With Justice for None; the four henchmen

@ H. Skip Robinson 04/01/2019

It is not hard to acknowledge that when Judges are chosen politically, the Judges will become as much a politician as those selecting them.  The confirmation hearings of Judges have become a political battle so adverse and contentious, that they are partially being fought through the legal system itself.

Of course, this is the worst thing that could ever occur in any society, but it has been the rule throughout human history. The Judges have always been a rubber stamp for the ruling class and the various factions want their candidate to be the one confirmed.  The should give you an indication of just how arbitrary judicial decisions have been and can be.  

“With Justice for None” is also the title of a book by the best-selling author and prominent defence Attorney Gerry Spence, now deceased, who wrote a highly critical review of our legal system.  

“A scathing indictment of how law is taught, practiced, and administered in this country . . . One of the best books ever written on the law.”—The Denver Post
 
“Renowned trial lawyer Gerry Spence takes an in-depth look at the American justice system and reveals a terrible truth: If you don’t have power or money, then you likely won’t receive justice either. The wealthy buy their way out of trouble, while the poor are punished. In an effort to combat this corruption, the author devises a number of reforms, tackling issues in every area of the system from law school to the courtroom.”

This is the truth about our legal system, and I have read and heard hundreds of stories over the years providing additional evidence. If you have the money to pay the extravagant prices the average Attorneys charges, and many of them are “poor to average” at best in their abilities to acquire justice, you will get better treatment that those that don’t have the money. Many of them are highly unscrupulous and will take your money and then do hardly anything to help you. And God forbid, having to use a Public Defender who is an indirect drain on the pension funds of the Judges and other government employees that work the justice system, I call Courthouse Vultures.   

IMHO, with the States and American BAR Associations, they have created a quasi power cartel full of individuals with highly questionable integrity. In 1820, Thomas Jefferson apparently agreed when he wrote; “The Judiciary of the United States is the subtle corps of sappers and miners constantly working underground to undermine the foundation of our confederated fabric.… the Federal Judiciary; an irresponsible body (for impeachment is scarcely a scarecrow) working like gravity by night and by day, gaining a little today and a little tomorrow and advance it’s noiseless step like a thief over the field of jurisdiction, until all shall be usurped from the States, and the government of all be consolidated into one…. when all government….in little as in great things, shall be drawn to Washington as the centre of all power, it will render powerless the checks provided of one government on another and will become as venal and oppressive as the government from which we separated.

Our Judiciary, has allowed, until just this week of 3/15/2019 the “extraordinary” excessive confiscation of money and property through unconstitutional Asset Forfeiture actions protected by the 8Th Amendment to be standard operations by local, state and Federal Law enforcement agencies. Finally, after decades perhaps even a century or so, of unlawful confiscations of property and money from the Citizens by government prosecutors and law enforcement, the Supreme Count finally has upheld and protected one of out constitutional rights, in a case Timbs v Indiana after the appellate determination by the Indiana Supreme Court, affirmed an action so unconscionable that it boggles the imagination.

We all know our political system is inherently flawed because of the effects of money on the system but unless you follow some of the lower and Supreme Court decisions carefully you are not necessarily cognizant of the Courts poor behavior.

I think they got Roe vs Wade right and many others but when it comes to the governments taxing and other confiscatory powers to fine, penalize and imprison, it is as if it is a profitable business to them.

I’ll give you one example. During the foreclosure epidemic, the South Florida Courts literally became a purely arbitrary system with a “rocket docket” mentality as it was being called by Attorneys, forgoing most of the rules of law and this was a determination from the top down, with the Senior Judges telling their subordinates to clear their docket, ruling against the homeowners almost 100% of the time. Come to find out the Judges have their own pension fund and they had invested in some of the mortgage loans sold be Wall Street and the banks.

Despite the various frauds initiated by the banks and mortgage lenders, homeowners lost their homes almost 100% of the time unless the banks made some sort of deal with the homeowners.  Here in So. Florida we still have huge numbers of foreclosures still on the dockets and it is often the banks themselves slowing the process. As a Realtor, I think they are trying to slowly bring these properties on the market so that the keep the inventories low and prices remain high but that’s another issue for another day. 

The rocket docket mentality still exists as far as the Judges siding with the banks, but the legal processes have normalized. If you think justice is being served, it is not. We even have found family members of the Judges being owners of banks or major shareholders. 

In the State of Florida, a jury trial is prohibited for foreclosure proceeding by Florida Statute allowing only the Judges to reside, called a Judicial Hearing over the determination of the cases. How can this even be constitutional? 

What is amazing is that Thomas Jefferson warned us about this so many years ago. He stated: “The opinion which gives to the Judges the right to decide what laws are Constitutional and what not, not only for themselves in their own sphere of action, but for the legislature and executive also in their spheres, would make the Judiciary a Despotic branch.  The new Constitution has secured these (individual rights) in the Executive and Legislative departments; but not in the Judiciary. It should have established trials by the people themselves, that is to say by jury.” Understand that he was writing about the jury being the final arbiter at the Appellate levels just as it is most often at the Circuit Court level. 

In one case We The People v. United States, 485 F.3D 140 (2007), one Judge made the initial decision in the lawsuit to deny the right to petition the government for redress of grievances under the 1st Amendment, a group of 62 questions relating to the Federal individual Income Tax, the U.S. Government would not answer.  A three Judge panel, including the now Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh upheld the usurpation and the SCOTUS refused to hear the case. https://openjurist.org/485/f3d/140/we-the-people-foundation-inc-v-united-states So, we had in this case, just “four” people determining if Citizens have the Right to petition the Government for Redress of Grievances under the 1st Amendment and expect honest answers to those questions.  Siding with Kavanaugh was Ruth Bader Ginsberg, Chief Justice and District of Columbia Circuit Court Justice, Judith W. Rogers. The initial Judge in the lawsuit at the DC Circuit was Judge Emmet G. Sullivan. I call them the four henchmen for usurping one of the most necessary rights of all. Our founding fathers petitioned King George as well and with the same results.

The proverbial question is why have a right to petition the government for redress of grievances, if the Government doesn’t have to honestly respond to questions pertaining especially to the tax laws of our nation? If they cannot answer such questions, how are they able to assess and enforce them?  

It was the single most influential action taken by those in the U.S. Government that made me come to the very sad but honest realization, as those from Princeton University and other academics have concluded. That we are an oligarchy and not a democratic republic any more, quashing the entire notion of any possibility of representative democracy under our current leadership and system. IMHO, it is the judiciary that provides the legal precedence that has slowly allowed the expanded size and scope of powers beyond the constitutional limitations set force in our rules of law.  There are legal and proper ways to amend our Constitution, yet the judiciary has ignored them on many occasions, legislating from the Bench as each political Party contends the other is doing. In all three of the above situations noted above, it was the Judiciary single handedly that was the final arbiter fostering the usurpation of rights protected by the Bill of Rights.           

Here are the 62 Questions posed in the formal petition for redress of grievances under the 1st Amendment presented to the IRS Department of the Treasury, The President of the United States and all 535 members of Congress. https://jurists4justice.com/essays/62-questions-the-irs-government-refuses-to-answer/

It simply comes down to just nine people determining the laws for a nation of 325 million people; two much power in the hands of too few individuals. With the negation of the right to petition for redress of grievances, they have now blocked all of the Citizens ability of any method(s) of direct oversight over those in judicial power, as Thomas Jefferson warned so very long ago.  You can vote your little hearts out and it will have little bearing, these justices are nominated and confirmed by the most politically powerful in our system.  The President and 100 Senators now decide our judicial fate.

Then we wonder why the Government has grown from having just one tax, a luxury import tax, to taxing everyone and everything we do with Gestapo like tactics, WWII Germany would be proud of. Total government spending at all levels is now at $7.4 trillion “annually” and we must borrow $1 trillion of that annually, now placing every household in debt to the turn of about $175,000.00 with a total of just the Federal Government debt now surpassing $22 trillion.

We are literally indebting the future generations beyond their potential of paying it back without debasing our currency even more.  Inflation has only been curbed by the poor economic conditions felt by everyone but the wealthy who appear to be oblivious to the effects placed on the middle to lower socio-economic spectrum.                                              

Advertisements

Paul Krugman is Wrong, Again

As first a Democrat and then a Republican, it wasn’t until the late 1980s that I ran into libertarians. I kept debating them and finally succumbed to the logical economics they knew and understood. Yes, it’s both complicated and takes some time to learn but boy, it then becomes an eye opener and everything you thought you knew is then easy to recognize as truth or fallacy.

I have found the lack of economic education to be a fundamental problem facing our world. However, the really hard part is to overcome the false narratives of the ruling oligarchy and their lackeys like Krugman. We have long known Krugman to be an economist who supports the faux Marxist agenda and despite our showing his erroneous arguments time and time again, he still gets the headline attention in the New York Times and other major mainstream media outfits. You don’t think this by coincidence, do you? It’s all about redistributing the majorities money through taxation to the wealthy special interests

War Is A Racket

If you have not seen the video, it shows that every war since the 1898 Spanish America War including WWI and WWII were started by either false stories and/or criminal activities and events done by those in our own government to make it look as if we have been aggressed upon. Even the Civil War was precipitated by wealthy special interest and with the Union military antagonizing the south into defending itself. The first shots fired by the south were in self- defense.

Why? War is very profitable for those who make weapons and the supplies even things like food for the soldiers. Over 139 million military combatants have lost their lives in just the 20th century, of course, most of them certainly not the children of those profiting from the wars. They are of course at Harward or Yale with college deferments.

You Want To Do What?

With the Federal budget especially, but also state and local, if Citizens could pick and choose which social programs they want to pay for and how much they want to contribute to each one, it would at least give us some semblance of a democracy. 

Look, there is no one greater than I that fears the voting majority because they are not being educated and there is no reason for the ruling class to educate them, and actually just the opposite. The stupider the voters are the more they can be taken advantage of.   

With politicians making the decisions, knowing darn well they are serving the wealthy special interests instead of the majority, the benefits of our democratic republic are negated. We’re simply an oligarchy, controlled by wealthy special interests pretending to be a democratic Republic like the Roman Empire and ALL other nation-states before us.

Can you imagine politicians having to actually prove to the voters that a war is needed with the citizens getting to decide if the truth is really being told to us? Would we have engaged in Desert Storm or Syria?

We have the technology to do this, it’s the political will I am worried about. These putzes can’t even get a simple 1 man 1 vote election correct. That’s because sadly we have the inmates running the asylum; oh right, we’re calling it a swamp now. Elon Musk and SpaceX can send rockets into space and land them safely, and we can get a friggin computer system to count the votes correctly?   

The Sliding Scale of Socialism

Socialism; what is it anyway?       

Socialism can be explained as the number of total social programs enacted, times the financial costs to taxpayers; the more costs associated with the programs and their total numbers, as a percentage of gross domestic product, the greater the level of socialism.  So it’s a sliding scale depending on how many total social policies the government has enacted.

In simpler terms, the larger the government is, the more taxes are needed to pay for all the social programs and the more socialist your society would be considered. The lesser the number of taxes and social programs, the less socialistic your society would be considered. Many economists suggest, the larger the government and greater costs of the required taxes, the less per capita production there is; which would be an inverse relationship. However, we’re not here to debate the ideologies. We’re here just to understand what it really is and means and define the term socialism.       

Governments usually provide various services that are an expense to society. Although many deem socialism and communism as antonyms, this author prefers to look at socialism as a percentage of the economy where government services and products are provided, to the percentage provided by the private sector production. This is not perfect for a variety of reasons but can be used as a generality but surely don’t use it to compare different countries.  There are many things that make countries wealthy and there are many things that make countries poor.  If we knew what these were, we would have likely fixed the poor countries already. Lots of theories abound, but never take them a fact.  Knowing what is in the best interest of the majority is a fool’s errand.            

The primary deference between communism and socialism is private property rights. When there are no private property rights, the government then owns everything, and everyone worked for the government, that is communism. Whereas Venezuela, with its private-public partnership as many called it, is a mixed economic model as economist call it. It is a combination of a robust government sector and a substantive private sector, trying to work in harmony. This is a problem for a number of reasons, as Venezuela is experiencing but once that a discussion for another day.    

The bigger the government is without property ownership being held by the State, the more socialistic. Over the last 30 years or so, the government has been buying up more and more real estate so once homes, lands, businesses, commercial buildings, and rents are owned by the government, that is communism with everyone works for the government. Under socialism, private property rights are still in the hands of theCitizens, it’s just that the property and various activities are taxed to payfor the government, The more total taxation as a percentage of total productiveoutput, GDP, the more socialistic your society would be.       

As an example, many may not consider prisons and jails to be part of socialism, because it is a needed entity yet the fewer people incarcerated the less socialism and fewer government costs there would be. Of course, the more people you have incarcerated the larger the correction system must be to manage, feed, cloth, shelter and try to educate the prisoners.    

The balance between the size of the private sector and the size of government differs in societies with mixed economies, thus it can vary and therefore is a sliding scale.   

Socialism can be visualized in this authors opinion as a sliding scale. With minimal government (libertarianism) to the left and communism, total government to the far right. The Democratic Party would be right of the Republican Party “theoretically”, but in reality, they are very close to one another and much closer today to the far-right communism than to the far-left,  libertarianism.      

This is one of the great misunderstandings as to which political ideology is far right and which one is far left.  As an example, fascism appears to occur when the costs of government get too large in relation to the amount of production or GDP, the gross domestic product as I noted previously. The major fascist nations of Germany, Italy, and Japan during WWII all were highly socialistic with high levels of militarism compounding the size and costs of government. To enforce all the taxation as GDP wains from the expansion of the government sector, those in government enforcement become harsher and penalties such as incarcerations and fines stiffer as wages drop and taxes rise. Basically, the government is squeezing the profits out of the private sector to pay for the increased costs of government. Additionally, in the 20thcentury, with the advent of fiat currencies put in place around the world,governments could simply print more money to pay for the additional costs of an expanding government, but this debases the currency without increased productivity causing the devaluation of the currency which results in eventual price inflation, the rising of manufacturing and consumer prices. Where this author believes government central planners make a huge mistake, is crediting the production by private companies contracting with the government, as part of the GDP calculations when a bridge, jet fighter or a school is an expense to society. As an example, if all children were primarily educated via home computers, the costs of building schools could be eliminated. I am not saying this is a good or bad idea, its just an example of identifying costs and expenses associated with the government where the physical school itself is built by some private sector construction company but actually paid for by taxes. Today, we add the costs of building the school as GDP when it is an expense to our society making it appear that our society is more productive than it really is. A society cannot be more prosperous by increasing expenses as our society has seen since the 2008 Great Recession, with the cost of the Federal Government alone reaching $4 trillion annually with $1 trillion of that being printed with interest charges passed onto the taxpayers. 

To learn some more about it go to wikipedia and evaluate my analysis with theirs. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism 

    

Capitalism v. Statism/Free Enterprise v. Government

We have not been a capitalist society now for many years and crony-capitalism, the term the media has adopted, is really a disguise for what is in reality, one or a combination of the three primary entities, socialism, fascism and communism, referred to collectively as Statism by some economists.

There are several methods involving government revenue to create massive levels of redistribution of wealth required for a fascist system to come into existence. Whereas Communism uses direct ownership of the means of production to get the money to the centralized political point, Fascism uses taxes, fines and regulatory fees to achieve this. What makes a country more socialist or fascist depends primarily on the level of militarization and the police state apparatus; the later requiring oppressive levels to effectuate the collection of the higher levels of taxation, regulations, and controls to maintain the flow of money from the Citizens via the redistribution of wealth into a centralized political point, a/k/a the U.S. Treasury Department in the case of the United States. It is then divvied up to special interests based on political influences such as campaign contributions, lobbying, and fund-raising efforts. Then you have the massive bureaucracy administering and overseeing all the redistribution of wealth schemes.

Many believe because there are private sector companies involved in our system we have capitalism. Perhaps to some small degree, but our money isn’t even free market derived anymore and many of our most prominent corporations are to one portion or another government contractors, negating the positive effects that capitalism would have on our society. The more the government intervenes in the market, the more the effects of capitalism are negated. Hence, the term in The Wealth of Nations “unfetters” free markets, referring to capitalism, meaning lacking government interventions.

Grant you that the law and corporations are in collusion, but without the laws mandating the various social policies, the corporations would be much less powerful because it is the government interventions that grant them the benefits or subsidies. We have to have trade and free enterprise, but we are better off without the government interventions. Every social democracy around the world is having essentially the same problems the United States is having because all the nation-states are essentially doing the same things. We have long understood why socialism, fascism, and communism (Statism) don’t work, yet it is the nation-state that promotes it, surely not capitalism in and of itself. A true capitalist would never want government interventions, but statists love them.

One should always keep in mind that libertarian capitalism promotes self-discipline and the nation-state promotes authoritarian discipline. You must decide which one do you want to teach your children and that the enemies of liberty are almost always those granted privileges or benefits by the nation-state.

Take the survey and find out where do you stand on the issues: The Nolan Survey