Category Archives: Law

Night of January 6th, by Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.

January 6th was the sole expression of popular outrage concerning a stolen election. It was trivial compared to say, the George Floyd riots. Why have the January 6 protestors been so relentlessly pursued while few if any of the George Floyd rioters have even been prosecuted. From Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr. at lewrockwell.com:

The so-called “Justice” Department has acted with draconian severity against the entirely legal demonstrators of January 6th , who were protesting the illegal election of brain-dead Joe Biden, in the face of substantial evidence the election had been stolen from President Donald Trump. The right to petition the government is guaranteed by the First Amendment, but this has not stopped Merrick Garland from a wave of prosecutions, and more such actions are planned. As if this were not enough the report of the Committee to Investigate the January 6th demonstrations has released the social security numbers of 2000 people who visited President Trump in December 2020, just before the protests,  exposing them to threats and violence.

Let’s look at what has happened. Here is a story from the New York Times, but remember when you read it, that this paper cannot report news objectively but insists on the Left line: “The investigation into the storming of the Capitol is, by any measure, the biggest criminal inquiry in the Justice Department’s 153-year history.

And even two years after Jan. 6, 2021, it is only getting bigger.

In chasing leads and making arrests, federal agents have already seized hundreds of cellphones, questioned thousands of witnesses and followed up on tens of thousands of tips in an exhaustive process that has resulted so far in more than 900 arrests from Maine to California.

Continue reading→

COVID-Narrative Dissenters File Lawsuit Against Legacy Media Over Coordinated Censorship, by Bill Pan

Interestingly, this suit spearheaded by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is being brought on antitrust, not First Amendment, grounds. From Bill Pan at The Epoch Times via zerohedge.com:

A coalition of outspoken critics and skeptics of the mainstream narratives on COVID-19 has brought an antitrust lawsuit against some of the world’s largest news organizations, accusing them of working in collaboration to suppress dissenting voices surrounding the pandemic.

Attorney Robert F. Kennedy Jr. attends the 2018 Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights’ Ripple Of Hope Awards at New York Hilton Midtown in New York City on Dec. 12, 2018. (Angela Weiss/AFP via Getty Images)

The lawsuit (pdf), filed on Tuesday in a federal court in Texas, targets The Washington Post, the British Broadcasting Corp (BBC), The Associated Press (AP), and Reuters—all of which are members of the “Trusted News Initiative (TNI),” a self-described “industry partnership” formed in 2020 among legacy media giants and big tech companies.

“By their own admission, members of the TNI have agreed to work together, and have in fact worked together, to exclude from the world’s dominant internet platforms rival news publishers who engage in reporting that challenges and competes with TNI members’ reporting on certain issues relating to COVID-19 and U.S. politics,” the complaint reads.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a critic of the Biden administration’s COVID-19 vaccination policies, led the lawsuit. He is joined by Creative Destruction Media, Trial Site News, Truth About Vaccines founders Ty and Charlene Bollinger, independent journalist Ben Swann, Health Nut News publisher Erin Elizabeth Finn, Gateway Pundit founder Jim Hoft, Dr. Joseph Mercola, and Ben Tapper, a chiropractor.

The plaintiffs, the lawsuit alleges, are among the many victims of the TNI’s “group boycott” tactic, defined as a coordinated effort to facilitate monopoly by cutting off the competitors’ access to supplies and necessities.

In this case, the TNI members are accused of engaging in group boycott—in concert with their big tech partners—against small, independent news publishers by denying them access to internet platforms they need to compete and even survive in the online news market.

“As a result of the TNI’s group boycott, [the plaintiffs] have been censored, de-monetized, demoted, throttled, shadow-banned, and/or excluded entirely from platforms like Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, Instagram, and Linked-In,” the lawsuit states.

Continue reading→

What the January 6 Videos Will Show, by Julie Kelly

The videos should have been released long ago, they might help some of the people who were arrested and are still languishing in jail. From Julie Kelly at amgreatness.com:

The jury trial of Richard Barnett, the man famously photographed with his feet on a desk in Nancy Pelosi’s office on January 6, 2021, is underway in Washington, D.C. Nearly two years to the date of his arrest, Barnett finally had a chance to defend himself in court on multiple charges, including obstruction of an official proceeding.

But it was not the fiery, outspoken Barnett who provided the most jaw-dropping testimony in the trial so far. To the contrary, one of the government’s own witnesses confirmed under defense cross-examination that “agents provocateur” were heavily involved in instigating the events of January 6.

Captain Carneysha Mendoza, a tactical commander for U.S. Capitol Police at the time, testified Wednesday how a group of agitators destroyed security barriers and lured people to Capitol grounds that afternoon:

Defense Counsel Brad Geyer: Isn’t it true that you had a lot of people, a large quantity of people walking down two streets that dead-ended at the Capitol?

Mendoza: Yes, sir.

Geyer: And would it be fair to say that at least at some of the leading edges of that crowd, they contained bad people or provocateurs; is that fair?

Mendoza: It’s fair.

Geyer: Dangerous people?

Mendoza: Yes.

Geyer: Violent people?

Mendoza: Yes.

Geyer: Highly trained violent people?

Mendoza: Yes.

Geyer: Highly trained violent people who work and coordinate together?

Mendoza: Yes

It was a stunning admission, representing the first time a top law enforcement official stated under oath (to my knowledge) that a coordinated, experienced group of agitators engaged in much of the mischief early that day. Under further questioning, Mendoza acknowledged those same individuals “pushed through barriers, removed barriers, threw barriers over the side, removed fencing, and eased the flow of people into places where they shouldn’t be.” This happened around 1:00 p.m., the same time the joint session of Congress convened to debate the results of the 2020 presidential election.

Continue reading→

Sue the Bastards

A Government by Experts, by Andrew Napolitano

Experts aren’t even mentioned in the Constitution. From Andrew Napolitano at lewrockwell.com:

I have often thought that after Abraham Lincoln, Woodrow Wilson was our worst president. By worst is meant least faithful to the Constitution and most destructive of personal liberty.

With the exception of Lincoln’s dictatorship — during which the federal government used violence to crush the states’ natural right to secede from a compact they had voluntarily joined, and instead brought about the systematic murder of 750,000 persons — America from its founding to the early part of the 20th century more or less enjoyed the James Madison model for the federal government.

Under this model, the federal government could only legislate, regulate, spend and govern in the 16 discrete areas of human behavior that the Constitution delegated to it. All other areas of human behavior were left free to individual choices or governance by the states.

From and after Wilson’s presidency, the Madisonian model was replaced by the Wilsonian one. Under this model, the feds could legislate, regulate, spend and govern in any areas of human behavior for which there was a national political will, except for those areas that are expressly prohibited to them by the Constitution.

Continue reading→

Decline of Empire: Parallels Between the U.S. and Rome, Part II, by Doug Casey (With Link to Part I)

The second part of Doug Casey’s excellent comparison between the Roman and American Empires. From Casey at internationalman.com:

See here for Part I

Like the Romans, we’re supposedly ruled by laws, not by men. In Rome, the law started with the 12 Tablets in 451 BCE, with few dictates and simple enough to be inscribed on bronze for all to see. A separate body of common law developed from trials, held sometimes in the Forum, sometimes in the Senate.

When the law was short and simple, the saying “Ignorantia juris non excusat” (ignorance of the law is no excuse) made sense. But as the government and its legislation became more ponderous, the saying became increasingly ridiculous. Eventually, under Diocletian, law became completely arbitrary, with everything done by the emperor’s decrees—we call them Executive Orders today.

I’ve mentioned Diocletian several times already. It’s true that his draconian measures held the Empire together, but it was a matter of destroying Rome in order to save it. As in the U.S., in Rome statute and common law gradually devolved into a maze of bureaucratic rules.

The trend accelerated under Constantine, the first Christian emperor, because Christianity is a top-down religion, reflecting a hierarchy where rulers were seen as licensed by God. The old Roman religion never tried to capture men’s minds this way. Before Christianity, violating the emperor’s laws wasn’t seen as also violating God’s laws.

The devolution is similar in the U.S. You’ll recall that only three crimes are mentioned in the U.S. Constitution—treason, counterfeiting, and piracy. Now you can read Harvey Silverglate’s book, Three Felonies a Day, which argues that the average modern-day American, mostly unwittingly, is running his own personal crime wave—because federal law has criminalized over 5,000 different acts.

Continue reading→

Trump’s Tax Returns Show Evil of the Income Tax, by Ron Paul

The evils of the income tax—robbing people of the fruits of their honest labor—are understood and mostly ignored. From Ron Paul at ronpaulinstitue.org:

The final act of the Democrat majority on the House Ways and Means Committee was to make public several years of Donald Trump’s tax returns, which the Committee obtained after a prolonged legal battle. The tax returns confirmed that, despite being one of the richest people in America, Donald Trump paid very little in federal income tax. In fact, in at least one year he paid under a thousand dollars.

Trump’s success in minimizing his tax liability without ever being audited is surprising only to those who think IRS audits are mainly used to catch rich “tax cheats.” According to data released by the Syracuse University Transactional Records Clearinghouse, in 2022 lower-income taxpayers were five and half times more likely than millionaires and billionaires to be audited! This is because low-income taxpayers cannot afford to hire top-notch tax attorneys and accountants to help fight the IRS, so they are more likely to give in to the agency’s demands.

Despite claims of the Biden Administration and its Congressional allies, the $80 million in additional funds provided to the agency as a part of the misnamed “Inflation Reduction Act” will likely increase the tax agency’s targeting of low- and middle-income Americans.

Continue reading→

The Elitists’ Communications Counterrevolution, by Thaddeus G. McCotter

We can’t possibly have an Internet free of state control. From Thaddeus G. McCotter at amgreatness.com:

We should have seen it coming.

The gleaming promise of new technology and its uses blinded us to the insidious extent imperiled elitists would go to protect their unmerited power, wealth, and status. We were naïve. Yet, even if one could have foreseen the metastasizing tyranny brought about by the digital age, it would have strained credulity to watch Americans—especially the young—not merely acquiescing to it, but embracing it.

Though we are now inured to its novelty, it bears recollecting that from the late 20th century to the present, we have lived through a worldwide communications revolution. Profoundly affecting the individual and society, the full impact of this revolution remains unclear. Humanity’s ability to choose and pursue happiness has been empowered to an extent undreamt. In the palm of one’s hand, or upon one’s laptop or desk, and with just a stroke of a key, one can instantaneously communicate with family and friends a world away, conduct business, petition the government for the redress of grievances, or bring calumny upon a major corporation. In sum, the communications revolution is an historically unprecedented technological boon for personal empowerment, growth, enrichment, and self-government.

It is this last that alarms the elitists.

The elitists believe they are entitled to wield power for the purpose of governing their inferiors (i.e., the rest of us). To facilitate this inversion of our free republic’s design, the elitists require the complicity of a significant amount of the citizenry who, through acquiescence, apathy, and/or dependency, are more than willing to submit to the elitists’ control over their lives, be it wholly or in part. Thus, for the elitists, the communications revolution is an existential threat. The empowerment of sovereign citizens to self-govern and, be it singularly or collectively, increase their ability to control and curtail—i.e., to subordinate—the power of public and private sector elitists, had to be blocked through co-option and coercion; through a communications counterrevolution.

Continue reading→

Obedience Culture, by Eric Peters

At best the obedient are boring, at worst they become the tyrants they once obeyed. From Eric Peters at ericpetersautos.com:

When did Americans become so  . . . obedient? That is easy to answer. It became so when they became so reflexively fearful. Of everything. Of anything.

That happened a little more than 20 years ago.

They were told to freeze in place – some may remember this – and they did. And so it came naturally when they were told to stand six feet apart. They just did it.

They were told to spread their legs. Having done that, putting on a “mask” came naturally enough, when they were told to do that, too.

They were told the “threat” was “elevated.”

The cases! The cases! 

Panic became the new American drug. Obedience, its hangover. The drug was pushed from the top down by the man who was president – just barely – when (supposedly) a handful of disgruntled Saudis flew commercial jets into American landmarks, one of which pancaked straight down into its own footprint after not being struck by a commercial jet. Americans were told by George W. Bush, squinty-eyed and finger pointing, to be very afraid – of everything. Of everyone. That to not be afraid was a kind of affirmation of “evil-doing.”

“You are either with us or with the terrorists,” he said.

“We are all in this together,” Americans said – a generation later, as they terrorized one another.

One doesn’t hear much about “Islamic terrorism” anymore. Probably because the “enemies of freedom,” as Bush styled them, won. Their squinty-eyed leader now comfortably retired to his ranch in Texas where he occupies his latter days painting luridly, disjointedly – in the John Wayne Gacy style.

Continue reading→

From Status to Merit and Back to Status, by Paul Craig Roberts

It took centuries for humanity to partially move from status to merit. Reversing that is a giant leap backwards. From Paul Craig Roberts at paulcraigroberts.com:

Henry Sumner Maine in 1861 wrote that “the movement of the progressive societies has hitherto been a movement from Status to Contract.”  Maine is referring to the rise of merit from the Enlightenment and its replacement of aristocratic status as the basis for advancement.

In the past few decades today’s progressives have turned this movement upside down. The new progressive movement is from merit to status based on race, gender, and sexual preference.  Already in law there is a two-tier system of rights and privileges governing university admissions, employment, promotion, and criminal law that mimic the medieval era of status-based rights.  Astute observers would also point out that in the 21st century both Republican and Democrat presidents have resurrected the power of medieval governments to confine people in prison on suspicion alone and to execute the accused without due process of law.

In 1995 in my book, The New Color Line, I said that the failure of the House and Senate to hold the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission accountable for implementing a racial and gender quota regime despite the explicit prohibition in the 1964 Civil Rights Act would result in the restoration of status-based rights and inequality under the law.  At the time my point was acknowledged, but the advocates of racial quotas and preferential hiring and promotion claimed the privileges were only a temporary measure until blacks had caught up and were proportionately represented in government and the professions.  It was obvious to me that once merit was abandoned because it was disadvantageous to preferred races, merit could not be easily restored.

Merit was first abandoned in university admission requirements for blacks alone.  This was followed by a general lowering of grading standards and then to pass-fail systems so that there was no way to measure the relative performance of the races.  Since then we have gone much further long this road.  Merit has been written off as racist and meritocracy as a tool of white oppression.

We have come full circle.  Henry Maine saw merit as liberation from status-based systems.  Today merit is regarded as suppression of status-based rights.

Continue reading→