169

“Let’s Kill All the Lawyers”- The REAL Trouble with the Trump Indictment

Michael Lesher

“The first thing we do,” says Dick the Butcher in Shakespeare’s early history play Henry VI, Part II – “let’s kill all the lawyers.”

In Shakespeare’s telling, Dick the Butcher is a notorious bully – and when he calls for the murder of lawyers he’s playing a leading role in a revolt against the legitimate king. So Justice John Paul Stevens probably got it right when, in a 1985 opinion, he interpreted the line as an indirect defense of the legal profession: “Shakespeare insightfully realized that disposing of lawyers is a step in the direction of a totalitarian form of government.”

Well, so it is; and Stevens also realized that you don’t actually have to “kill all the lawyers” in order to “dispose” of them – least of all when the bulk of the profession appears more than happy to dispose of itself.

But I doubt whether Stevens or anyone else anticipated the insouciance of the Georgia district-attorney-turned-totalitarian-activist who, by indicting Donald Trump and at least four of his lawyers on racketeering charges this month, has devised a breathtakingly simple way to make lawyers vanish: just send them to jail (along with their clients) for advocating a legal theory of which the Democratic Party disapproves.

And yes: that is the “racketeering” alleged in this so-called indictment. The felonies of which Trump and his associates stand accused in Fulton County, Georgia are the challenges they made to the results of the 2020 presidential election. No bribes, no hidden skullduggery, no usurpation of political office for private gain. No – the alleged “conspiracy” is all about Trump’s unsuccessful efforts to persuade officials that the election results were marred by irregularities and, as a result, should not be certified as a matter of law. That is all.

Forget the media frenzy about the details: who spoke with whom and when, which Trump adviser is being charged for which “debunked” claim, and so on.

The important point about this indictment is that lawyers are being charged with felonies for doing legal work.

An American prosecutor is criminalizing the legal profession – a business that can only end with the “totalitarian form of government” whose first steps Justice Stevens identified with the elimination of lawyers.

I really wish someone in the business would tell Ms. Fani Willis (who is currently basking in her fifteen minutes of media glory as the prosecutorial Jael to Trump’s Sisera) that if you make it a felony to offer unsuccessful legal arguments, you make it virtually impossible to offer original legal arguments at all.

But then, I’ve often wished that mainstream media had the backbone to speak out against the prosecution of Julian Assange, on the grounds that if Assange is locked up for doing what all investigative journalists do there won’t be any more investigative journalism. And yet our popular “journalists” clearly don’t give a hoot about the destruction of journalism, so long as it’s done in the service of the powers that be.

And apparently they feel the same way about prosecuting lawyers for doing what lawyers have always done – just think of Clarence Darrow’s “Nietzsche made them do it” argument on behalf of Leopold and Loeb – so long as it’s Donald Trump’s head on the block. The New York Times has just printed a “guest essay” calling Ms. Willis’ 98-page travesty “brilliant.” Et tu, Brute?

But the real news is the cowardice of the nation’s lawyers. They should be rising up en masse to denounce the indictment – just as all reporters and their editors should be shouting from the rooftops in support of Assange. After all, every lawyer has a duty to protect the legal system from subversion. And whatever you think of Trump (I personally think little of him), this indictment is an unconscionable attempt to strip the electoral process of judicial oversight by criminalizing unpopular legal challenges to election results.

Peel away all the flatulent rhetoric and the tedious repetition of details, and what’s left of the indictment is the claim that Trump and his lawyers are criminals because – and only because – they offered the government and the courts an unpersuasive legal theory for challenging the outcome of the 2020 presidential election.

If they can be convicted for that, the rule of law in the US political system is at an end. It’s that simple – and that serious.

Mind you, I hold no brief for the particular arguments these lawyers – Kenneth Chesebro, John Eastman, Rudy Giuliani, et al. – actually presented. Their case was a makeshift assortment of dubious legal theories and sketchy facts, and I’m not surprised that it failed.

In fact, I wouldn’t have been surprised if Trump and company. had been required to pay the legal fees of their adversaries in court – a remedy the law provides when lawyers’ arguments are more creative than credible.

But it’s one thing for a judge to reject some lawyers’ last-ditch effort to protect their client’s position. It’s an entirely different matter to threaten them with racketeering convictions because they offended a powerful political organization – in this case, the Democratic Party. Legal debates – and defeats – are part of a healthy democratic society.

Criminalizing legal challenges to political processes is a weapon of the sworn enemies of constitutional government, whether their names are Dick the Butcher, Adolf Hitler, Joe Biden, or Fani Willis.

Does that sound too harsh? Well, consider the paragraphs in Willis’ indictment about the attempt of Trump’s lawyers to persuade Vice President Mike Pence to refuse to certify the votes cast for Biden by members of the Electoral College. According to the indictment, that effort – because it contradicted elements of the so-called Vote Counting Act – was nothing less than a criminal undertaking in furtherance of a racketeering conspiracy.

But where would that leave those members of Congress who in January 2001 tried to persuade Vice President Al Gore to reject the Electoral College’s votes in favor of George W. Bush? That effort, too, was illegal – because the petitions presented by the Congressional representatives lacked the signature of a United States Senator.

One Congresswoman actually stated that she didn’t care whether her petition carried the needed signature – to which the Vice President pithily replied, “Well, the law does care.” But no one in the press called the Democrats’ petitions “fakes” or “forgeries;” no one accused the Democratic representatives of trying to “steal” the election; and no one dreamed of charging any of them with felonies for making a doomed last stand against an election they thought had been unfairly decided.

But you can’t have it both ways. If Trump, Giuliani, Eastman, and Chesebro are criminals because they urged Mike Pence to overlook the formalities of the law in 2021, then all those Democrats who presented anti-Bush petitions on the floor of Congress in 2001 were criminals too.

And the next lawyer who considers a legal objection to some future election result will know that he may face arrest, and a felony indictment, if the prevailing powers later declare his arguments “debunked.” Can a democratic electoral process survive in an environment that punishes legal challenges to perceived irregularities?

I don’t know of a single commentator who has claimed that elections can be trusted to govern themselves without any sort of judicial oversight. And judicial oversight depends, necessarily, on the availability of private legal action.

So where are the throngs of angry lawyers denouncing the Willis indictment? Where are the bar association presidents, who until now have had a public opinion on just about every subject? Where are the law professors publishing op-eds in mainstream periodicals to warn us of the threat this indictment poses to the constitutional structure of the republic?

One clue to their silence may be found in the Times’ guest essay I mentioned already – the one that managed to masquerade 98 pages of political hack work as “brilliant” legal argumentation. That essay links the impending legal battle in Fulton County to the show trial staged by the so-called “January 6 Committee” – a travesty I’ve written about before.

The comparison is instructive. The January 6 Committee publicized its conclusions even before its proceedings officially began – and among those conclusions was the demonization of any effort to challenge the 2020 presidential election as an attack on the nation itself.

Ms. Willis probably intends to conduct her own show trial in similar fashion, and the liberal press is clearly prepared to go along. Not many lawyers are eager to be pilloried in mainstream media as traitors or subversives.

But I think there is another reason, and to understand it one needs to understand the political indoctrination of the US legal profession, a process that has only intensified over the last two decades. As a glut of lawyers made finding legal jobs increasingly difficult, bar associations and other lawyers’ organizations (nearly all of which incline to the left) seized the opportunity to impose ideological tests as a way of winnowing out, or at least marginalizing, lawyers with undesirable opinions.

The effects have been all too obvious. Thus, a recent “panel discussion” sponsored by the New York City Bar Association about “authoritarianism and lawyers” never mentioned the upending of representative democracy during the COVID coup or President Biden’s flagrant violations of the Nuremberg Code. Instead, the speakers lamented the fact that some New York lawyers had actually supported Trump’s reelection campaign.

This week, the same organization is advertising an event “premised on the idea that lawyers can and should play a greater role in combating climate change.”

In other words, wherever mainstream liberalism prevails, lawyers are expected to be cogs in the machinery that is steadily pushing us all closer to totalitarianism.

And the indoctrination seems to be working: few lawyers objected to the January 6 Committee show trial; and so far, at least, one can count on the fingers of one hand the lawyers who have called the Willis indictment what it is: a blatant attack on constitutional government.

Maybe some of those silent lawyers are privately displeased about what is happening, and are hoping that if they wait a bit the whole thing will go away. But I’m afraid any such hope is dangerously misguided. The totalitarians are not backing down; on the contrary, they have gained confidence and momentum over the last three years.

All the terror tactics and democracy destruction we’ve witnessed since 2020 is likely only to accelerate under a series of new pretexts: another virus, “climate change,” a purported rise in “hate speech,” “white supremacism” – the list can be extended almost infinitely.

So there isn’t going to be a better time to register an objection. If you care about the integrity of the US legal system, and especially if you’re a lawyer yourself (as I am), now is the time to speak up.

If we wait until Trump’s lawyers are all in jail, we may find we’ve waited too long. Yes, today it is Trump’s orange head on the block. But tomorrow we may all find ourselves threatened with prosecution for saying the wrong thing, supporting the wrong cause, or even thinking the wrong thoughts.

And when our modern equivalent of Dick the Butcher thunders, “Let’s kill all the lawyers!” – where will we be if the prospective dictator he’s advising can look back at him and say, “Lawyers? What lawyers?

First published at Brownstone.org
Michael Lesher is an author, poet and lawyer whose legal work is mostly dedicated to issues connected with domestic abuse and child sexual abuse. His latest nonfiction book is Sexual Abuse, Shonda and Concealment in Orthodox Jewish Communities (McFarland & Co., 2014); his first collection of poetry, Surfaces, was published by The High Window in 2019. A memoir of his discovery of Orthodox Judaism as an adult – Turning Back: The Personal Journey of a “Born-Again” Jew – was published in September 2020 by Lincoln Square Books.

SUPPORT OFFGUARDIAN

If you enjoy OffG's content, please help us make our monthly fund-raising goal and keep the site alive.

For other ways to donate, including direct-transfer bank details click HERE.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

169 Comments
newest
oldest most voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Martin Usher
Martin Usher
Nov 5, 2023 9:36 PM

We already have established first steps in this direction by convicting people of the criminal offense of “lying to the FBI”. Lying is one of those things that we all know what it means but when it comes to legal arguments whether someone is telling the truth or lying is often a matter of opinion. (….and anyway, if you were in trouble with the FBI you’d hardly tell the truth if it meant sticking your head in a noose).

The current setup is noisy, inefficient and doesn’t always get the right answer, Its a system that can be gamed, exploited and generally manipulated but on the other hand it beats hands down any alternatives that I can think of. Its already possible for courts to sanction lawyers who waste time with spurious arguments and deliberately use provable falsehoods and that is how it should be — the courts, assisted by the various state bar associations, should police lawyers and definitely — most definitely — not the police. That is asking for trouble.

Ras-Puputin
Ras-Puputin
Aug 31, 2023 3:22 PM

The western “justice system” is wrong at a core level, and that is its basis on Old Testament morality.
The very words related to “judge” come from “Judah”.

The concept that “laws are set in stone” and must not be changed, only expanded, comes from the same source.

It’s all related to a mental rigidity (illnesss) and a drive to control life and everything vital- traits that are not actually human or natural.

Once you dig in past the facade of due process, the “rule of law” is clearly a device to keep people from putting an end to their corrupt and inhuman leaders. The law is not for the people to decide- the vast vast majority of voters in “democratic” countries never gets any say in any significant legislation in their entire life….

The justice system is very much a core part of the System of slavery disguised as democracy and will be used in whatever way they seem fit, to deal with anyone deemed undesirable and exists as a device to maintain the masses peaceful under the delusion that they do not (still) live in a totalitarian feudarchy as domesticated wage slaves.

The concept of “fairness” is not Judaic and has no place in this justice system. It is replaced by a righteousness which comes from being the one with the bigger stick. You might find a fair judge but they are not working in a fair system.

As for lawyers….
Enough said?

In this case I was not at all surprised to find that the prosecutor is a woman- the script is entirely predictable and almost funny.

susano
susano
Nov 25, 2023 7:01 PM
Reply to  Ras-Puputin

Not just a woman but a black woman. Take a good look at what Democrat party operative black female prosecutors are doing all across the country and all of them got into office on Soros/Open Society campaign cash. One of them, in St Louis, dismissed 25,000 criminal cases. 25,000!!! She was put there to NOT prosecute violent crime committed by “POC” and to unleash chaos. She not only subverted the law, endangering the non criminal population, but was going to nursing school while not actually showing up for her alleged job. These women, who were handed law degrees because of affirmative action (racism), are the ignorant and dangerous useful idiots of the Marxists in control of every institution in the US. Elon Musk made an astute observation about this problem and Soros when he said that Soros was especially good at arbitrage (knowing where to get the most bang for his bucks) and local prosecutor races was were he “invested”. It’s paid off in terms of delivering the Satanic impulses of that monster. I’m also reminded a Freudian slip made by Michigan’s Jewish supremacist AG, Dana Nessel, who, when Michigan’s corrupt 2020 electoral steal went down, stated that the Republicans questioning the outrageous actions in the Detroit metro area thought “all black people were stupid and corrupt”. Well, Republicans had said nothing about “black people” but were looking at non verified mail in votes. Dana Nessel’s remark revealed that it is she who sees black people as “stupid and corrupt” and based upon the mountain of evidence, I have no reason not to believe her.

Raoullo
Raoullo
Aug 31, 2023 6:33 AM

As per your literary analogy, the Trump indictment farago is pure theatre for keeping the sheeple dazzled by the fireworks, whilst the PTB set the real world on fire.

If I, and lesser minds, know that these legal shenanigans only serve to prop up this ludicrous robber baron to martyrdom status, how much more the ‘masters of the universe’ must know it — with their infinite means of deception!

Their goal, as always, is the keep the herd mesmerised by Punch and Judy and at each other throats, instead of them lifting the curtain of their own servitude.

Eff off with your pathetic show.

Joe H
Joe H
Sep 14, 2023 9:07 PM
Reply to  Raoullo

Their goal is to punish Trump’s crime.

Trump is a proto-fascist with no respect for law or ethics.

MaryLS
MaryLS
Oct 14, 2023 4:57 PM
Reply to  Joe H

On the contrary, it is those seeking to take down Trump who have no respect for law or ethics. The law has now been coopted for political purposes.

Martin Usher
Martin Usher
Nov 5, 2023 9:44 PM
Reply to  MaryLS

The people involved with various Trump prosecutions have been going very slowly and carefully precisely to avoid the appearance of co-opting the law for political purposes. In the same vein Trump has been afforded freedoms and opprtunities that other people don’t get precisely because of his political position.

I’m afraid that I’m going to resort to the notion that if he’s innocent he’s got nothing to fear. Unfortunately it appears that he’s been playing fast and loose with just about everything he’s touched and its gradually catching up with him. Unfortunately for us there’s a lot of people who see him as the ‘useful idiot’, someone who’s easy to manipulate by flattery, and those people don’t seem to have our best interests at heart.

(A stiff dose of Fascism might do the American public some good. Apart from my posts like this one I should do quite OK out of it whereas a lot of Joe Public (and Jane Public) is going to get a salutary lesson in how “Making America Great Again” doesn’t actually include losers like themselves.)

Camille
Camille
Aug 30, 2023 5:36 PM

I saw George Galloway interview Garland Nixon on MOATS recently. If what Garland Nixon said is right, Off G’s report is not accurate. Donald Trump is accused of corruption because the interpretation ( by the state) of his statement to an election official is that he asked an election official to create fictitious votes for him. That would be corruption if true…but if what Garland Nixon says is true, then the charges are preposterous because it is very difficult to accept that there are reasonable grounds for beliving that that is what Trump was trying to do

Joe H
Joe H
Sep 14, 2023 9:07 PM
Reply to  Camille

LOL, there’s every reason to believe that’s what Trump was trying to do.

MaryLS
MaryLS
Oct 14, 2023 5:05 PM
Reply to  Camille

Media reporting on Trumps request for Georgia election officials to ” find votes” was as always a deliberate distortion of Trumps intended meaning. If you look at the complete conversation, that statement followed a litany of examples of problems with the Georgia election vote count. There were thousands of votes tallied for Biden that should not have been. Trumps request was for Georgia to take action on one or more of these anomalies, and given the evidence of election errors it was an entirely legitimate request.

Martin Usher
Martin Usher
Nov 5, 2023 9:48 PM
Reply to  Camille

That phone call (“I just need you to find 12000 votes”) could be interpreted very negatively. As an isolated incident, “meh!”. As part of a bigger picture it has to look as if there was a systematic attempt to subvert demcracy using the power of the Executive Office.

Regardless, do we really want a person with such tendencies to be near the levers of power? Especially one who now knows the ropes.

Thom Sheaffer
Thom Sheaffer
Aug 30, 2023 11:44 AM

Audacious.

Placental_Mammal
Placental_Mammal
Aug 30, 2023 10:20 AM

Entertainers

Politicians are more than anything entertainers. They participate in the contrived dramas that the central bankers require them to act in. Those that step out of line like JFK and Magufuli are dealt with severely. Drumpf has been assigned the role of an outsider despite all he has done for the banksters. He warp sped the clot shots, transferred the embassy to Jerusalem, recognised the annexation of the Golan heights and so on. He was bailed out of his bankruptcies so that he could be sold to segments of the sheeple as a swamp draining liberator.

Placental_Mammal
Placental_Mammal
Aug 30, 2023 10:27 AM

Swamps

Draining swamps is a rotten metaphor. Swamps provide a habitat for wading birds and other species. Some like the Pantanal in Brazil are as big as England and impossible to drain. I recently returned from a great holiday there.

Antonym
Antonym
Aug 31, 2023 7:08 AM

Ok, gutter.

Placental_Mammal
Placental_Mammal
Aug 30, 2023 9:35 AM

Polanski

The judiciary is of course rotten to the marrow like all of the other appendages of government. One good example is the way Polanski got away with the organisation of multiple murders in 1969 and had the guilt transferred to a bunch of patsies. Here the judiciary, “law enforcement” and the media joined hands in absolving the perpetrator and convicting the patsies. The Warren commission is another example of the putridness of the legal profession.Examples abound.Ultimately the various organs of government exist to execute the plans of the world government with the central bankers ay the apex. This also includes corporate religion.

Alejandro Volpe
Alejandro Volpe
Aug 30, 2023 12:37 PM

So you think Polansky was behind the murder of his wife and friends . You are watching to many movies …Hollywood movies …. your imagination is from another planet .

Placental_Mammal
Placental_Mammal
Aug 31, 2023 11:35 AM

I am now just over 72. I lost the ability to stomach Hollyweird when I was about 36. Half a lifetime ago. May I know on what you base your judgement of Polanski ?

Ras-Puputin
Ras-Puputin
Aug 31, 2023 3:47 PM

I think it is you who needs to provide some bases for your “judgement” of Polanksi (probably not a nice guy) as the mastermind for the murders.

Placental_Mammal
Placental_Mammal
Sep 9, 2023 10:55 AM
Reply to  Ras-Puputin

I have repeatedly highlighted the gaping holes in the case for Polanski and against Manson, Tex and the chicks. There is as far as I know no hard evidence that connects Manson and the rest to the crimes. The motive for the crime was concocted by the crooked and unimaginative prosecutor Vince Bugliosi. This arsehole wrote a book called Helter Skelter that alleged Manson committed the murders in order to start a race war that would eventually wipe out most of the population and leave the planet to Manson and his followers. The book sold 7 million copies. Is it any wonder that the sheeple swallowed convid and all the other false flags that preceded it ? Bugliosi’s hypothesis in bizarre and insane. Unbelievably it wasn’t even original. There was in fact a Manson like cult leader in California in the 1950’s and it was him that first came up with the mad theory. His name was Krishna Venta. At least it was what he called himself. Unbelievably again Krishna Venta (who was Jewish) was killed by an Anglo Saxon suicide bomber. Venta was apparently playing around with his wife. The bomber was a Venta follower.

Polanski on the other hand had both the motive and the means. His wife was carrying a child he didn’t want. She smoked tobacco, pot and possibly opium when pregnant. She also had sexual intercourse with a rising Hollywood star when pregnant. The chaps name was I think Christopher Jones. He vanished after the murders, surfacing decades later to tell his story. Polanski had the powerful mob connected Hollyweird apparatus at his disposal. The mob could have easily provided the professionals required for a hit like this.

Straight Talk
Straight Talk
Aug 30, 2023 9:23 AM

Dictatorship is when the policies never change, no matter how many different faces are elected. We’ve had the same economic and foreign policies going on 50 years now.

The problem with a 24/7 news cycle is that it tends to create soap opera variety news. Everything having to do with elections fits that bill nicely. There are so many layers of BS, I’m not at all surprised to learn this:

Even The Bald Eagle’s Call Is Propaganda“The most distinctly American fact you will ever learn is that the piercing cry you associate with the bald eagle is actually a Hollywood invention.”

Every day you choose your own cowardice over truth“. Bribery is a strong drug. Everyone eating at the trough knows that the only way their horrible ideas would even see the light of day is only due to bribery.

Alejandro Volpe
Alejandro Volpe
Aug 30, 2023 9:23 AM

I think you should write poems and forget about politics !!! Life it’s not a novel l!!! Donald Trump and associates deserved all to be in jail.

Bryan
Bryan
Aug 30, 2023 9:19 AM

When I quoted the Nazi jurist Carl Schmitt recently –and more specifically the ius publicum Europaeum as founded in the act of colonisation, imperialism, spatial annexing, and global temporal and spatial ordering (Grossraum) — the response was to point out the geographical and ideologically separable differences between European and American law – when in fact none exist. (American law is or was English Law.)

My bad for naming countries which could be reductively misinterpreted to mean isolable geographically self-contained entities each with their own nomos or differential way of being. Ignoring the fact that the supermajority of the human species is always involved in a very specific economic way of being that involves everybody, everywhere, all-at-once: which is what I mean by the actualisation of the “nomos of the earth” as universalised colonisation.

The entire species is right now acting and constructing a global spatial ordering as an economically determined anthropology. The many acting together as one (e pluribus unum qua novus ordo seclorum) with such integrated totalisation that it can only be referred to as a singularity irreducible to any one activity; and certainly irreducible to the Trump indictment.

The real constitutional indictment of the “rule of nomological law” is the moral-economic voluntarism that has led to a totalised singularity of being with a very singular collective intentionality which is both inimical and actually harmful to life; a globalised nomos (conventional ethical law) whose measure is the very “Grund und Boden der Erde” (ground and soil of the earth) made into our image. That is the something the Nazi’s could only wet dream of; as actualising now as an economically totalised as each and everybody, everywhere, all-at-once without any supervision or even overseeing at all as a voluntarist auto-autocracy of the whole species.

The juridico-political new order of the earth is completed voluntarily by everybody as a nomological automatisation of thinking with no exceptions. That is the completed world ratiocentric totalisation I am getting at: whichever is actually rationally irrefutable, but will be reactively refuted anyway. Then thereafter, there will still be the collectively intentional unitary economic species-being as homo kakoeconomicus neoliberalismus as a hominisation and self-domestication undergoing the rule of law as a globalisation Rechtsstaat (state of right); or better; Unrechtsstaat (state of wrong) as moral-economic voluntarism or rational-absolutist deonticism of self-destruction.

The law as we know it through reductive mechanisation as juridical and criminal procedures is only a backup; a derivative and secondary “safety net” to the voluntarily given loyalty as the rational economic “nomos of the species”. Most people will never even see the inside of a court or have their economic behaviourism criminalised because they pledge their moral allegiance to the economic species-being from birth to death as a moral-economic subject and thoroughly law-abiding “good citizen”. Thereafter: reducing voluntary self-domestication and moral-economic subjectivation as speciated “rule of law” to the Trump indictment really is “flatulent rhetoric.”

Reductive-mechanical and logical-analytical deterministic thinkers can only seemingly see the isolated event. They cannot seemingly see that the deep structure of the language they use in sentence construction is the fons et origo of all derivative law and law-abiding moral-economic determinism; or that thereafter, there can be only one univocal and unidirectional interpretation – the one we are all following now as everybody, everywhere, all-at-once as nomological determination of right and wrong, good and bad, superior and inferior and so on.

So who compelled us to act as a moral-economic singularity – the forces of nature, the forces of evolution, Nietzsche? Shoulda listened to Nietzsche’s real argument (not Darrow’s whichever is compelled as derivative): it was and is the grammar.

God is in the grammar. We have become our owned God-like economic being or Prosthessengott; and the juridical sentence is logically prior to the earthbound consequence.

Every sentence is a death sentence that reductive-mechanistic ideological thinking cannot see but is controlled by none the less. Kill all the lawyers and lawgivers whilst we are all legally self-legislating as working everywhere all-at-once?

No need, we are killing ourselves off anyway by only doing legal work unless we see the control-mechanisation we are all subjected to as self-determined self-imprisonment in the death-bearing sentences of structure-determined rule of law. 

Ras-Puputin
Ras-Puputin
Aug 31, 2023 4:57 PM
Reply to  Bryan

We should be paid to read your comments- it is hard work. 😂
I agree with the gist of it mostly, but you can make it more accessible without dumbing down or diluting.

Here’s a hint: Economy of words.

Edwige
Edwige
Aug 30, 2023 9:09 AM

Lawyers needing alternative employment? What’s on offer….
https://dumptheguardian.com/society/2023/aug/30/one-in-11-workers-england-could-nhs-staff-by-2036-37-study

Hang on – isn’t this the most right-wing Tory government since the last one who spend all day plotting NHS privatisation (while somehow never quite getting around to it – like the BBC) and at a time of unprecented austerity? And they’re massively expanding the NHS workforce?….

It’s one of the clearest proofs of the fake left-right divide. State centralisation increases whoever is in power.

It seems as if the old saying about people won’t understand things if their salary depends on them not understanding it is being turned into a system of government. Any resemblance with the old Soviet nomenklatura is entirely uncoincidental – and it’ll go the same way as it’s meant to (the UK wing of the collapse of the West).

Ras-Puputin
Ras-Puputin
Aug 31, 2023 5:05 PM
Reply to  Edwige

They have clearly determined they are too afraid of simply going ahead and privatising the NHS- they believe the political cost will be too much, so they go about breaking it down until it just needs to be killed off for being so useless.

The Great Reset is about a new social contract, which is that people agree and consent to a greatly reduced quality of life, for the greater good. The Brits will agree that the NHS needed to be scrapped and replaced with a privately held (and expertly managed) health system.

Universal Credit will take care of the proles who fall sick anyway- by taking some spare cash from the tax payer so the useless eater can pay pharma for the cheap mass produced medication ( which will slowly kill them) and/or to pay fat private landlords for council accomodation for the proles to slowly rot in.

Brian Sides
Brian Sides
Aug 30, 2023 9:04 AM

But you can’t have it both ways. If Trump, Giuliani, Eastman, and Chesebro are criminals because they urged Mike Pence to overlook the formalities of the law in 2021, then all those Democrats who presented anti-Bush petitions on the floor of Congress in 2001 were criminals too.”

The defence that some one else did what you did but was not prosecuted or convicted.
Is no defence at all. Try this yes I stole a car but I know some else who stole a car and he was never charged so you can not try me. Does not work.
The idea that judges have to obey the law is very naive. Who judges the judges.
Trump needs all the help he can get to be re-elected and these trials will help a lot.

Howard
Howard
Aug 30, 2023 4:16 PM
Reply to  Brian Sides

There is a difference between something clearly defined and almost universally understood as illegal (such as theft) and something which exists in a quasi-legal state (such as influence peddling).

If Trump et all had bribed Mike Pence, then clearly their tactic would have strayed into the realm of actual crime. Plus, of course, there is a significant difference between filing petitions and actually asking the one official whose duty it is to do something not to do it.

This is an interesting case. By all rights it should find its way to the Supreme Court for resolution – notwithstanding the apparent corruption of that institution.

NickM
NickM
Aug 30, 2023 7:36 PM
Reply to  Brian Sides

“Trump needs all the help he can get to be re-elected and these trials will help a lot.”

Yes, just like Hilarious Killery Klingon was Trump’s best helper last time.

Is this really the best that 300 Million Yanks can find to lead them?

Lizzyh7
Lizzyh7
Aug 31, 2023 8:39 PM
Reply to  NickM

Uh please bear in mind the 300 million have absolutely zero choice in the matter. Ever.

NickM
NickM
Sep 2, 2023 7:49 AM
Reply to  Lizzyh7

That’s the real problem: how to set up a government that is representative and just. A problem which faces the handful of members in each nuclear family, just as much as it faces the billion members in one of the asian democracies. It is a human problem not a problem in technology. It demands human skills such as judging probity of the Judges and removing criminality from the Laws .

mgeo
mgeo
Aug 30, 2023 8:49 AM

This is analogous to the fraticide in the imperial families of the Roman Empire.

NickM
NickM
Aug 30, 2023 8:12 PM
Reply to  mgeo

AD69 — The Year of the Four Emperors.

Ended happily with the election of the Flavian dynasty, according to two great historians. There’s hope for the U$ yet?

Machiavelli argued that the [winning Flavian Dynasty] earned the respect of those around them through good governing:

Titus, Nerva, Trajan, Hadrian, Antoninus, and Marcus had no need of a swollen Praetorian Guard, but were defended by their good lives, the good-will of their subjects, and the respect of the senate.[5]

Edward Gibbon wrote in The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire that their rule was a time when “the Roman Empire was governed by absolute power under the guidance of wisdom and virtue”.[6] Gibbon believed that these benevolent monarchs and their moderate policies were unusual.”

So, it is “unusual” to have a succession of good rulers. This suggests that the unbroken succession of bad presidents for the past 50 years means we are seeing the Decline and Fall of the U$ Empire.

“Eh, Mr.Gibbon, still at it: more scribble, scribble, scribble?” — Anon.

Rhys Jaggar
Rhys Jaggar
Aug 30, 2023 7:14 AM

‘Killing lawyers’ is a very different thing to killing people who call themselves lawyers, but are in fact nothing of the sort.

It’s pretty darn obvious, even from 3000 miles away, that the US judicial system is now almost completely corrupted to the core. The Supreme Court has political appointees who do what they are told, not rule justly according to law. Vast numbers of Attorneys General have been corrupted by Soros et al to prosecute/not prosecute according to political fault lines. They do not serve the citizens of their state by so doing.

Obviously there are still some mavericks who actually believe in justice, in legal due process and evidentiary truth. But every time they take a decision of value, some non-entity corrupt mouthpiece is wheeled out to overturn it.

The only saving grace in the USA right now is the nature of the Constitution which assigns wide areas of jurisdiction to State level, not Federal level. If that were not the case, then seeking justice through the courts would long ago have become a futile exercise.

Raoullo
Raoullo
Aug 31, 2023 6:47 AM
Reply to  Rhys Jaggar

Maybe, but methink that chemically-induced mental numbness and apathy makes it all moot. Remember what brought the guillotines out in 1789: squalor and hunger. The PTB know it all too well, so now you have soma.

Ras-Puputin
Ras-Puputin
Aug 31, 2023 5:10 PM
Reply to  Raoullo

The drugs don’t work- the smart phones bloody do.

les online
les online
Aug 30, 2023 7:12 AM

Resisting Arrest is a hard charge to beat…All other charges could get thrown out but not Resisting Arrest…Once in Their grip – you cant win…

The Trap They’ve set for Trump: So long as he turns up for every court date, even if it’s set for 3 am on a Sunday, reduces the chance They’ll get him for :Contempt of Court…They will be trying to “Get Trump !” on a contempt charge…Trump has gotta take care They dont get him on “A Technicality”, or he’ll be sent down for a long Julian Assange…
A Bush Lawyer…

Raoullo
Raoullo
Aug 31, 2023 6:49 AM
Reply to  les online

Trump is a fictitious character and this conversation is irrelevant.

Penelope
Penelope
Aug 30, 2023 4:26 AM

Twitter/X CEO Linda Yaccarino is the chairman of the World Economic Forum’s Taskforce on Future of Work and sits on the WEF’s Media, Entertainment and Culture Industry Governors Steering Committee. She has stated that “lawful but awful” posts will be “deamplified,” and that the company policy is one of “freedom of speech, not reach.” X is also actively recruiting applicants for various censorship positions for the upcoming election in 2024

https://www.globalresearch.ca/end-natural-health-information/5830660

link covers other aspects of growing censorship to expect.

Duckman
Duckman
Aug 30, 2023 7:06 AM
Reply to  Penelope

where are the children? burnt or….. worse?
weather warfare evidence below

http://www.voterig.com/.um1.html

P Munk
P Munk
Aug 30, 2023 3:32 AM

What I find most remarkable is the polarization of the two evil duopoly; to the extent by which former President Trump is now being framed as a legitimate anti-establishment option, even as mainstream media acknowledges Mad King Joe’s senility and corruption. Amid the Salem-esque persecution Pariah-President Trump, the newly-clothed game show host’s stated principal campaign platform involves securing America’s borders… more like reinforcing the U.S. National Security Prison, if you ask me.

wardropper
wardropper
Aug 30, 2023 2:45 AM

It’s time to banish today’s US political system to Victoria, Australia.

The Northern Hemisphere can find no credible function for such lunacy.

None of the decent American presidents of the past would be able to recognize the system, and today’s decent human beings would be well advised to stay at least a million miles away from it.

It is so corrupt that the stench of it strips paint, yet people tell themselves that their vote for its left or right buttock makes a difference…

It really needs the Sodom and Gomorrah treatment.

Thomas L Frey
Thomas L Frey
Aug 30, 2023 3:03 AM
Reply to  wardropper

Last I checked Tel Aviv is the homo central of the world, should they also get the “Sodom and Gomorrah” treatment?

Ukraine is the money laundering capital of the world, does that warrant the “Sodom and Gomorrah” treatment?

Center of London is home of the Bank of England and Rothschild’s nation within a nation, does that warrant the “Sodom and Gomorrah” treatment?

ETC. ETC. ETC.

Erik Nielsen
Erik Nielsen
Aug 30, 2023 11:45 AM
Reply to  Thomas L Frey

Thats precisely why we need a WWIII. Burn, burn, burn. in the lake of fire :-D.

Thomas L Frey
Thomas L Frey
Aug 30, 2023 3:16 PM
Reply to  Erik Nielsen

You will get it. However it won’t be what we expect.

wardropper
wardropper
Aug 30, 2023 6:32 PM
Reply to  Thomas L Frey

I thought it was clear that I was referring solely to “today’s US political system”.
Basically, Washington.

That’s what needs the S&G treatment.

Rhys Jaggar
Rhys Jaggar
Aug 30, 2023 7:19 AM
Reply to  wardropper

More practical is to banish every US citizen (man, woman, child and indeterminates) back to their homeland, forever revoking their right to leave again. All military bases decommissioned, all corporations banned from trading, all NGOs refused a license to operate, all banks required to close down every single account of any US individual, corporation, trust or any other legal entity whatsoever.

They are, after all, SO superior, that they will be happiest living on their own, free of our inferior gene pools, our refusal to die for their benefit, our unreasonable wish to trade amongst ourselves without considering them in any way whatsoever.

Stiffen the crows, we would still have reasonable energy prices in Europe if it weren’t for the USA. There wouldn’t be war in Ukraine but for the USA. The Covid scam wouldn’t have gone global without the USA’s DOD.

underground poet
underground poet
Aug 30, 2023 11:29 AM
Reply to  Rhys Jaggar

Its not called the great satan for nothing, it takes years of corruption to acquire that title, and its held onto until God says she has had enough, and eventually she says it, just not right now.

Erik Nielsen
Erik Nielsen
Aug 30, 2023 11:47 AM

“She”? God made “she” out of man’s ribbon. God didnt made a mistake, but you did.

wardropper
wardropper
Aug 30, 2023 7:55 PM
Reply to  Erik Nielsen

Exactly.

From a man’s rib, we got women.
From women, men are born.

Seems fair to me.

wardropper
wardropper
Aug 30, 2023 8:26 PM
Reply to  wardropper

After all, it’s really pretty idiotic to label an invisible spiritual being with the terminology of animal sexuality.

Calling God “Him” really isn’t a serious gender label.
It’s basically just a tradition that enables us to refer to a sentient, conscious personality as something more than an “It”.

Turning Him upside-down into Her doesn’t help anybody either, so perhaps the best thing is just to assume that the name, “God” includes everything visible and invisible.

For practical purposes also, “He” will do just fine, since the Bible refers to Him as “God, the Father”, and not, “God, the Father and Mother combined”.

As a further relevant consideration, Mount Everest can be called “he”, or “she” according to whatever religious reverence your culture may have decided to allot to it, but you will look in vain for its primary or secondary sexual characteristics.

Which is why for western culture, “it” has been found acceptable.

Deal with it folks. God isn’t going to change to suit your narcissistic fashions.

Erik Nielsen
Erik Nielsen
Aug 31, 2023 12:14 AM
Reply to  wardropper

Precisely. God made man in his own picture. Christ called him my Father, our Father. We call him Our Lord.
Every single legal description is masculine. I dont see any declassifying women because of that.
She is made by our same Father from the same material and spirit.
Two wonderful creatures who together make a whole.

underground poet
underground poet
Aug 31, 2023 5:58 PM
Reply to  Erik Nielsen

You were meant to be fooled, so that never finding peace is the proof she still has yet to evolve, while men have been brought to their logical brute strength conclusion in forever wars.

wardropper
wardropper
Aug 31, 2023 6:21 PM

Nah.
The descriptions of these things come in fashions and waves.
Men also have a heck of a lot of evolving to do.

The arch-fooler is, of course, no joke, and he spares no one.
So we all need to stay awake.

underground poet
underground poet
Aug 31, 2023 9:02 PM
Reply to  wardropper

Not really, mens evolution has been brought to its logical conclusion, we now do most of the lifting, driving, and lastly protecting of the woman.

The woman on the other hand are not only twice as complicated as men, they are only 2/3 completely evolved, the last 1/3 being attempted in secret and the results are not encouraging.

I just know what can go wrong but not quite sure of the whys, the hows are a known, a break party gone astray they tell me, but if miracles exist, they shall be followed up on.

Ras-Puputin
Ras-Puputin
Aug 31, 2023 5:16 PM
Reply to  Erik Nielsen

The only thing your “god” “made” is the delusions you desperately cling onto, like a good slave.

underground poet
underground poet
Aug 31, 2023 5:55 PM
Reply to  Erik Nielsen

She was also warned that if you make him (Adam) (she had a problem from which only creating a man could be resolved) he would ruin your entire universe.

And as far as I can tell,(about 4 billion years worth) they were right, I have seen the proof, the enemy, and the solution all at the same time.

Howard
Howard
Aug 30, 2023 1:35 PM
Reply to  wardropper

At some level the corruption – which, as you say, is absolute in America – touches and infects everything, not just the government.

In fact, I would argue that corruption does not begin at the top and work its way down: it begins at the bottom and works its way up.

Way back when I was a teen, there were lawyers in town who the kids who got caught speeding would get their dads to hire – because they knew these lawyers knew how to “convince” the judge not to throw the book at them. You know: quid pro quo. Back scratching and all that jazz. Not quite Trump level; but mini-corruption.

And the idea among the common man is that mini-corruption is okay. Or as Ayn Rand succinctly put it: “Let me withdraw from reality the cookies I stole from the cookie jar!”

Raoullo
Raoullo
Aug 31, 2023 6:54 AM
Reply to  wardropper

Haha. Which led me to imagine legions of kangaroos watching the American electoral circus in the Outback!

DonDon
DonDon
Aug 30, 2023 2:10 AM

After the lawyers, there are the town planners and architects, then the dentists . . . eventually we’ll get around to the protestant German pastor whose name starts with N . . .

Albert Anderson
Albert Anderson
Aug 30, 2023 1:14 AM

“Integrity of the U.S. legal system”. LOL, man. Good one. What is that, an oxymoron? Can’t say I’m not as concerned about where shit is heading as anyone else, and do realize this is mostly just a spectacle of political infighting and obfuscation amongst the oligarchy, but there are lines lawyers can’t cross aren’t there? As well as U.S. Presidents? If they purposely lie when making their “legal” arguments, isn’t that like, against the rules? There’s a such this as frivolous lawsuits, isn’t this Trump thing like a frivolous and dangerous thing? If they really knew it was all bullshit, isn’t that something that should be addressed? If a sitting President knowingly lies to the citizens of the U.S., should not that President be held to account? (I know, I know, everything they do is a lie). I mean, Trump is a piece of shit, look what he did, anyone thinking it wasn’t all for vain personal gain instead of valid legal arguments is deluding themselves. The fucker should be in jail any which side of Sunday. (As well as Biden, etc.). I don’t know, in the end it doesn’t matter much because lawyers ain’t gonna save us. Anyone thinking that, must be, well, a lawyer (oh, look who wrote this). They, and I’m not just talking about the lawyers, all should be punished for putting all of us thru this crap instead of doing their real jobs. In a just world maybe, not this one. Then again, we’re all the fools for putting up with it.

Jax
Jax
Aug 30, 2023 12:15 AM

voting is for slaves. america, like all countries, is a human farm. your owners are human farmers.

america is a one party totalitarian oligarchy posing as a two party “democracy”

democracy never has, and never will exist

your “vote” isn’t even counted, they probably burn the ballots. you cannot fix a broken system with a broken system.

Thomas L Frey
Thomas L Frey
Aug 30, 2023 3:05 AM
Reply to  Jax

America is not, and never has been a Democracy.
American is, and always has been, a Representative Constitutional Republic, at least on paper, and as penned by the Founders.

Democracy is just a variation of Mob Rules. Two wolves and a lamb deciding what will be for dinner.

Ras-Puputin
Ras-Puputin
Aug 31, 2023 5:19 PM
Reply to  Thomas L Frey

Same shit by a different masonic name

anonym
anonym
Aug 29, 2023 11:59 PM

Well, yeah, but Sidney Powell ought to have her toes held to the fire for yanking everybody for two months. For a good while.

Clive Williams
Clive Williams
Aug 29, 2023 11:48 PM

85? There’s a bell button ding! This Stevens actor will be a James I Jackobian in one hand out tuther cronie.

jubal hershaw
jubal hershaw
Aug 29, 2023 11:15 PM

If Trump and Robert F Kennedy jr were the choices at the next election, “Who has the shortest rapsheet ?” would be a determining factor of your choice ?

Veri Tas
Veri Tas
Aug 29, 2023 11:05 PM

I’m not a Trump fan for various reasons – one being his “warp speed”, armed forces aided injection drive.

However, I do get the impression that he was and is unfairly targeted, from the very first day of taking office as president. And the procedural abnormalities during his indictment are frightening to say the least. The judicial system has never been a fair process – the prisons are full of criminals from the lower social strata when, in reality, many of the worst crims come from the upper crust, and they don’t seem to be represented much in the world’s prison population.

Nor do I have much respect for lawyers – where were they when vaxx, mask and lockdown mandates – or rule by decree – were foisted upon us? And now that some lawyers are copping the unconstitutional force of the fascist system they are abandoning their own.

Should we care? In spite of the above, yes we should. This is the dismantling of any kind of “justice system” we have left, IMO.

Clive Williams
Clive Williams
Aug 30, 2023 1:16 AM
Reply to  Veri Tas

To Yorkshire we must go AGAIN.
Dont you shop by targets, US Homesteading are Capitalist Wholesale. Backing Sponsoring Funding is USA Business are you a Man or unethically hell bent on filling a roll model.
I think?…I Think in dwelling Will leave an American speechless. He’s only hoping to reach out to duel citizenships not legals.
As per as the above Article…..
>He also forgot his own involvement at being inside a dwelling before it gets dark.<…….."An English Mother to a Son who was born 19/2/1919"…….thereabouts.

Thomas L Frey
Thomas L Frey
Aug 30, 2023 3:08 AM
Reply to  Veri Tas

That “unfairly targeted” idea was just to make him look like an outsider.

Trump is, and always has been, and will be, a NYC Liberal that shares connections with many nefarious characters in NYC.

One of the first being Roy Cohn.

Howard
Howard
Aug 30, 2023 4:26 PM
Reply to  Thomas L Frey

While Trump, as you say, is no “outsider,” I do think there’s merit in the notion that he was targeted upon becoming president. Not for being an outsider – but for not having been the establishment’s chosen president.

I doubt that the kingmakers take kindly to having their plans interfered with – even by one of their own.

Pilgrim Shadow
Pilgrim Shadow
Aug 29, 2023 10:37 PM

One of two things likely happened on Election Night month, 2020. The Deep State/PTB, comprised of both “Democrats” and “Republicans”, and many other non-affiliated Globalist/Satanist types blatantly stole a Presidential election, or, they faked a stolen election. In effect, it amounts to the same thing. They couldn’t have made it any more obvious.

eliger
eliger
Aug 29, 2023 8:29 PM

Some washed up article faking it as something else to appeal to your Christian 2nd coming Republican fanbase, so they can fill the OG kitty jar up.
If anyone believes FBI busted mara logo for nuclear secrets LOL they will believe this latest TV production by the same theatre company.
Covid woke up the medium die hard trumpers, the internet isnt that bothered as it used to be by him.
Any media out let selling this as real is just an extension of MSM.
Off guardian what have you become…

comment image

Clive Williams
Clive Williams
Aug 30, 2023 1:38 AM
Reply to  eliger

Personally, I swear to follow the Constitution of the United States…. I don’t have to abide by or listen to Lying…
Is that as a Republican or Democrat either way its none of my business. Again it’s none of my Business to becoming a Permanent Legal Resident…THATS THREE HOME RUNS…😎😎😎

Lost in a dark wood
Lost in a dark wood
Aug 29, 2023 8:15 PM

The play’s the thing wherein I’ll catch the conscience of the King.

Senator Lindsey Graham questions Brett Kavanaugh regarding Military vs Criminal Law (starts at 24:00)

Thomas L Frey
Thomas L Frey
Aug 29, 2023 10:00 PM

Lockheed Linsey

Lost in a dark wood
Lost in a dark wood
Aug 29, 2023 10:20 PM
Reply to  Thomas L Frey

Neither he nor Lockheed wrote the script!

Thomas L Frey
Thomas L Frey
Aug 29, 2023 10:30 PM

Didn’t say he or they did.
That is his nickname because he is a war pig whore for Lockheed Martin.

Lost in a dark wood
Lost in a dark wood
Aug 29, 2023 11:01 PM
Reply to  Thomas L Frey

I don’t know who downvoted you. It wasn’t me.
I’ll upvote to balance it out!

Erik Nielsen
Erik Nielsen
Aug 30, 2023 12:41 AM

Its against the rules. You cant balance another person’s free speech out.
As I am against your global censorship of other people’s opinions, I have down voted it to balance it back again to TRUE reality!

wardropper
wardropper
Aug 30, 2023 2:51 AM
Reply to  Erik Nielsen

lol

Clive Williams
Clive Williams
Aug 30, 2023 2:00 AM

That’s a bit crazy not that he can’t but he’s actually exposing himself unethically.

Jesuitic Ziowahhabiz
Jesuitic Ziowahhabiz
Aug 29, 2023 8:13 PM

Get over it. The US is a terrorist corporate entity, and always has been. The only ones your “founding fathers” considered themselves “equals” to was the king of England. They just tried to force everyone in the world to get a “vaccine” that might kill you, thanks in part to the Trumpet, so who the fuck care if he goes to jail for a photo op.

Fighting for fake “freedom and democracy” is the most idiotic thing taxcattle can do.

Clive Williams
Clive Williams
Aug 30, 2023 2:08 AM

That’s not correct regarding the King of England, in fact it’s a typical lying technique Organism.

turesankara
turesankara
Aug 29, 2023 8:09 PM

Who cares?

“Beware the false profits who come to you in sheep’s business suits, but inwardly are ravenous wolves of Wall Street.”

Nobody wants Trump or Biden!

“Don’t vote. It only encourages the bastards.” — PJ O’Rourke

Pilgrim Shadow
Pilgrim Shadow
Aug 29, 2023 9:31 PM
Reply to  turesankara

Disagree.

Next to nobody wants Biden. Some want Trump. Some want anyone but Trump.

mastershock
mastershock
Aug 29, 2023 7:42 PM

No train staff in the ticket offices for the unlucky U.K people.
Build Back Better is fast under this Conservative lot.
Automation at the trains station will look like scenes from an dystopian film.

rickypop
rickypop
Aug 29, 2023 7:35 PM

Lawyers are all in on the game. Statutory law applies only to dead entities. In court its the land of the dead, where the game is to trick the living into representing their dead fictional identity i.e., its in the format of your name (MR JOE BLOGGS) Joe Bloggs being a gullible slave then takes responsibility of his fiction from the trustee (Crown) to themselves and a guilty verdict is pronounced.
Sick really but its all to protect the banking system and the criminal families that run the world.

Erik Nielsen
Erik Nielsen
Aug 29, 2023 11:01 PM
Reply to  rickypop

You can use a hammer to build a house, or you can use a hammer to beat your neighbour in the head and steal his house.
As building a house takes time, some people prefer the shortcut.

Same with lawyers. Lawyers mostly very intelligent people and allocated to serve humanity in what God appreciate most: To provide justice.
But many Lawyers fall into the trap of doing the exact opposite namely injustice, and thus get to serve the devil instead of God.

There is a saying: Lawyers are like beavers, they build up dams in society, pick up all the fish, and leave everything in a mess for everybody else to clean up.

Thomas L Frey
Thomas L Frey
Aug 29, 2023 7:31 PM

For the Trump supporters that come here:

In the late 1980s and early 1990s, Trump was facing bankruptcy and was bailed out. By whom you ask? A guy named Wilbur Ross. A banker that worked for guess who? ROTHSCHILD. Shortly after this, his properties in Atlantic city had a boom of sales from Russian mobsters laundering money. Wilbur Ross was our Secretary of Commerce, appointed by Trump.

AG Barr is a Bush puppet and also part of the swamp. Ever heard of Jeffrey Epstein and pedophile island? AG Barr when he wasn’t working for the government was in a private law firm that was part of the defense team for Jeffrey Epstein. AG Barr is supporting and pushing Red Flag Laws and Gun Control. AG Barr’s father gave Jeffery Epstein one of his first jobs (That he was not qualified for) and wrote a book called “Space Relations”, about trafficking of human sex slaves.

Jeffery Epstein died in a Federal Facility run by AG Barr’s DOJ. ALL CAMERAS FAILED AND ALL GUARDS FELL ASLEEP. Yet Barr claims to have seen a video, that previously didn’t exist. Give me a break!

Do you know who was the prosecuting attorney for Jeffrey Epstein? Alexander Acosta. He WAS our Secretary of Labor, appointed by Trump.

Then there is Stephen Feinbert who was Intelligence Advisory Board lead for Trump who also has ties to Epstein through DynCorp. DynCorp was indicted for child trafficking in 2008 and 2009.

Steve Manuchin, a swamp creature from skull and bones, was in charge of our economic recovery.

Who introduced Melania to Trump? Ghislane Maxwell and Jeffery Epstein. Who was Melania working for at the time? Victoria’s Secret owned by Les Wexner. Who Gave Jeffery Epstein’s his million dollar mansion? Les Wexner. Who is linked to the Nxivm sex cult? Les Wexner. How close does someone in political power have to be to two of the biggest sex trafficking scandals before it is too close?

Trump is no friend of the 2nd Amendment. He supports Red Flag Laws, as in take the guns now, and due process whenever we get around to it. Appointed a gun control jerk to head the ATF (Thankfully this appointment stalled out). Set legal precedent by allowing the ATF to classify a piece of plastic as a Machine Gun (Bump Stock Ban).

Trump supports 5g. A military grade electronic weapons system that can be turned on large groups of people or individuals. Research Voice of God Weapon.

Trump supports mandatory vaccination. You know those untested and unverified chemical cocktails that kill people randomly.

Trump will not challenge or stop the abuse of Civil Asset Forfeiture, Qualified Immunity or warrantless searches.

Trump supports the implementation of ID2020, Bio-metric ID. This is a pretext for chip implants.

Trump supports the implementation of CBDC and said exactly that at the last G7 Summit he attended.

Trump went to the WEF meeting during his presidency and said that Klaus Schwab, AKA Dr. Evil, has great ideas / great man.

$Hitlary is walking around free, while Julian Assange is in prison. Trump praised Wikileaks during his campaign and now can’t be bothered to even discuss Wikileaks.

Then there is Jarred Kushner the Chabad loyalist and d-ck that puts Israel First. You know why there was no border control and the worst illegal immigration ever? Because Trump put his Chabad son in law in charge of immigration policy.

Do you know who was Trump’s biggest campaign contributor? Sheldon Adelson. He put Israel First, always and all the time.

Trump is the one that issued the emergency orders providing the legal provocation for political parasites to enforce lockdown orders and mask mandates. Trump is the one that funded the death jab with the military’s Operation Warp Speed. Trump is the one that gave fake Dr. Fauci the podium and ear of the masses. Trump pushes the death jab and kisses the rear end of big pharma at rallies .

DOES THIS SOUND LIKE DRAINING THE SWAMP AND PUTTING AMERICA FIRST?

Trump and his entire cabinet were Zionist sh-t heads that don’t give a f-ck about anyone but themselves. Trump is just the face man that makes you think it is all ok.

Wake up and stop suffering from the cult of personality.

Government will never save you from government.

We need to all realize that when Trump gave the speech about the snake, he was talking about himself.

AND NO, I DO NOT SUPPORT BRANDON, THE OTHER BANKER BOSS PUPPET POS.

I dare you to try and refute these facts.

Thomas L Frey
Thomas L Frey
Aug 29, 2023 7:34 PM
Reply to  Thomas L Frey

See also Whitney Webb’s new two volume series, “One Nation Under Blackmail”.
In her book she goes into detail regarding the swamp creatures Trump is associated with over many decades.

Like Trump’s long term relationship with Roy Cohn, mob lawyer and Jeffrey Epstein predecessor.

Alan Vaughn
Alan Vaughn
Aug 29, 2023 9:04 PM
Reply to  Thomas L Frey

Thank you Thomas…
And here I was worrying that I was the only one who knew about all those evil things Trump is responsible for and actually think it matters. A lot!
I hope I’m not the only one who finds it mind numbing when trying to get my head around the idea that so many IDIOTS still think he’s the Messiah and will rescue them after he drains the swamp!
What is the matter with all those lost sheep? 🤦‍♂️

Clive Williams
Clive Williams
Aug 30, 2023 8:43 AM
Reply to  Alan Vaughn

Second Intermission
Draining Oceans of Recycling Bio-Mass Plastic Testicles Inc.
End of Second Intermission

Howard
Howard
Aug 30, 2023 4:28 PM
Reply to  Clive Williams

Spot on! It’s a sad day when the intermission is the more interesting part of the program.

Thomas L Frey
Thomas L Frey
Aug 29, 2023 10:28 PM
Reply to  Thomas L Frey

LOL.
Down vote only means you suffer from cognitive dissonance and can’t be bothered to even try to refute the facts asserted. Sad.

Big Al
Big Al
Aug 30, 2023 4:06 AM
Reply to  Thomas L Frey

Wasn’t me, man. Totally agree and well put.

Clive Williams
Clive Williams
Aug 30, 2023 9:03 AM
Reply to  Thomas L Frey

Impressive WW1
Hyde Park Corroner…pfft! Corner. I do beg your whatever please take a short walk around Marble Arch and to the Worlds First Zionist Bank in our Beloved London Town. To sort out your Cultural Differences…1912.
We is very Social Seruity Coperative Tommy & Miss Working Classes.
Thank you

SeamusPadraig
SeamusPadraig
Aug 30, 2023 12:22 AM
Reply to  Thomas L Frey

But the real question is: do you support the constitution? In this case, Trump’s rights are our rights. It’s not about him personally.

Thomas L Frey
Thomas L Frey
Aug 30, 2023 2:48 AM
Reply to  SeamusPadraig

I thought I had a pending reply here already, and can’t see that anymore.
I will try again.

Absolutely, Trump is innocent until proven guilty. All people deserve to face their accuser and have the opportunity to refute any potential evidence or statements.

That said, I don’t believe that Trump is in any real jeopardy. As I understand it the case has more to do with the handling of sensitive documents post presidency. However based on the precedence established by previous administrations in this regard, I don’t think they really have a case. Making assertions about elections, no matter how absurdly false, or true, is part of Trump’s Freedom of Expression.

Based on Trump’s complicity in Operation Warp Speed, his support of Fraudster Fauci, support of the death clot jab mandates that are killing people, and ass kissing of Big Pharma, in my opinion, he is a murderous criminal. He is also part of the swamp and the reason they will never go after him about these issues.

I also don’t believe that the justice system is functioning properly and do what I can to avoid it at all cost. To even be in a courthouse makes my skin crawl.

As far as I am concerned this is all just kabuki theater.

Clive Williams
Clive Williams
Aug 30, 2023 8:34 AM
Reply to  Thomas L Frey

Intermission
Fauci was front cover Time Magazine October 2020.
End of Intermission

Howard
Howard
Aug 30, 2023 10:26 PM
Reply to  Thomas L Frey

Mr. Trump seems never to have met a proposition he didn’t like or couldn’t support. He’s the closest thing to a shotgun we’ve ever had in public life: he points at everything and nothing and fires.

“Did I hit something?” ought to be his motto.

Rita
Rita
Sep 1, 2023 10:07 AM
Reply to  Thomas L Frey

Your facts are all correct but you have missed the forest for the trees. If Trump were being attacked for any of the things you write above, that would be great. But he isn’t.

AIPAC / Israel lobby bets on EVERY horse in the race. This is a known fact. The only person who did not speak at the AIPAC conference before the 2016 election was Bernie….

Being against the lawfare is not about being a Trump supporter. Personally I can’t stand Trump. But I knew at some point in October 2016 that TPTB and AIPAC were pushing “Trump” aka Jared Kushner, Emperor of the Middle East, because Killary had become a liability.

In the 2020 election, when I went to sleep Trump was ahead, woke up a few hours later to find that Basement Biden had somehow won with the turnaround coming from a miniscule number of votes in a few key states. If you put all the minor irregularities in those states together it was easy to see how the election was swiped and this was just my own gut feeling in the first three seconds of seeing the results and even before I learned about the irregularities. .

The point is not whether Trump will change anything. He didn’t and couldn’t. The point is that Trump by virtue of being authentic resonates with a large chunk of the population and there is a danger that with a “populist President” this sets in motion impetus for change at the state level that challenges the federal powers in DC.

Trump may be a narcissistic buffoon but he is an authentic buffoon and as a real estate person he is not pro-war. These two facts alone place him and shoulders above any Democrat. Like a two year old he has no filters. This is alarming but appealing to many who are fed up of hypocrisy.

One other thing.
Jordan Peterson is being threatened in Canada for (among other things) having made an unflattering tweet about a “robust” woman in a swimsuit on the cover of some magazine. It made me think about all the jokes about Trump’s hair. I really dislike it when people comment on appearance. Anyone’s appearance. I remember Gillian Tett an FT “journalist” going off on Trump’s hair when her own hair is basically a few thinning strands that would look like nothing without spending a ton at the hairdressers.

Somehow with Trump it became ok and even cool to hurl any sort of invective that would have you locked up for “hate speech” if the same had been directed at Killary.

Paul Prichard
Paul Prichard
Aug 29, 2023 7:17 PM

Your alternative update on #COVID19 for 2023-08-27. mRNA, modRNA, saRNA, etc: high risk, no idea what we are doing. Practice full of jab injuries, not free to talk (blog, gab, tweet).

Christine Thompson
Christine Thompson
Aug 29, 2023 5:50 PM

Why has my comment re. (the probable actual author of the ‘Shakespeare’ works) gone into ‘pending’? There is no justifiable reason for that. Or is it just another occasion where ‘glitches’ are occurring?

Sophie - Admin1
Admin
Sophie - Admin1
Aug 29, 2023 6:09 PM

No, it’s not a glitch, we just REALLY don’t want anyone to know Shakespeare was actually the earl of Oxford. I mean I know there are several websites and a movie already devoted to revealing this fact – but if we had let your comment thru that might just have opened the floodgates and ruined our plans.

/sarc

sandy
sandy
Aug 29, 2023 5:43 PM

OMG. Really? This article amounts to another variant of the Establishment FALSE BINARY menu of limited perceptions that bypass the real problems. Lawyers and judges and their Bar Associations are monopolies with special elite permit status to function as executioners withing this corrupt “democratic” repubtocracy. Pro se is an alien invader to be exterminated by any means necessary. Confront a lawyer with their stated Bar Assoc. goals and objectives and any common sense fairness and rationality and they will tell you: “that’s not how things work”. Bring up Constitutional rights and protections: “that’s not how things work”. How do they work then? Oh, they will guide you thru the gauntlet, then screw you any way they can because they have a club in control of the entire apparatus, politicians are also mostly lawyers, and you are an authority-less serf that’s gonna take it for the team. Pro se or sui juris? The judge will take you out by any means necessary. This is the way things work in ‘Merica. This, is the problem. Allow lawyers who are independent lawyers unafraid to rock the ABA boat and care more about the law, the Constitution, justice and equality. Break up this corrupt monopoly and bring back Constitutional Article 3 courts and subject judges to oversight and criminal liability. All of a sudden few would go to jail in a country where 1/3rd of people have been arrested before the age of 23. PoLice would have to stop arresting people for ridiculous bullshit and Cities would lose the profit and control of Police State.

On top of this Trump has been a crook for 30 years and should have been in prison long ago. That the SYSTEM can only pedestal ludicrous rats like Trump or Biden or Bush or Obama or Clinton or Reagan as presidents, is the problem. The entire corrupt SYSTEM is the problem.

turesankara
turesankara
Aug 29, 2023 8:12 PM
Reply to  sandy

Agreed. Who cares?

“Beware the false profits who come to you in sheep’s business suits, but inwardly are ravenous wolves of Wall Street.”

Nobody wants Trump or Biden!

“Don’t vote. It only encourages the bastards.” — PJ O’Rourke

Sandy
Sandy
Aug 29, 2023 8:45 PM
Reply to  turesankara

Yep. Voting is down in not prez elections to about a 30% max of eligible voters. Prez still gets up to 60%. But still, when politricksters are being elected by only 15% of eligible voters thae entire system has deligitimized itself. If any journalists dug into this fact and made it widely known, folks would really know they were casting their vote with their feet, and go all the way. If T & B are the rematch in ’24 look for a 25% turnout of eligible voters and we could declare that 75% voted AGAINST all of the Rats!

Pilgrim Shadow
Pilgrim Shadow
Aug 29, 2023 9:37 PM
Reply to  Sandy

As the saying goes, it doesn’t matter who casts the votes, it matters who counts them.

Jim McDonagh
Jim McDonagh
Aug 29, 2023 11:41 PM
Reply to  Sandy

The POTUS vote has dipped below 50% the last to go rounds , stuffed electronic ballet boxes not with standing ?

Jim McDonagh
Jim McDonagh
Aug 29, 2023 11:39 PM
Reply to  sandy

I agree with your last paragraph ! But why not complete “connecting the dots” here and remember that Mr Trump is also partially responsible for the collapse of the bankster towers when in1969 the Towers’ construction began , later to be pancaked by a few Saudis and 2 fuel laden jet liners out of the blue perhaps on 9/11? Mr Trump was up to his hairpiece in corrupt dealings with the New York Mafia and democrat pols diverting cement and structural steal to his casino builds by stripping it from the bankster tower build and charging both projects triple the price . No prosecutions were even attempted at that time , as the Vietnam war rolled along as Nixon and Kissinger abetted by Johnson merrily committed treason ?

Placental_Mammal
Placental_Mammal
Aug 30, 2023 12:41 AM
Reply to  Jim McDonagh

There were no planes.

sandy
sandy
Sep 5, 2023 5:04 PM
Reply to  sandy

Y’all can check out my wife Mindy’s battle with our corrupt US system at Substack where she just started writing…

https://mindystone.substack.com/

Thomas L Frey
Thomas L Frey
Aug 29, 2023 4:59 PM

So Off-Guardian has no control over what makes a post pending or not?
I thought administration included all aspects of the computer network system, and thus Admins would have full access to the filtration system as well.

Or is this a case where a specific commenting system has been purchased under licence that does not grant the user access to how the service decides to censor speech?

Thomas L Frey
Thomas L Frey
Aug 29, 2023 5:25 PM
Reply to  Thomas L Frey

I really want to know exactly what I posted in the pending post below this one that qualified for “pending”.

I cannot identify anything that justifies it.

Sophie - Admin1
Admin
Sophie - Admin1
Aug 29, 2023 6:19 PM
Reply to  Thomas L Frey

Your comment is now published – so the world is a lil bit safer tonight.

As we have all said many times we have no idea why Akismet sometimes randomly drops posts in pending. It happens to everyone, it even happens to us. – But that’s ok because we just click on “approve” and the comments then appear – just ever so slightly later than they would otherwise.

Is having to wait a little bit longer to have your thoughts published and hosted – at our expense – really too much for you to deal with? Maybe you need to reduce stress in your life – or learn a little patience.

Thomas L Frey
Thomas L Frey
Aug 29, 2023 7:42 PM

As we have all said many times we have no idea why Akismet sometimes randomly drops posts in pending. It happens to everyone, it even happens to us.

Why isn’t anyone curious enough to find out?
Is it possible that the Akismet software producers aren’t for Free Expression and are implementing a protocol from TPTB?

Sophie - Admin1
Admin
Sophie - Admin1
Aug 29, 2023 9:05 PM
Reply to  Thomas L Frey

You think their protocol depends on delaying the appearance of our readers’ comments by a few hours?

Thomas L Frey
Thomas L Frey
Aug 29, 2023 10:05 PM

I think it depends on key words or symbols that are in a filter for flagging.

Delays for a few hours? As stated you said you have to manually release the pending, correct?

So in essence if all admins are on vacation, it will sit in pending forever?

Maybe you need to get in contact with the guy that Corbet highlighted in your recent article, and find out from him, which forum comment application isn’t censored, and doesn’t have a “glitch” that flags comments “randomly” for pending.

BTW, I don’t believe for a second that there is anything random about software written by humans.

Sam - Admin2
Admin
Sam - Admin2
Aug 29, 2023 11:04 PM
Reply to  Thomas L Frey

I reassured you about this the other day. If you’re concerned I’ll make a point of monitoring your account for a while, let’s see if we can get to the bottom of this. A2

Thomas L Frey
Thomas L Frey
Aug 30, 2023 1:35 AM
Reply to  Sam - Admin2

While I appreciate the attention, I would expect the product vendor should be able to respond to queries by their users in this regard.

I would hope they maintain a knowledge base for their users or at least a user forum that can be searched for similar questions.

Thank you for the concern and offer.

Sam - Admin2
Admin
Sam - Admin2
Aug 30, 2023 2:34 AM
Reply to  Thomas L Frey

I’ll pass your suggestions onto the team and I’ll continue to monitor your situation personally. A2

Erik Nielsen
Erik Nielsen
Aug 30, 2023 12:34 AM
Reply to  Thomas L Frey

We are all after you “the sour pending cryer”. To secure your free speech never come out.
You are a target, because everyone is trembling like it was Nelson Mandela when we see “the sour pending cryer’s” words, and we cant have any revolution can we?
Let the world bow to “the sour pending cryer’s” comfort zone.

Sandy
Sandy
Aug 29, 2023 8:37 PM

This is good to know. Just a software hiccup. The inclination to fear censorship and marginalization (they spin this as “conspiracy theory”) at the slightist sign is a product of the SYSTEM’s alienation machine, now in over-clocking mode in 2023. Patience is a virtue that only patience can reveal. 🙂

Thomas L Frey
Thomas L Frey
Aug 29, 2023 10:06 PM
Reply to  Sandy

Software hiccup makes for a good explanation atm anyway.

Howard
Howard
Aug 29, 2023 10:38 PM

There arises a problem when someone prepares a comment on the cusp (so to speak). That is, when an article is reaching its expiration date – when the commenters are poised to move on to the next article.

In that situation, even a couple hours can make a difference in the comment being read or not.

Yes, life goes on even if nobody on Earth reads a particular comment. It’s just that sometimes the comment is in response to a particularly nasty reply to an earlier comment.

Jim McDonagh
Jim McDonagh
Aug 29, 2023 11:56 PM
Reply to  Thomas L Frey

You might find a substantial donation to Off G could help with the “pending” glitch ? This is an infotainment business and after all aren’t we all profit seekers these days ? Put up your own blog behind a paywall , like “moneycircus ” and ramble on about what is important to you ? The pernicious cost of operating these thing is startling , and the cash bleed is constant .LOL

Thomas L Frey
Thomas L Frey
Aug 29, 2023 4:53 PM

Trump is just another banker boss puppet POS, playing his role in the kabuki theater of distraction.

That anyone would take the time to talk about any of the political parasites (AKA Child Murderers and Rapists), doesn’t know what is going on.

Lawyers caring about the integrity of the legal system? You know why lawyers can safely swim in shark infested waters? Sharks don’t eat their own.

Lawyers have been failing WE the PEOPLE for over a century. SCOTUS is just a sock puppet for the Shadow Government. Just as impotent as Congress and Executive. They are an integral part of the divide and conquer strategy as they embrace judicial supremacy. Our courts have become Admiralty Courts lead by kangaroos.

Want to make a difference for WE the PEOPLE?
Then get rid of Qualified Immunity, Civil Asset Forfeiture, Warrantless Searches, Warrantless Detainment, Communication Management Units (CMUs), Government Operated Black Sites on modified tankers lurking in international waters (Rendition and Torture), the Federal Reserve and their Fiat Currency, dismantle the Congressional Military Industrial Complex and their endless Foreign Entanglements, out of control and power hungry Intelligence Community, ETC. ETC. ETC.

The corruption in government has flourished because people chose joining team evil and unconstitutional, over doing the moral and right thing.

We are not going to fix the circumstances of our corrupt government and justice system, by using the very same corrupt system.

We are being censored, threatened with disarmament, and facing restricted travel, all of which are obvious violations of what are supposed to be inalienable rights.

I will believe lawyers are for real when the political parasites and armed government employees are indicted and convicted of 18 U.S. Code § 241 – Conspiracy against rights and / or 18 U.S. Code § 242 – Deprivation of rights under color of law. Penalty can include death when these violations result in the death of a person.

When ever Congress discusses gun control they are in violation of theses codes. When law enforcement makes up violations and makes an illegal detainment, they are violating these codes.

That these codes haven’t been used already, says more about the current “legal” profession, than I ever could.

petunia petherington
petunia petherington
Aug 29, 2023 4:21 PM

More bullshit too distract the masses.

David Ho
David Ho
Aug 29, 2023 4:39 PM

From What?

Thomas L Frey
Thomas L Frey
Aug 29, 2023 5:21 PM
Reply to  David Ho

Maui fires that incinerated whole families with over 2k children not accounted for, and cause of fire still unknown.

That the son of the president is an obvious criminal, like daddy, that cannot even get a lawyer to represent in court.

That Brandon gave Ukraine 40 billion while giving the victims of Maui $700.

That TPTB are pushing for new mask mandates and claiming Virus X is coming.

That Directed Energy Weapons are real and have been for over three decades.

ETC. ETC. ETC.

Penelope
Penelope
Aug 29, 2023 7:14 PM
Reply to  Thomas L Frey

Yessiree, Thomas–
Funny how the fire only destroyed small residential plots, holding harmless HUD properties. Also untouched govt bldgs, fire dept, police & ONE residential area (It was HUD too). The destruction actually seemed to follow the property lines quite precisely.

https://sashalatypova.substack.com/p/was-weaponized-gis-used-in-lahaina

Martin Usher
Martin Usher
Aug 29, 2023 4:14 PM

Trump’s indictments don’t stem from ‘novel legal theories’ but from concrete actions that can be construed as illegal. Whether or not they’re actually illegal will be tested in court — that’s what courts are for — but according to many ‘its not looking too good’.

Trump’s indictments are unprecedented because the actions that precipitated them were unprecedented. Losing elections is a political fact of life and while you might question a close race the breadth and scope of the allegations of election fraud were ridiculous given the numbers involved. Since challenges to individual results failed — some of them sailing very close to the legal wind — alternative, often novel, strategies were devised to maintain Trump in power. All of those strategies were likely to fail (eventually) but all had the potential to cause significant disruption and damage.

The actions of a lot of people on January 6th. were illegal and were likely to result in prosecution. The hope by many was that as ‘patriots’ a renewed Trump administration would rescue them from the slowly grinding machinery of the law. This fails on two counts. One is that their patriotism is self-defined and the other is that being a patriot (however a person defines it) doesn’t confer any special privleges when it comes to lawbreaking. History is littered with the bodies of ‘little people’ — the likes of you and me — who thought that they were doing “God’s Work” when in fact they were serving the temporary interests of the powerful, only to be discarded when convenient. This is especially the case with wannabe dictators who use populism to advance their interests (so don’t say that nobody ever warned you!).

Howard
Howard
Aug 29, 2023 5:01 PM
Reply to  Martin Usher

Certain things in your comment seem actually antithetical to your larger point (i.e., concern for the integrity of US “democracy”).

Trump being a charlatan does not negate his right to question election results – even if in so questioning he disrupts the overall working of the system. If our system is so disjointed that it cannot withstand a legal challenge, then perhaps it deserves to be disrupted.

Is it not the very function of lawyers to devise novel strategies for their clients? Isn’t that precisely what leads to Supreme Court decisions which in themselves prove controversial and disruptive?

Martin Usher
Martin Usher
Aug 29, 2023 6:39 PM
Reply to  Howard

As an election worker I not only know the systems in use in the US very well but know how difficult it is to game them. The level of ignorance and misinformation swirling around the mechanics of elections was breathtaking, the way that volunteer election workers were routinely denigrated and even harassed and threatened was well beyond the limits of polite society. The fact that this was all disseminated by people who should know better made these actions unforgivable.

Our elections are not at all easy to ‘adjust’ at the vote count which is why so much attention is paid to unleashing funding sources. There’s a case wending its way through the courts at the moment which if successful will make the funding flow unleashed by “Citizens United” seem to be a mere trickle. Since we lost our media diversity rules a long time ago its now comparatively easy to capture a segment of the electorate and feed them with the ideas needed to ‘guide’ their performance at the ballot box. (This in a sense made the entire Trump charade not just irrelevant but counterproductive but I suspect Trump’s not the sort of person who listens to any advice that contradicts what he wants to do.)

SeamusPadraig
SeamusPadraig
Aug 30, 2023 12:27 AM
Reply to  Martin Usher

Electoral fraud, sadly, is also a fact of life. Making it illegal to discuss it in public or challenge it through the legal and congressional process is hardly a blow for democracy and constitutional rights.

Balkydj
Balkydj
Aug 29, 2023 3:34 PM

“If they can be convicted for that, the rule of law in the US political system is at an end. It’s that simple – and that serious.”

Extremely well executed & exemplary expression of educated evaluations…

Everyone involved in this absurd legal procedure needs to read this brief
Poignant objective synopsis, before arriving at any Legitimate decision !
Though I personally have a loathing for Rudy, since September 2001, he
Should always have had a right to a Legal Representative, who should
Never be held accountable for his client’s actions.
Plain freakishly ABSURD ACTIONS:
Well presented, professionally by
Michael Lesher. Hats off &
Thinking Caps ON

Howard
Howard
Aug 29, 2023 3:13 PM

It goes without saying that Dick the Butcher and all his descendants didn’t mean to include corporate lawyers. They are a breed apart – above the “law” by virtue of belonging to entities which almost by definition are above the “law.”

It’s only when such lawyers step outside the protective walls of big business that they become vulnerable.

Edwige
Edwige
Aug 29, 2023 3:58 PM
Reply to  Howard

Allen Dulles was a partner at Sullivan & Cromwell.

As for “Shakespeare”, he never did anything but side with the power and position of the upper classes providing they were in the Tudor bloodline. It’s the main reason why Charlie Chaplin believed “Shakespeare” had to be from the upper classes himself. “Shakespeare” didn’t ultimately want kings to rule however – his model of the ideal ruler was Prospero (written late in the official chronology but for some reason listed first in the First Folio almost as if it was the most important work).

Christine Thompson
Christine Thompson
Aug 29, 2023 5:47 PM
Reply to  Edwige

Yes, the person who actually wrote the ‘Shakespeare’ works was, in all probability, Edward de Vere, 16th Earl of Oxford [1560-1604].

‘Shaksper of Stratford’ [1564-1616], the bloke who is merely claimed to have been the author, left literally nothing in his will that would have supported the claim that he was any sort of a writer, let alone a supposed top-level one. For the items in his possession, as shown in his will, did not include any of the things which would have been owned by someone who was definitely a writer: ie, such things as papers, writing implements, ink, books, book storage items [ie, bookcases, etc], letters to and from him, drafts, scripts, etc etc. Not one of those items were included in the will of ‘Shaksper of Stratford’, the claimed author of ‘Shakespeare’.

There exist absolutely no evidences which support the claim that ‘the Stratford bloke’ wrote ‘Shakespeare’, and a veritable wealth of evidences which support the claim that the actual author was Edward de Vere, 17th Earl of Oxford (a very high-level courtier at the Court of ‘Queen’ Elizabeth I [I put the word ‘queen’ in quote marks due to the fact that I’ve been a passionate anti-‘royalist’ for 35-40 years]).
Many of the themes in the ‘Shakespeare’ plays are actual events in the life of Edward de Vere.

Christine Thompson
Christine Thompson
Aug 29, 2023 6:49 PM

Anyone who thumbs-down my post above is demonstrating that they’ve not carried out scholarly research into the subject, and that they’re thus ‘blindly believing’ the ‘official narrative’ re. the authorship of ‘Shakespeare’.

There are many millions of people around the world who have carried out such research (me being one of those many millions), and they are aware that there is literally NO robust data to support the claim that ‘Shaksper of Stratford’ was the author of the ‘Shakespeare’ works.

Christine Thompson
Christine Thompson
Aug 29, 2023 6:51 PM

Edit: I accidentally typed ’16th’ Earl of Oxford in the 2nd line of my post above, when it should have been the ’17th’.

I typed it correctly in the penultimate paragraph.

petunia petherington
petunia petherington
Aug 29, 2023 6:57 PM

Ahhh..Shakespeare!

Shakespeare was a man of wit and on his shirt he had some ****

One day while passing great st Paul’s a strumpet grabbed him by the *****

Saying ” it’ll cost you a sixpence or maybe a bob…
it all depends on the size of your ***”

Violet
Violet
Aug 29, 2023 7:36 PM

Very witty 😂🤣😅

Howard
Howard
Aug 29, 2023 10:44 PM

Perhaps it wasn’t as strange back then as it appears to us nowadays for someone to regard his work as ephemeral and not necessarily worthy of all the legal fanfare we ascribe to such works today.

Also, in all the arguments you (and others) present in favor of de Vere, it isn’t noted that he left anything in his “will” regarding these works.

Why should de Vere be exempted from something which poor Shakespeare is raked over the coals for?

Christine Thompson
Christine Thompson
Aug 30, 2023 10:58 AM
Reply to  Howard

I’m not sure re. de Vere’s will. It’s quite some years since I carried out the in-depth research into the ‘Shakespeare’ authorship.
I do recall that it’s thought that de Vere may have ‘died’ of the plague, but the cause of his death is not definitive.
Anyhow, his (probable) authorship of the ‘Shakespeare’ works was not known widely [as in, not known by the masses, at the time], so he’d in all probability not have made any reference to it in any will which he made.

What I do know is that in the 16th & 17th centuries, when much lesser writers (but, nonetheless, people known to be writers) than the writer of the so-called ‘Shakespeare’ works passed over [‘died’], their deaths were acknowledged in a big way. People at the time knew that someone of note, in a literary context, had passed.
However… when ‘Shaksper of Stratford’ passed, in 1616, there was nothing done, to mark his death. Nothing. When, of course, had he been the author of the ‘Shakespeare’ works, his death would have been marked in some big way. But nothing took place, no ceremony, nothing.

N.B., the ‘First Folio’ stuff was some years later. And there are many anomalies re. the words in the local Stratford-on-Avon church, re. ‘William Shaksper’. Also, the image of ‘Shaksper of Stratford’ in the church had initially shown merely a man with a bag of grain on his lap… (there exists documentary proof of that…). But some time later on, that image was altered: the bag of grain was altered, to show a piece of paper, and ‘Shaksper’ holding a pen…

And how many people are aware that the ‘First Folio’ was funded by the daughters and sons-in-law of Edward de Vere, 17th Earl of Oxford??
All those on Earth who know that the facts re. the ‘Shakespeare’ works (and, of course, the pertinent facts re. de Vere himself, and how those facts relate to the specific content of the Plays/Writings) indicate that de Vere was the Works’ actual author are aware of that fact: that de Vere’s relatives funded the ‘First Folio’. Which would not have been the case, had ‘Shaksper of Stratford’ been the author.

Christine Thompson
Christine Thompson
Aug 30, 2023 11:37 AM
Reply to  Howard

A P.S. to my reply to you of about 40 minutes ago.

‘William Shaksper of Stratford’ should not be referred to as “poor ‘Shakespeare'”.
He, Shaksper of Stratford, is known to have hoarded grain, and then, when there was a shortage of it, sold it at a higher price than the norm. I think (but am not absolutely sure; can’t recall) that he was even involved in some legal case re. that. I have a feeling that it’s documented somewhere, have a vague recollection of having read of it, during my research into the ‘Shakespeare’ authorship question.

Christine Thompson
Christine Thompson
Aug 30, 2023 1:00 PM

What I meant, in my post above (timed at 11.37am), is that Shaksper of Stratford was a dishonest, mercenary person. Not someone to respect or admire.
There’s also documentation, at the time (ie, in the late 16th/early 17th century), that he was involved in some sort of legal case involving a prostitute. I can’t recall the precise details, but many of the books on the subject of the ‘Shakespeare’ authorship question refer to that case.
And to the fact that he, Shaksper, stockpiled grain, and then sold it at a much higher price than the going rate, during times of shortage.
Ie, as I say, he was not someone to be respected…

Howard
Howard
Aug 30, 2023 4:39 PM

Two things here: 1) great artists do not always have sterling characters; which leads to 2) if indeed Shakespeare was a bit of a scoundrel, that may explain why he was not honored upon his demise.

Christine Thompson
Christine Thompson
Aug 30, 2023 5:14 PM
Reply to  Howard

If you deigned to carry out some actual research into the ‘Shakespeare authorship question’, then you’d learn that there truly is NO robust data, in any form, which supports the claim that ‘Shaksper of Stratford-upon-Avon’ was the author of the [so-called] ‘Shakespeare’ writings.

And, moreover, that there truly is a veritable wealth of robust data which more than supports the claim that Edward de Vere, 17th Earl of Oxford, was the actual author of the Works.

Howard
Howard
Aug 30, 2023 10:33 PM

I’m not really all that concerned with “Who Shot John?” (i.e., in this case, who wrote Lear?). I just don’t like sloppy logic.

If – as I noted – Mr. Shakespeare can be faulted for not leaving behind specific instructions regarding the works attributed to him, then why shouldn’t de Vere also be so faulted?

That’s all. Not an argument regarding authorship; just a point of logic.

Christine Thompson
Christine Thompson
Aug 30, 2023 11:21 PM
Reply to  Howard

Howard, you seem to be talking ‘apples and oranges’, here. Or a ‘strawman’. Or ‘changing the goalposts’.

I don’t think anyone had been discussing as to whether or not Shaksper of Stratford (or de Vere) ‘had left behind specific instructions re. the writings attributed to him’…

One of the many crucial facts re. the Stratford bloke is that it was conclusively demonstrated, via the lack of contents in his will, that he owned NO [not even one!] possessions that would have supported the claim that he was any degree of a writer, let alone the claim that he was the author of the ‘Shakespeare’ writings.

He had no paper, no writing implements, no ink, not even one book, no book storage items, no letters from and to him, no drafts [of plays], no scripts [of plays], no records of payments for writing, or for commissions to write, no references in letters, notebooks, etc, mentioning him as a writer, no tributes at death testifying to his literary creations, etc etc.

Many of the books on the ‘Shakespeare authorship question’ refer to this vital point. I own, and have read, about 20 such books. One of the quite a considerable number of volumes on this subject authored by Americans is by an American woman called Diana Price: the book is entitled “Shakespeare’s unorthodox biography: new evidence of an authorship problem”.
In the book, she tabulates the many criteria which would need to be fulfilled, in order to give credence to the claim that William Shaksper of Stratford was the author of the ‘Shakespeare’ works. And she made the point, as I have above, that he fulfilled not even one of the criteria.
On pp 310-313 of her book, she tabulates a number of criteria [10 in total], and along the top of the tabulation, she writes the names of 12 writers who were contemporary with the writer of the ‘Shakespeare’ works, and, at the far right end of the table, comes ‘William Shakspere’ (so there are 13 writers shown in the table).
She annotates each column with ‘Yes’ for each writer who fulfils any or all of the criteria, and leaves a blank space where the writer does not fulfil any, or some, of the criteria.
Most of the writers she includes in the table (including Ben Jonson, Edmund Spenser, Michael Drayton, Anthony Munday, and others) are able to fulfil between 3 and 10 9 of the listed criteria.
However… William Shakspere is able to fulfil none of the criteria. Demonstrating that there is not one piece of evidence which supports the mere claim that he was the author of the [so-called…] ‘Shakespeare’ works.

On pp 314-322, she gives specific details of the criteria which the other writers in her tabulation were able to fulfil; ie, precisely because they WERE genuine writers…

Howard
Howard
Aug 31, 2023 1:23 PM

I suppose it had to come to it: that art would be just another mathematical formulation. Ten criteria which MUST be met before someone is permitted to be considered an artist.

When you can come up with something less absurd and less insulting to true artists, let me know.

Christine Thompson
Christine Thompson
Aug 31, 2023 9:01 PM
Reply to  Howard

For heaven’s sake, no-one can just claim that such-and-such a person was the author of one or more specific writings. Something called evidence is required

You’ve made it perfectly clear that you ‘think’ that the Stratford bloke (Shaksper of Stratford-upon-Avon) wrote the ‘Shakespeare’ works. However, there exists NO truly robust evidence to support that claim!
And yet you’re still merely assuming that he was the author. When there are many, many people around the world who’ve carried out a wealth of investigations into the question, and have found that (as I stated above) that there are NO truly robust evidences to support that statement.
And so your response is to merely ridicule one of the very many scholarly researchers of this (one of your compatriots, too).

What the author of the book I referenced (merely one of many scholarly books which address the lack of evidences to support the ‘official narrative’ that Shaksper of Stratford wrote the [so-called] ‘Shakespeare’ works) did was to address the ‘authorship question’, in the right and proper way: ie, she looked for evidences. And there are NO robust evidences (to repeat myself…) to support the ‘official narrative’.

Christine Thompson
Christine Thompson
Aug 31, 2023 9:13 PM
Reply to  Howard

P.S. to my post to you timed at 9.01pm on 31 August.

I should, in that post, have given you the criteria which the American author included in her tabulation (see my post to you of 30 August, timed at 11.21pm).

Here are the (vital) criteria she used. Every actual writer/author would have been able to fulfil these criteria. That’s the point: Shaksper of Stratford did not fulfil them.

The criteria which the author used are as below:

Evidence of education

Record of correspondence, especially concerning literary matters

Evidence of having been paid to write

Evidence of a direct relationship with a patron

Original manuscript extant

Handwritten inscriptions, receipts, letters, etc, touching on literally matters

Commendatory verses, epistles, or epigrams contributed or received

Personally referred to as a writer; miscellaneous records

Evidence of books owned, borrowed, or given

Notice at death as a writer

Shaksper of Stratford was able to fulfil NOT ONE of the above criteria…

So what I said is emphatically NOT ‘absurd’, as you claimed.

Howard
Howard
Sep 1, 2023 5:27 PM

The bottom line is: no one claimed authorship of the “Shakespeare” plays. Therefore, it’s ALL speculation. If de Vere wrote the plays, why did he not say so? After all, there’s very little in any of the plays that would have been revolutionary, seditious, heretical or even controversial.

It makes NO sense that nobody laid claim to these works. There’s some evidence they were collaborative, with members of the acting troupe contributing ideas and lines.

At any rate, someone clearly preserved them or we wouldn’t know about them (consider how many ancient Greek plays were lost to humanity for not having been preserved in any form).

Clearly, also, they were attributed to this Shakespeare at some point.

At any rate, the criteria presented are nonsensical; and serve only to reinforce the ridiculous idea that genius ONLY comes from aristocratic stock; and that genius can ONLY be recognized and appreciated by an educated elite.

Sorry, I don’t buy that idea at all.

Christine Thompson
Christine Thompson
Sep 1, 2023 8:06 PM
Reply to  Howard

Howard, that is NOT the meaning of the criteria!!
How on Earth can you think that!!

The criteria (used by that particular author, and by many others, too) are eminently logical criteria with which to try to ascertain as to who might have been the author of the ‘Shakespeare’ works, OR to rule out other putative authors, if they did not fulfil the necessary criteria.
The criteria have less than nothing to do with anyone’s ‘position’ in society, and everything to do with an attempt to ascertain who may, or may not, have been the author of those Works.

I repeat: the criteria (used by that particular author, and by others, too, as I’ve said) are wholly logical ones, when trying to narrow down the possibilities for authorship of whatever writings.
If the Stratford bloke had been any level of a writer, he’d have been able to fulfil most, if not all, of those criteria. When ‘Shaksper of Stratford’ ‘died’, the list of his possessions included NO books, no papers, no writing implements, etc etc!! He thus could not have been a writer! For if he had been, he would have owned books, papers, writing implements, etc etc. It’s stating the bl—y obvious!!

My possessions in my home would leave no-one in any doubt that I’d been a prolific reader, and also a writer (not a professional writer, but a writer, nonetheless. I did, actually, have an article published in 1996, in an international genealogy magazine. I used to be a genealogist, and wrote an article on one of my ancestors, which was accepted for publication).
For I have a massive book collection, and pens, papers, filing systems, highlighter pens, stapler/staples, document wallets full of papers, 55+ lever-arch files chock-a-block full of papers, etc etc!
No-one would be in any doubt that I’d written stuff, and read many, many books, thus acquiring a wealth of knowledge re. many disparate subjects.

But that is NOT the case re. ‘Shaksper of Stratford’. He owned literally nothing that would have marked him down as a writer. Literally nothing!!

The criteria, therefore, have less than nothing to do with “trying to establish that someone of ‘high birth’ wrote the ‘Shakespeare’ works”. They’re simply a logical way of trying to find out whether there exist any facts that would support the claim that ‘the Stratford bloke’ was the author of the stuff. And there exists nothing to support that claim. Nothing!

We’ve had this ‘argument’ before, re. the authorship of the ‘Shakespeare’ works, and I said then that I’m actually what’s meant by the term ‘an inverted snob’, so of course I’m not saying that de Vere was the author due to ‘snobbery’!!

Also, at least for some period of time, the works by ‘Shakespeare’ had the name ‘Shakespeare’ written on the books’ covers in a hyphenated form; ie, ‘Shake-speare’. It was known, back then, that hyphenated names were, very often, the sign of the author being someone other than the claimed author.
One such example being a claimed author whose name was given as ‘Martin Mar-prelate’ (I’m not genned-up on that, other than that basic fact). It was ascertained that the author of that writing [whatever it was; as I say, I’m not genned-up on the detail of that] was someone other than the claimed person. Ie, was what would today be termed ‘ghost-written’.

I also mentioned to you when we discussed this some time ago [maybe a year ago], that one of de Vere’s heraldic images from one of his titles showed an image of someone ‘shaking a spear’. And also, one of his peers referred to him as “Your countenance shakes a spear”.
All the facts need to be taken into consideration.

Howard
Howard
Sep 2, 2023 3:22 PM

Logic is all well and good, but not the be all and end all. It is only slightly more effective than pure guesswork. This, because there are myriad things which affect the existence of something; and there’s no way logic can embrace them all.

There are examples through history of very great writers having a change of heart near the end of their lives and attempting to destroy every trace of their works – Nikolai Gogol being but one example. Logically, it makes no sense for Gogol to take such an attitude toward his own work. Logically, one might conclude the works were not really his. But we know otherwise.

But let me round this out by repeating what must remain the bottom line: NO ONE claimed ownership of these plays attributed to Shakespeare. King Lear is perhaps the greatest literary work in human history – yet no one claimed ownership. This is absolutely illogical.

Christine Thompson
Christine Thompson
Aug 30, 2023 11:28 PM
Reply to  Howard

Oops… a ‘typo’ in my post to you (timed at 11.21pm, has gone into ‘pending’…).

I accidentally typed a number ‘9’ in the 3rd paragraph up from the bottom (should say “between 3 and 10 of the listed criteria”.

Howard
Howard
Aug 30, 2023 11:42 PM

One additional thing to consider. Given your position on Spirituality, isn’t it possible that an extraordinary spirit might choose to inhabit a very ordinary “coat” (i.e., human)? Would this not give that particular human something extraordinary right from the start?

YourPointBeing
YourPointBeing
Aug 30, 2023 1:25 PM
Reply to  Howard

Don’t waste your time responding to “Howard”, because he is simply a duck (more likely a cuck)

Howard
Howard
Aug 30, 2023 4:37 PM
Reply to  YourPointBeing

Don’t you mean your advice to go to some other commenter?

Allie GoPro
Allie GoPro
Aug 29, 2023 3:00 PM

I don’t think enough people are picking up on this aspect. All the TDS types are cheering, and all the prepper/militia righties are declaring civil war. All knee-jerk stuff.

Lizzyh7
Lizzyh7
Aug 29, 2023 4:28 PM
Reply to  Allie GoPro

And that’s the goal of the whole thing. One does not even need to read the details to know this is for show, the divide and conquer show, at theaters now. While we ignore the idiocy and sensationalism we slide ever further into full totalitarianism. And what pretends to be left cheers it on, oblivious of the real point. But you wait, when the other side gets into power queue the shrieking left, who’ll whine how unfair it all is while ignoring how they facilitated it so joyously. Morons all.

Thomas L Frey
Thomas L Frey
Aug 29, 2023 5:24 PM
Reply to  Allie GoPro

How are the retarded Trump supporters, suffering from cult of personality, reacting?

turesankara
turesankara
Aug 29, 2023 8:11 PM
Reply to  Allie GoPro

Exactly. Who cares?

“Beware the false profits who come to you in sheep’s business suits, but inwardly are ravenous wolves of Wall Street.”

Nobody wants Trump or Biden!

“Don’t vote. It only encourages the bastards.” — PJ O’Rourke

wardropper
wardropper
Aug 30, 2023 3:01 AM
Reply to  turesankara

All profits are false in the 21st Cent…

THERE IS NO MONEY.

Erik Nielsen
Erik Nielsen
Aug 30, 2023 3:43 AM
Reply to  wardropper

Believe it. If you enter the cult and believe in it there is eternal e-money……everything is money inside Metaverse…………..LOL.

Howard
Howard
Aug 30, 2023 4:43 PM
Reply to  wardropper

There never was any money – real money, that is. It was always a ruse to allow some to gain power over others.

“I have a parcel of land where I grow food,” says the serf.

“I have thousands of special coins,” says the lord of the manor. “My holdings trump yours. Therefore, I am your boss.”