YesToHellWith cover art

YesToHellWith

YesToHellWith

By: and may TRUTH reign supreme!
Listen for free

About this listen

 YesToHellWith is determined to expose the wrongful conviction and imprisonment of Orlando Carter. We are asking that President Trump review this injustice and exonerate Carter.

yestohellwith.substack.comyestohellwith Political Science Politics & Government
Episodes
  • We need De Jure Governors!

    We need De Jure Governors!
    Aug 29 2025
    What does it mean… to constitute?When we make something we do so using things…and with a specific intent.Take a knife. It is made from metal…Shaped into certain dimensions… weight… and balance…For one mission — to cut.The knife is not a cup. It cannot hold liquid. It is not a bowling ball. It is not a flowerpot.Nothing in the design, the clauses, or the maker’s instructions…Allows the knife to serve any purpose other than what was intended.So — let’s agree:To constitute means… to create with purpose.If you write a love poem for a friend…You choose the paper… the pen…You select words to send a particular message…And you shape the tone to match your intent.The poem is not a legal brief.It is not a horror story.By its very constitution — like the knife —It has boundaries that keep it true to its nature.The Founders of America understood this.When they framed the US Constitution…They were not drafting an abstract idea.They were building something very specific…A structure made of words and principles…Designed to form and bind a government.And this Constitution —Like the knife, like the poem —Cannot, by deception, be turned into anything else.This famous document is not a knife.It is not a bowling ball.It is not a love poem.The Constitution creates… and controls… the United States Government.We must be firm about this:The Constitution is not the source of our freedom.Even the Bill of Rights — another creation —Was written with a clear and limited purpose:To prohibit the government from doing what it has no authority to do.Patrick Henry said it plainly:“The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people…It is an instrument for the people to restrain the government.”But to understand how to constitute anything — especially freedom —We must first understand what that freedom is.John Locke described liberty as:“To be free from restraint and violence from others…Which cannot be where there is no law.”Freedom is not chaos.It is the natural condition of man…Bound only by the equal rights of his neighbor…And governed by natural law.The Constitution was built to preserve that condition.A carefully measured frame…Designed for justice… and for nothing more.Freedom is the open meadow…Without a fence… master… or hand to pull us back.It is the birthright of every man and woman.It does not come from parchment…Or from the promises of politicians.Robert Heinlein put it simply:“In the absence of order, there is chaos. In the absence of freedom, there is tyranny.”Freedom is the natural condition into which we are born.It can be limited only by the equal rights of another.The Founders understood this.They knew government is not the giver of liberty…It is, at best… its guardian.That is why they wrote the Constitution with boundaries —Not to control the people…But to control the power that governs them.Chief Justice John Marshall affirmed in Marbury v. Madison:“The powers of the legislature are defined and limited;and that those limits may not be mistaken or forgotten,the Constitution is written.”James Madison, in Federalist No. 45, reminded us:“The powers delegated… to the federal government are few and defined.Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite.”Freedom thrives only when those limits are honored.When the meadow is kept open…And the fence is built to keep the government in —Not to keep the people out.Even a carefully built frame…Can be broken…If the limits are ignored… or erased.This was the great debate over the Bill of Rights.Thomas Jefferson argued in 1787…That a Bill of Rights would guard against abuse:“A bill of rights is what the people are entitled to againstevery government on earth…and what no just government should refuse.”But Alexander Hamilton, in Federalist No. 84, warned of a danger:That by listing some rights,We might suggest all others were surrendered.The Ninth Amendment resolved this:“The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights…shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”Yet over time…Two dangerous phrases have crept into our language:“Constitutional rights.”And “civil rights.”They sound harmless.But they imply that rights come from government…And what government gives… government can take away.Consider this:Have you ever wondered how Congress—meant to be chained down by a short list of powers—ended up ruling almost every corner of your life?It wasn’t by accident. It was by twisting a few words in the Constitution into weapons of control.First, the Commerce Clause. Written to regulate trade across state lines, it was stretched into a blank check—allowing Washington to dictate everything from farming wheat in your backyard to the rules of your workplace.Second, the General Welfare Clause. Intended as a boundary to keep spending for the common ...
    Show More Show Less
    55 mins
  • Federal Jurisdiction and Taxation

    Federal Jurisdiction and Taxation
    Jul 29 2025

    Begin a revolution of thought and regain your freedom.



    Get full access to YesToHellWith at yestohellwith.substack.com/subscribe
    Show More Show Less
    15 mins
  • Where are the Heroes? Episode 10

    Where are the Heroes? Episode 10
    Apr 14 2025
    Welcome back to the “Where are the Heroes?” podcast series. I am Beau Johnson, the author of The End of Justice.In the last episode, we heard from Orlando Carter and, based upon his comments, we know PNC Bank lied about the existence of a $4 million loan when it submitted a Suspicious Activity Report to the Federal Government. We know the FBI and DOJ advanced a false theory of prosecution into the court system. This entire deception was further complicated when Glassman and Parker lied in 2018 by stating that the evidence of the $4 million loan was shredded.We are left with two questions. First, how is it possible that the Federal Government was wrong about something that is easily proved? Second, why is it that no one with the requisite authority will rectify this matter in the interests of truth and justice?Regarding the first query, we must accept that the government is arrogance to the point of being untamed. Let’s use the analogy of herding cats. As the Department of Justice currently functions, it is impossible to control 93 arrogant US Attorneys and thousands of investigators. If the Attorney General of the United States does not apply appropriate oversight over what are criminal acts by federal officials, those who wield prosecutorial and investigative authority will, like feral cats, roam and destroy at will. Consequently, people like Orlando Carter will be unjustly prosecuted. Providing for strict oversight over a herd of US Attorneys is a must. It is not enough to expect supposedly experienced US Attorneys to govern themselves according to their oaths and ethical standards.For example, we must conclude that the original US Attorney, Gregory Lockhart, was not held to account for his questionable choices and actions. Just the opposite. Lockhart roamed beyond truth and into the hinterlands of lies. Yet, he received praise from on high as the system supported his efforts and Carter’s guilty conviction. When the system does not focus on truth, wayward US Attorneys, who are drawn to the scent of trophy convictions, will foster what is false and unjust.Regarding the second question, after an unjust conviction is secured by the DOJ, those with titles and authority will assert that, by law, they cannot investigate what is a criminal decision within the courts. However, what if the courts are complicit with the injustice? Absolutely nothing. Those with power, bad actors, and the system, to include the courts, are not held accountable.This supposed “law,” which allegedly prevents elected representatives from getting involved with criminal court cases, serves as a means of self-preservation. As such, if pubic officials are able to refuse help, the injustice continues. However, what happens if an official is asked to assist with an ancillary matter that does not require a direct challenge to a criminal case? Sadly, not much at all. He will seek an answer from the responsible agency and nothing more. Once he receives a reply, he will forward it and consider the matter closed. He serves as nothing more than a middleman, a glorified secretary.Let me give you an illustration. In the year 2018, I asked Senator Tim Kaine of Virginia to review not the criminal conviction against Carter, but the conflict between the Departments of Justice and Treasury concerning the non-existence of the $4 million loan. Since Kaine saw the conflict between PNC Bank’s admission to the Department of the Treasury and the court conviction, he was compelled to send a query to the DOJ. When Kaine received a response from the DOJ stating that the guilty conviction was secured fairly, what did Kaine do? He sent me a letter, attached the agency’s response, and washed his hands of the matter. He did not delve into the obvious conflict between two federal agencies. Was Kaine at all intrigued? Was he moved to investigate an injustice? No. Kaine did nothing to advance truth or exonerate an innocent man. Kaine did what he could do without resolving the obvious conflicts. He considered the matter closed.In another example, Orlando Carter recently asked Congresswoman Beatty from Ohio to investigate the non-existence of the $4 million loan. Beatty went through the formalities by asking the DOJ to respond to this issue. Once again, the DOJ gave her a boilerplate statement explaining that Carter was convicted and justice had been served. Beatty then sent the DOJ’s perfunctory response to Carter and closed the matter. She refused to seek truth. She performed as a glorified secretary.Let’s now consider the following development. A year after Carter contacted Congresswoman Beatty, the Ohio chapter of the NAACP researched the government’s case against Carter. Knowing of the obvious conflicts, the NAACP then approached Beatty. Quite curiously, if only because the NAACP raised the concern, Beatty, at least by appearances, treated the matter with more importance. She wrote to Attorney General Garland and asked that they investigate ...
    Show More Show Less
    32 mins
No reviews yet
In the spirit of reconciliation, Audible acknowledges the Traditional Custodians of country throughout Australia and their connections to land, sea and community. We pay our respect to their elders past and present and extend that respect to all Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples today.