separation of powers. No court has addressed this question directly,
but the judicial precedents that bear on the continuing validity of our constitutional analysis are consistent
with both the analytic approach taken and the conclusions reached. Our view remains that a sitting
President is constitutionally immune from indictment and criminal prosecution."
- Randolph D. Moss : Assistant Attorney General : Office of Legal Counsel
Source : Old address : http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/sitting_president.htm
New Address : http://www.justice.gov/olc/sitting_president.htm
  :: Note from Good Works On Earth : The above link is a titled as follows :

A Sitting President's Amenability to Indictment and Criminal Prosecution

The indictment or criminal prosecution of a sitting President would
unconstitutionally undermine the capacity of the executive branch
to perform its constitutionally assigned functions.

MEMORANDUM FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

      The quote and titling above from the Randolph D. Moss memorandum to the sitting president, William J. Clinton,
      2000 presidential election in November 2000.  The paragraph directly above the quote Faye provides reads as this :

" ,,, Balancing these competing concerns, we believe the better view is the one advanced by
the Department in 1973: a sitting President is immune from indictment as well as from further
criminal process. Where the President is concerned, only the House of Representatives has
the authority to bring charges of criminal misconduct through the constitutionally sanctioned
process of impeachment."  - Randolph D. Moss : October 16, 2000

3. "WE THE PEOPLE" : From the Bill of Rights; the most radical option:
"Whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends,
it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it and institute new government."

Another answer would/could be:
    a : "WE THE PEOPLE" by going through proper impeachment process;
or b : Voting them out;
or c : Waiting for their terms to expire;
or d : abolishment of the current government and instituting a new government.

SONE GAME QUEST #5 The Question, Part Two :
"exactly what is the proof of law allowing the immediate arrest of the president ?"

ANSWER :

Article II, Section 4 of the United States Constitution : "Removal and impeachment of the president
and "all civil Officers of the United States" in cases of conviction for "Treason, Bribery, or other High Crimes and Misdemeanors."

More on this matter: The 25th Amendment to the Constitution details the procedures required for the removal
of the President from office if he is determined to be "unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office."

Also, in the Bill of Rights : "Whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends,
it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it and institute new government."

All of the above material was provided as the answers to the questions :
#1 : "When the President of the United States, and Vice President, et al., have committed crimes
and high crimes of treachery and treason in a maliced perfidy, who arrests the president?"

#2 : exactly what is the proof of law allowing the immediate arrest of the president ?"


If you, dear reader, feel these answers are incorrect in any way,
please feel free to inform us so here : lexigram@goodworksonearth.org


Additional Information :

"There ought to be some kind of American federal criminal statute for fabricating the reasons for war." - Bob Cesca : offsite link

A Bob Cesca blogger response : Bob, there is a provision in the Constitution against Treason (Article III Section 3):

"Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies,
giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to
the same overt act, or on confession in open court."

Bob, lying to Congress and the UN and sending us to die and be maimed in an unnecessary war on the basis of lies
solely to profit the cartels is an act of war against the Republic and is Treason, as surely it would be treason for a
sergeant to deliver his platoon into the power of an enemy on the field for a fistful of money.

It is not necessary for the Sergeant to have fired a shot at one of his own to be guilty of Treason;
it is only necessary that he deliver them to die at the hands of an enemy in the context of war.

It is no different for the Commander-in-Chief than for the sergeant.  - DocTwain on March 19, 2007