There is quite a bit of news coming out today. So much, in fact, that one can feel somewhat overwhelmed by all of it. But, if I had to pick one thing, it would probably be Ron Wright's piece at the American Thinker today entitled A Call to Arms for All Patriots to Come to the Aid of their Country. The piece is rather long, and if, as I urge you to do, check each linked article, it will take a lot of time to digest. One linked article that you should especially go and read in its entirety is titled The New World Order. Wright has done an extensive investigation of this one area, but it bears on what has happened in the 2020 presidential election. Wright concludes that a RICO case can be made. But will it?
Nov. 3, 2020, a new day of infamy, a devious covert attack shook the United States of America to its core. This attack was worse than Pearl Harbor or 9/11. The perpetrators were our elitist aristocracy and political class that reject the concept of self-governing by We the People. Complicit were our unelected administrative state, the Deep State, the mainstream media (MSM), Big Tech, The New World Order (Globalists – The Great Reset), and hostile foreign governments, specifically China. This evil coalition seeks to subvert the People's will by undermining our core beliefs, sovereignty, and overthrowing our government as created by our founders. As President Lincoln said, "A house divided against itself cannot stand."
As President Trump said, this coalition stole the 2020 Presidential election to prevent a duly elected President from serving a second term. This action was yet another coup to conceal the many past criminal acts of these perpetrators, e.g., treason, misprision of treason, rebellion or insurrection, and advocating the government's overthrow. Including violating the People's civil rights under the First, Second, Fourth, and Fifth Amendments and many other serious federal felonies that so far have gone unpunished.
This coalition's collective actions are a criminal conspiracy or a criminal enterprise, as defined in RICO, as I wrote previously in this article. See this article by Glenn Reynolds (AKA, Instapundit), a University of Tennessee law professor. Our law enforcement and other government agencies covered up these crimes - the Secretary of State, Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Central Intelligence Agency, Director of National Intelligence, and others. They all went rogue and failed to defend the United States against all foreign and domestic enemies.Note, there are many more links in the original article that I have not included in the quote, but I suggest, ne urge you to check each on of them out.
At stake is whether our country survives as a constitutional republic from this covert, insidious attack both from within by the aid and comfort by elected and unelected officials and others owing allegiance to the United States and by the assistance of hostile foreign governments and The New World Order. As Benjamin Franklin said, our government is, A republic, if you can keep it. As explained by Richard Berman, “. . . democratic republics are not merely founded upon the consent of the people, they are also absolutely dependent upon the active and informed involvement of the people for their continued good health.” [My emphasis] We must preserve the rule of law and put an end to this unequal system of justice — rules for thee, but not for me. As John Adams said, “[We are] a Government of Laws, Not of Men.”I do not want to make light of Mr. Wrights work here, because he has done a yeoman's task pulling together so many disparate threads. I am in his debt. But again, I ask, who will have the courage to actually bring all these threads together to make a case in a court? What court will have the courage hear the evidence?
There's an old observation that goes something like this: the problem is not what's illegal; it's what's legal. In other words, it is that which is allowed that plagues us. Just as vexing and corrosive as the issue of election fraud is that of whether or not the elections conducted in the battleground states were even legal. Indeed, legality may be the overarching central issue in the 2020 elections, not fraud, not cyber-security. So the MSM's droning on about the nonexistence of "widespread voter fraud" and the firing of Chris Krebs is just more of their obfuscations.
America's big problem of late is not just with the trashing of constitutional norms; it also involves the left's lack of appreciation for the very idea of law itself. America seems to be entering a "post-legal" twilight, where laws on the books are not enforced and where governors and mayors create capricious new "laws" out of whole cloth that are clear violations of inconvenient pre-existing laws.
Sometimes post-legal "laws" can have the imprimatur of the legal, as when a law has been enacted by lawmakers. So a new law that is contrary to already existing law is allowed until it receives judicial review and is struck down. But what if the courts don't grant certiorari and decline to review?
Where we see abundant evidence that America has entered a post-legal era is in the battleground states of the 2020 federal elections. Laws and even constitutions were ignored and superseded. The prime example is Pennsylvania. Act 77, the law that legalized mail-in voting in Pennsylvania, violated the state's own constitution. And then PA's own Supreme Court violated the U.S. Constitution by usurping the power of the state's Legislature. If that's all true, then the election in the Keystone State was illegal. So how can Congress accept the votes of Pennsylvania's electors on January 6?
Anyone who denies that significant election fraud occurred in November is either dishonest or a fool (here and here). But the issue before Congress on January 6 should not focus on fraud; it should mainly be about the legality of the elections in the battleground states. Some have argued that it falls to the vice president to rule January 6 on the legality of the elections in the battleground states.As long as the Left has existed, and it has existed since man first walked the earth, it has not been concerned with the law itself, but with the appearance of legality. They always want power, but if they can get it by feigning legal means to do so, that is better. They don't have to fool everyone, just enough to get them into power. Then they pass laws, which may not be legal, but by that time, who is to stop them. Case in point is the proposed gun laws and confiscations. The Constitution is pretty clear, yet if the courts refuse to rule such action unconstitutional, they effectively have nullified the Constitution.
No comments:
Post a Comment