|View single post by Joe Kelley|
|Posted: Sat Sep 1st, 2018 02:24 pm||
|The process by which corrupt politicians are held to account is a process known as rule of law, and it is the process that was demonstrated in the Revolutionary War. People, not the government, either hold the government to account, as documented in a Declaration of Independence, or people will suffer until suffering is no longer possible.
A Declaration of Independence follows the process of rule of law, whereby the people enumerate the actions perpetrated by those who corrupt government, and an offer is made by the people to afford the accused, corrupt, government a remedy. When the answer to that offer is open violence initiated by the corrupt in government, then how can it be any clearer that the government no longer follows rule of law?
June 8, 1776:
"That the question was not whether, by a declaration of independence, we should make ourselves what we are not; but whether we should declare a fact which already exists:
"That, as to the people or Parliament of England, we had always been independent of them, their restraints on our trade deriving efficacy from our acquiescence only, and not from any rights they possessed of imposing them; and that, so far, our connection had been federal only, and was now dissolved by the commencement of hostilities:
"That, as to the king, we had been bound to him by allegiance, but that this bond was now dissolved by his assent to the late act of Parliament, by which he declares us out of his protection, and by his levying war on us a fact which had long ago proved us out of his protection, it being a certain position in law, that allegiance and protection are reciprocal, the one ceasing when the other is withdrawn:"
The people command all legal jurisdiction civil and criminal through their common law Grand Jury process and their common law Trial Jury process. The government exists to aid the people through that process. If the government obstructs that process instead of aiding the people through that process, then the government is guilty of something known as Mixed War.
The People's Panel
The Grand Jury in the United States, 1634 - 1941
Richard D. Younger
"They proved their effectiveness during the Colonial and Revolutionary periods in helping the colonists resist imperial interference. They provided a similar source of strength against outside pressure in the territories of the western United States, in the subject South following the Civil War, and in Mormon Utah. They frequently proved the only effective weapon against organized crime, malfeasance in office, and corruption in high places.
"But appreciation of the value of grand juries was always greater in times of crisis, and, during periods when threats to individual liberty were less obvious, legal reformers, efficiency experts, and a few who feared government by the people worked diligently to overthrow the institution. Proponents of the system, relying heavily on the democratic nature of the people's panel, on its role as a focal point for the expression of the public needs and the opportunity provided the individual citizen for direct participation in the enforcement of law, fought a losing battle. Opponents of the system leveled charges of inefficiency and tyranny against the panels of citizen investigators and pictured them as outmoded and expensive relics of the past. Charges of "star chamber" and "secret inquisition" helped discredit the institution in the eyes of the American people, and the crusade to abolish the grand jury, under the guise of bringing economy and efficiency to local government, succeeded in many states. "
A peaceful solution is always an option for peaceful people. Corrupt government, on the other hand, demonstrates routinely just exactly what is a corrupt government, leaving no doubt whatsoever when the people set the record straight through the lawful, peaceful, process.
Martin Luther King Jr. Conspiracy Murder Trial Transcripts:
"THE COURT: Let me ask you, do all of you
agree with this verdict?
"THE JURY: Yes (In unison).
"THE COURT: In answer to the
question did Loyd Jowers participate in a
conspiracy to do harm to Dr. Martin Luther
King, your answer is yes.
"Do you also find that others, including governmental agencies, were parties to this conspiracy as alleged by the defendant? Your answer to that one is also yes."
Page 434 MLK Trial:
"Then when they had the plea-bargaining business, I said to myself, here is this justice system, the most important American perhaps other than the President of the United States has been
killed, and they are going to have a plea-bargaining instead of a full-scale trial so that a court of law can tell us, can give us a full transcript of what that murder is about."
Reverend Jim Lawson
Which News Media would quote from court transcripts if the government did its job and these accused, alleged, criminals were on trial by the people, for the people?
Using the example of the Martin Luther King Jr. Conspiracy Murder Trial as a benchmark of what is supposed to happen, although that trial was delayed for 30 years until the perpetrators had successfully got away with conspiracy murder, but none-the-less using the trial as an example, what would a trial look like with Bill and Hillary as the accused?
In the murders of John and Bobby Kennedy, which were murders before and after the Martin Luther King Conspiracy Murder fact, the "Media" (monopoly corporate media) successfully covered up those conspiracies. Only the Martin Luther King Jr. case was documented through the lawful process.
People today can call someone a "Conspiracy Theorist" when someone points out conspiracy in the John, or Bobby Kennedy murder cases. People today cannot call someone a "Conspiracy Theorist" in the Martin Luther King Jr. Conspiracy Murder case, as it is on the official public record that the people, through their jury process, has found the government guilty of conspiracy murder in that case: just read the transcripts if in doubt.
So...there are the paths open to Americans in America.
1. Actual rule of law, proceeding according to the common law, whereby the accused is offered a remedy, and the remedy is found through trial by jury, and then the people know, without having to rely upon Corporate Monopoly Media, what actually happened in that case. The result of that trial by jury then stands as a deterrent for any future conspirators.
2. No official, lawful, remedy whatsoever, and a continuous flow of false information that divides the people into factions that are set against one another perpetually.
"Q. Let me ask you finally -- this has
been a long road -- how you regard -- what is
your explanation for the fact that there has
been such little national media coverage of
these -- of this trial and this evidence and
this event here in this Memphis courtroom,
which is the first trial ever to be able to
produce evidence on this assassination --
what has happened here that Mighty Wurlitzer
is not sounding but is in fact totally
silent -- almost totally silent?
"A. Oh, but -- as we know, silence can be
deafening. Disinformation is not only
getting certain things to appear in print,
it's also getting certain things not to
appear in print. I mean, the first -- the
first thing I would say as a way of
explanation is the incredibly powerful effect
of disinformation over a long period of time
that I mentioned before. For 30 years the
official line has been that James Earl Ray
killed Martin Luther King and he did it all
by himself. That's 30 years, not -- nothing
like the short period when the line was that
the Cubans raped the Angolan women. But for
30 years it's James Earl Ray killed Dr. King,
did it all by himself.
"And when that is imprinted in the
minds of the general public for 30 years, if
somebody stood up and confessed and said: I
did it. Ray didn't do it, I did it. Here's
a movie. Here's a video showing me do it. 99
percent of the people wouldn't believe him
because it just -- it just wouldn't click in
the mind. It would just go right to -- it
couldn't be. It's just a powerful
psychological effect over 30 years of
disinformation that's been imprinted on the
brains of the -- the public. Something to
the country couldn't -- couldn't be. "
Had the government and the media faced common law due process in 1963 for the conspiracy murder of JFK, it is possible that MLK and RFK would not have been murdered.
When murderers run the government with impunity what is expected to happen? Will those criminals sell off everything of value in America? If instead a potential criminal begins to contemplate using government for criminal purposes and that criminal faces the people armed with their lawful process, will that power of the people holding the criminals to account for their crimes, on the official public record, deter those wannabe criminals from using government as their facade that covers up their crimes?
If the people maintain their own public records through their common law due process, what would reporters report on other than the official record of facts documented in official transcripts like the Martin Luther King Jr. Conspiracy Murder Trial?
Would people choose to listen to CBS, NBC, Fox, The Washington Post, or would people prefer to read the transcripts documenting the Bill and Hillary Trial?