Posted originally on the CTH on March 18, 2024 | Sundance
When Atlanta Judge Scott McAfee ruled recently in the Fani Willis decision TechnoFog noted, “Judge McAfee rules that only one potential liar can prosecute the case – but not both potential liars. Instead of curing the “appearance of impropriety”, it allows it to continue. If Nathan Wade goes, why can Fani Willis stay? McAfee doesn’t give an answer.”
To chase down this judicial question, lawyers representing President Trump and seven co-defendants, collectively accused of RICO conspiracy, today asked McAfee to issue a certificate of immediate review of his order denying disqualification of Fani Willis.
The certificate, if issued, would allow the defendants to seek an immediate appeal of the order. Because in order for President Trump to appeal the order denying disqualification prior to trial, the defendants must obtain a certificate of immediate review within 10 days from the date of the order. Today Trump’s lawyers asked for that certificate. [pdf of motion HERE]
(VIA NBC) – […] It’s important to note that there isn’t an automatic right to appeal at this stage. Rather, McAfee would need to grant permission to do so within 10 days of his ruling, and then the state appeals court would need to agree to hear the case. If that happens, it could bring yet more delay to the prosecution that doesn’t even have a trial date yet and has already been sidetracked by the disqualification motion that led to McAfee’s ruling.
It’s unclear if the judge would grant such permission to appeal at this stage. In a recent unrelated ruling in which he dismissed some of the indictment’s counts, McAfee said he’d be inclined to permit an appeal of that ruling. But he didn’t say that in his disqualification order. That doesn’t automaticallymean he wouldn’t permit an appeal, but he didn’t go out of his way to signal his openness to the idea like he did in his dismissal ruling.
In his disqualification order, McAfee said that the defense failed to prove an actual conflict of interest, but that the appearance of impropriety meant that either Willis (and her whole office) or special prosecutor Nathan Wade had to go. Wade resigned that same day. Though he deemed a speech she gave improper, McAfee declined to disqualify Willis because of alleged “forensic misconduct” based on it. If defendants are allowed to mount an appeal, they could cite the damning facts McAfee found to argue that he reached the wrong legal conclusion by not disqualifying Willis. (read more)
Judge McAfee rules that only one potential liar can prosecute the case – but not both potential liars.
Instead of curing the "appearance of impropriety", it allows it to continue.
If Nathan Wade goes, why can Fani Willis stay? McAfee doesn't give an answer. pic.twitter.com/Lj1pgF6Bgk
Here is the joint motion that President Trump and I filed today asking Judge McAfee to issue a certificate of immediate review. We want the Georgia Court of Appeals to immediately take up the disqualification of District Attorney Fani Willis.https://t.co/vUPyHcSd0Lpic.twitter.com/eAKM8FADe4
Statement of Steve Sadow, lead defense counsel for President Trump in the Fulton County, GA case:
“President Trump and seven defendants have jointly filed a motion requesting the Court to grant a certificate of immediate review of its Order denying dismissal of the case and disqualification of Fulton County DA Willis. The motion notes that the Court found that Willis’ actions created an appearance of impropriety and an “odor of mendacity” that lingers in this case, but it nonetheless refused to dismiss the case or disqualify her. The motion further notes that the Court found Georgia case law lacks controlling precedent for the standard for disqualification of a prosecuting attorney for forensic misconduct. For these reasons among others, the Court’s Order is ripe for pretrial appellate review.” (LINK)
Congress cannot agree on anything other than dismantling the First Amendment. There is no greater threat to the establishment than the uncensored sharing of ideas. This week, 353 members of Congress voted to ban TikTok to “protect our data.” Unlike any major issue facing the country, it took Congress a mere eight days to implement this ban, with an astounding 81% in favor of removing the platform.
As Robert F. Kennedy Jr. accurately states, NATIONAL SECURITY is the ruse they use every single time when the government permanently removes one of our freedoms and usurps more power. They never give us back the freedoms we relinquish. Kennedy quoted his father’s favorite author, Albert Camus, “The welfare of the people is always the alibi of tyrants, and it provides the further advantage of giving the servants of tyranny a clear conscience.”
Hippocrit Joe Biden himself recently signed up for the TikTok platform but received minimal following due to his waning support with Gen Z and Millennials. “It’s the digital public square,” Kennedy explained, as people have gravitated toward the platform in recent years as it was one of the last frontiers of free speech.
There is absolutely no reason that Congress cannot address security concerns on the backend. I can assure you that the majority of voting members have NEVER utilized the platform and likely cannot attach a PDF to an email. They all agreed to ban free speech and did not need any additional information. Remember the last TikTokCongressional hearing? The questions were completely asinine and showed that the voting members had no understanding of the platform.
Small businesses have been using TikTok to grow their companies. De-platformed individuals have used it as a way to share their ideas, mere ideas, as thoughts alone threaten government. Politicians like RFK have been using TikTok to speak out against the establishment as the mainstream news refuses to cover the majority of what he and others have to say, as their donors would never allow it. There are restrictions in place on the app for material that does actually present a danger to the public, but Congress refused to look into the matter.
A local Christian radio station constantly runs ads saying that they need private donations to avoid large advertisers who will control what they can and cannot air. That is yet another reason why I offer this complimentary blog, free of advertisements or third-party interference. I have turned down countless offers over the years because I will not risk my voice, and I am not motivated by money.
I commend Kennedy for always making clear arguments without bashing his political opponents. This man deserves more coverage than he receives, and he does have quite a large following on social media platforms such as TikTok, where he is permitted to speak freely. RFK is honest and does not play partisan political games.
The First Amendment should not be prohibited for ANY reason. How many times has major American-owned corporations leaked your data in recent years? Every month there seems to be a new leak from a major corporation followed by a class action lawsuit where the victims are paid a few dollars and perhaps receive free credit monitoring. The people should own their data NOT the government.
When has 81% of our Congress agreed on anything? They see the people speaking to one another and collaborating without government intervention. Our elected officials have not made progress on any measure in years and routinely shutdown because they simply cannot have bipartisan debates. The Senate couldn’t even pass a measure as neutral as the Daylight’s Savings bill for crying out loud. These leeches on society sit in office until the day they die, receiving a hefty salary paid for by the American people which is a mere fraction of what they receive from insider trading and lobbyists who influence the policies they implement on the entire nation.
Government tyranny is rising because they see that they are losing control of the narrative. The First Amendment and our ability to freely communicate with one another is swiftly vanishing.
We are looking at options outside the Socrates private blog to avoid these tyrannical censorship bills and will likely make an announcing in the coming weeks.
Posted originally on Mar 12, 2024 By Martin Armstrong
The Constitution doesn’t directly discuss presidential immunity from criminal or civil lawsuits or immunity for other government officials. Instead, this privilege of Presidential has developed over time through the Supreme Court’s interpretation of Article II, Section 2, Clause 3:
The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.
The legal doctrine concerning Presidential Immunity dates back to its 1867 decision Mississippi v. Johnson, 171 U.S. (4 Wall.) 475 (1867), where the Supreme Court established that the President is largely beyond the reach of the judiciary by holding that it could not direct President Andrew Johnson in how he exercised his purely executive and political powers. The ONLY exception is an impeachment for a crime. The Court stated it had no jurisdiction . . . to enjoin the President in the performance of his official duties.
In Franklin v. Massachusetts, 505 U.S. 788, 825–28 (1992) Justice Scalia, concurring, noted Mississippi v Johnson, stating:
“I am aware of only one instance in which we were specifically asked to issue an injunction requiring the President to take specified executive acts: to enjoin President Andrew Johnson from enforcing the Reconstruction Acts. As the plurality notes, ante, at 802-803, we emphatically disclaimed the authority to do so, stating that” ‘this court has no jurisdiction of a bill to enjoin the President in the performance of his official duties.’” Mississippi v. Johnson, 4 Wall. 475, 501 (1867). See also C. Burdick, The Law of the American Constitution §50, pp. 126-127 (1922); C. Pyle & R. Pious, The President, Congress, and the Constitution 170 (1984) (“No court has ever issued an injunction against the president himself or held him in contempt of court”). The apparently unbroken historical tradition supports the view, which I think implicit in the separation of powers established by the Constitution, that the principals in whom the executive and legislative powers are ultimately vested-viz., the President and the Congress (as opposed to their agents)-may not be ordered to perform particular executive or legislative acts at the behest of the Judiciary.2″
Two vice presidents have been indicted: Aaron Burr in New York and New Jersey for killing Alexander Hamilton in a duel at Weehawken, New Jersey on July 11, 1804, and Spiro Agnew, who pleaded no contest to several offenses at the moment of his resignation. However, the same arguments have not been made for vice presidential immunity as for presidential.
In 1973, during the infamous Watergate scandal, the Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) issued a memorandum concluding that it was unconstitutional to prosecute a sitting president, then Bill Clinton. The question becomes, what is an insurrection?
Legally, sedition is conduct or speech that incites individuals to rebel violently against the government’s authority. Insurrection includes the actual acts of violence and rebellion. In a Republic, sedition and insurrection refer to inciting or participating respectfully in rebellion against the constitutionally established government, including its processes, institutions, or the rule of law. In other words, it MUSTviolently seek to overthrow the government or its institutions by overthrowing the Constitution itself. One cannot commit sedition or insurrection to “overthrow a government” while still claiming to uphold and defend the Constitution. Consequently, the rule of law and the Constitution are inextricably linked. There MUST be violent attacks that would thus not be protected actions.
Nobody has been charged with 18 USC 2383 because they knew they had to prove there was a violent attempt to overthrow the government. Special Prosecutor has Charged Trump with CONSPIRACY, which is simply an agreement – not the substantive crime of insurrection. They have charged Trump with what someone could charge all of these prosecutors for interfering in the 2024 election. The statute is Civil Rights Violation 18 USC 241, widely used as a catch-all for anything you can allege. It carries a punishment of up to 10 years in prison. It has been routinely used in election fraud conspiracies, like ballot box stuffing.
Smith has alleged “a conspiracy against the right to vote and to have one’s vote counted.” Essentially, Mr. Smith has accused Mr. Trump of trying to rig the outcome of the election to claim victory falsely. Naturally, the Democrats refused to investigate election fraud of dead people voting, etc. This has been a selective prosecution. The Washington Appellate Court claimed that Trump was acting not as the President but as a candidate.
U.S. DC Circuit Judge Sri Srinivasan in Marxville was NEVER even a judge before who was controversially appointed under former President Barack Obama to the position of Chief Judge no less of the DC US Court of Appeals because of his race. This questionable judge, in trying to destroy Donald Trump, wrote in the ruling:
“In arguing that he is entitled to official-act immunity in the cases before us, President Trump does not dispute that he engaged in his alleged actions up to and on January 6 in his capacity as a candidate. But he thinks that does not matter. Rather, in his view, a president’s speech on matters of public concern is invariably an official function, and he was engaged in that function when he spoke at the January 6 rally and in the leadup to that day. We cannot accept that rationale,”
He has stripped everyone of immunity, and all you now have to do is file a suit against him and argue he was not acting as a judge and did not follow the law because he was doing so for personal gratification. Special Prosecutor Smith could be libeled for the very same statute interfering in everyone’s right to vote, and he was acting as a partisan – not according to established law.
The Supreme Court has recognized various immunity statutes by Congress that give immunity in return for testimony, as in Kastigar v. United States, 406 U.S. 441, 445–46 (1972). The English Parliament first enacted a statute providing immunity in 1710 (9 Anne, c. 14, 3–4 (1710)). That created the precedent that America followed. Finally, it was Congress that enacted the first federal immunity statute in 1857, providing immunity in return for who would rat on someone the government wanted (Ch. 19, 11 Stat. 155 (1857). However, there was an exception for perjury committed while testifying before Congress.
The Supreme Court’s decision in Counselman v. Hitchcock 142 U.S. 547 (1892) soon rendered Congress’s immunity statute unenforceable, holding that providing limited immunity was unconstitutional to compel testimony.
Article I, Section 6, Clause 1:
The Senators and Representatives shall receive a Compensation for their Services, to be ascertained by Law, and paid out of the Treasury of the United States. They shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.
If the Constitution did not create IMMUNITY for anyone other than Article I, Section 6 Clause 1 on a limited basis to prevent criminal law from interfering with a vote, arrest a Congressman to prevent him from voting for or against a bill. Courts or statutes have created all other immunities. My question boils down to HOW can you create immunity for any government official that would violate the Eighth Amendment, be it excessive fines or cruel and unusual punishment? If you have ABSOLUTE immunity for Special Prosecutor Smith and judges regardless of their actions, then how can you deny IMMUNITY for Trump? Either everyone has it, or nobody has it. These are all judicially crafted immunities – not prescribed by the Constitution.
Posted originally on the CTH on March 11, 2024 | Sundance
The House Subcommittee on Oversight released a report [SEE HERE] and overview [SEE HERE] highlighting just how political the J6 committee was. The report outlines how Nancy Pelosi structured the J6 committee for political intents, and the longer report showcases the evidence of how Liz Cheney assisted.
WASHINGTON– Today, Committee on House Administration’s Subcommittee on Oversight Chairman Barry Loudermilk (GA-11) released his “Initial Findings Report” on the events of January 6, 2021 as well as his investigation into the politicization of the January 6th Select Committee. (more)
The last bullet point has a name. The “Select Committee staff” who met with Fani Willis was likely Mary McCord.
“For nearly two years former Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s January 6th Select Committee promoted hearsay and cherry-picked information to promote its political goal – to legislatively prosecute former President Donald Trump,” said Chairman Loudermilk. “It was no surprise that the Select Committee’s final report focused primarily on former President Trump and his supporters, not the security failures and reforms needed to ensure the United States Capitol is safer today than in 2021.
“The American people deserve the entire truth about what caused the violent breach at the United States Capitol of January 6, 2021. It is unfortunate the Select Committee succumbed to their political inclinations and chased false narratives instead of providing the important work of a genuine investigation. In my committee’s investigation, it is my objective to uncover the facts about January 6, without political bias or spin. My report today is just the beginning.” (LINK)
Pay very close attention to these next two citations:
November 3, 2021 – In Washington DC – “Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.) and the House Jan. 6 Select Committee has tapped Mary McCord, who once ran the Justice Department’s National Security Division, for representation in its fight to obtain former President Donald Trump’s White House records. (read more)
Then consider:
January 10, 2024 – Georgia prosecutors probing Donald Trump’s effort to subvert the 2020 election got an early boost in the spring of 2022. It came from another set of investigators who were way ahead of them: the House Jan. 6 select committee.
Committee staff quietly met with lawyers and agents working for Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis in mid-April 2022, just as she prepared to convene a special grand jury investigation. In the previously unreported meeting, the Jan. 6 committee aides let the district attorney’s team review — but not keep — a limited set of evidence they had gathered. (read more)
The “J6 committee staff” that led the conversations with Fani Willis is a person, and that person’s name is Mary McCord. As the lead in the J6 staff effort, there is simply no way to believe the committee staff that met with Fani Willis did not include McCord.
♦ McCord submitted the fraudulent FISA application to spy on Trump campaign.
♦ McCord created the “Logan Act” claim used against Michael Flynn and then went with Sally Yates to confront the White House.
♦ McCord then left the DOJ and went to work for Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler.
♦ McCord organized the CIA rule changes with Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson.
♦ McCord led and organized the impeachment effort, in the background, using the evidence she helped create.
♦ McCord joined the FISA Court to protect against DOJ IG Michael Horowitz newly gained NSD oversight and FISA review.
♦ McCord joined the J6 Committee helping to create all the lawfare angles they deployed.
♦ McCord then coordinated with DA Fani Willis in Georgia.
♦ McCord is working with Special Counsel Jack Smith to prosecute Trump.
Posted originally on Mar 11, 2024 By Martin Armstrong
The June 2022 Supreme Court Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision has left reproductive measures in the hands of individual states. Organizations like Planned Parenthood are now looking to target men in states where abortions are no longer permitted. The rate of sterilization for childless young men in states without access to abortion is rapidly rising.
I have discussed the origins of Planned Parenthood, including its founder and her main objective for the organization. The historical basis of Planned Parenthood cannot be denied, regardless of where you stand on abortion.
States like Indiana and Kentucky are experiencing a rise in Planned Parenthood locations despite the recent ruling because they are marketing their services toward men.
The International Journal of Impotence Researchreported a 35% increase in vasectomy consultations, with around 22.4% resulting in sterilization, since the Dobbs ruling. The median age for vasectomy services in America is now 35. Around 8.6% of men who opted for sterilization were childless pre-Dobbs, but that number has nearly doubled to 16.9%. “Younger men, especially those under 30, as well as childless men were significantly more likely to seek consultation Post-Dobbs compared to the prior reproductive legal climate,” the report found.
The majority of men who opt for vasectomies have children and are done expanding their families. The FDA has numerous forms of male birth control options but has not released any to the public. Planned Parenthood states that although potentially reversible, the goal of the procedure is complete sterilization. “Vasectomies are meant to be permanent. You should only get a vasectomy if you’re 100% positive you don’t want to be able to get someone pregnant for the rest of your life,” Planned Parenthood states on its website.
Now, 10.3% of men undergoing this procedure were under 30 before Dobbs, compared to 23.9% today. White males are more likely to volunteer to undergo this procedure than other races, as it is commonly taboo in various cultures, but celebrated among social justice warriors who believe we must curtail the population to reduce our carbon footprint.
The trend of sterilized, childless young men in America is expected to rise as the family unit is no longer celebrated or valued. There is no information from Planned Parenthood on whether these men can still become pregnant, but it is likely that population replacement will come from migrants rather than new births.
Posted originally on the CTH on March 10, 2024 | Sundance
By now, most intellectually honest American observers have accepted the United States intelligence apparatuses are the most political and dangerous institutions of government. All recent history shows how the Intelligence Community (IC), identified by Chuck Schumer as the “six ways to Sunday” targeting group, operate as the extra-constitutional fourth branch of government.
The IC conducts surveillance of Americans, and the apparatuses of the FBI, DOJ and DHS operate the enforcement mechanism for the targeting identified by the intelligence apparatus. The public-private partnership between the domestic communication networks, including social media, and the Intelligence Community are well known. DHS operates on behalf of the IC and the legislative and judicial branches defer to the IC. This is a specific outcome of the Patriot Act authorizing the IC to conduct surveillance of all Americans.
In his interview with Meet the Press today, former House Intelligence Committee Chair, and current Senate candidate from California, Adam Schiff, publicly stated his desire that the IC continue their operations against U.S. citizens and control any/all information that is shared with Donald Trump in national security briefings. WATCH (prompted):
.
The United States intelligence community is the most insidious threat to the Republic. There is currently an information war taking place that encompasses pushback against the constructs of the IC and the control justifications known as “misinformation,” “disinformation,” and “malinformation.” All of these newly created terms serve the function of controlling, eliminating and censoring activity by a corrupt network of government actors.
There is no such thing as mis-dis-or mal-information – there is only information. Unfortunately, too few Americans have an understanding of how and why these terms were created by the surveillance apparatus in order to control information they deem against their interests.
Lastly, Adam Schiff is likely going to be the purple tie candidate supported by the professionally Republican and communist Democrats in their effort to generate an insurance policy against President Donald Trump. It is easy to predict how Schiff would likely be installed in the Senate Select Intelligence Committee (SSCI) with a specific responsibility to stop, impede and block any intelligence nomination by President Trump.
Posted originally on Mar 4, 2024 By Martin Armstrong
Nikki Haley has finally won none other than the LEFTIST stronghold – Washington, DC. If you get pulled over by a cop there, you may hear that line coming from the new movie Civil War – What Kind of American Are You?
The Democrats have been funding Haley, and anyone with common sense would end their campaign. So why is Haley going endlessly? Because the word is if the Supreme Court or all the legal cases somehow manage some way to prevent Trump from running or he magically contracts COVID version 35 and dies before November, Haley will take the nomination by default. The Democrats will rejoice along with the Neocons, who will be popping champagne bottles for they will get World War III fully on board.
She has already come out and said she will NOT support Trump if he runs in November. If you have children or grandchildren, their future will be uncertain with Haley as President. Victoria Nuland will rejoice.
Posted originally on Mar 4, 2024 By Martin Armstrong
Those outside the US believe we have outstanding health care due to the high price tag associated with every service. Healthcare workers have been leaving the field in droves since the COVID-19 pandemic. The American Association of Medical Collegesbelieves that there will be a shortage of 122,000 physicians, 400,000 home health aides, and 29,400 nurse practitioners by 2025, but that may be an optimistic forecast.
A friend of mine in the area recently needed stitches after an injury and their nearest Urgent Care facility was closed. The second Urgent Care (America’s version of a smaller hospital) had a sign saying that it would not open until late afternoon due to a staffing shortage. The third Urgent Care facility was closed over the weekend, also likely due to staffing shortages. By the time she found the fourth provider, the wait was multiple hours due to only one physician being on staff that day.
These essential care employees are overworked and exhausted. People are less likely to take on hundreds of thousands in student loan debt for a grueling job that they must carefully keep by avoiding litigation while watching patients suffer due to high costs passed down from insurance and drug companies.
Healthcare providers are being replaced through AI programs while others are going remote. Amid hospital closures in small towns, remote nurses and doctors are entering hospital rooms on screen. This means hospital administration can hire fewer people and ask the less experienced employees who cost less to retain to perform crucial functions. The virtual nurse or doctor will not be able to help if the patient codes or something goes wrong.
Nursing job vacancies spiked by 30%from 2019 to 2020 as a direct result of COVID regulations and working conditions. A 2021 Washington Post-Kaiser Family Foundation poll showed that another 30% of healthcare workers considered leaving their profession in general after the pandemic, while 60% said the pandemic negatively affected their mental health. These people were also required to receive the vaccine against their will and promote treatments for the virus that may not have aligned with what they believed to be the best treatments. Estimates vary, but every agency agrees that there will be a serious shortage in the near future. The American Hospital Association believes there will be a shortage of 3.2 million healthcare workers by 2026.
The largest portion of our population is aging and will require health care in the near future. Not many can afford the costs of becoming ill, and sickness remains the leading cause of bankruptcy in the world’s financial capital. An aging population paired with overwhelming staffing shortages will lead to serious trouble in America’s healthcare system in the short term, not to mention the additional 7.2 million and counting new illegal residents who are receiving free health services at the cost of the taxpayer.
I have created this site to help people have fun in the kitchen. I write about enjoying life both in and out of my kitchen. Life is short! Make the most of it and enjoy!
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America
Centinel2012 