THE REPUBLICAN PARTY AND TRUMP CALLED FOR THE DESTRUCTION AND EXECUTION OF U.S. LAW ENFORCEMENT AND U.S. MILITARY PERSONNEL FOR TRYING TO PROTECT AMERICA FROM THEM
As we and many others have reported, the Republican Party and Donald Trump have been calling for the destruction of U.S. law enforcement and the execution of U.S. military personnel for trying to protect the United States from its enemies, and where after calling for the same, a record number of men and women in service of our country were executed by those being incited by Trump and the GOP.
https://www.businessinsider.com/gop-far-right-wants-fbi-destroyed-and-defunded-2022-8?op=1
https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/28/politics/milley-donald-trump-execution-comment/index.html
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-61218611
Trump has previously specified that killed men and women of the service, killed in the line of duty, were "suckers" and "losers".
CONGRESS SPECIFIED THAT SCOTUS IS SERVING WEALTHY INTERESTS OVER THE FACTS AND LAW
As specified by Congressman Sheldon Whitehouse in the first link below, SCOTUS has been ignoring facts and introducing lies in order to serve wealthy donors, as far back as Citizen's United, but as UpRights News and The Hartmann Report have proven, the Supreme Court of the United States and its composition and legitimacy have been under attack for no less than 91 years, as a result of a series of ongoing Republican (but not limited to the same per filmmaker Oliver Stone, exposing the corruption of Democrat and Freemason FDR and/or others to involve the U.S. into WWII in Europe) treason and elections fraud conspiracies, briefly summarized in the network diagram above, and in the second link below.
THE MAJORITY OF THE GOP'S SCOTUS MAJORITY WAS ILLEGITIMATELY APPOINTED, NOMINATED, CONFIRMED, AND/OR INSTALLED BY JEFFREY EPSTEIN'S KOCH, ROCKEFELLER, AND GOOGLE CHILD SEX TRAFFICKING CRIME SYNDICATE'S CLIENTS', FINANCIERS', AND/OR ASSOCIATES' FEDERALIST SOCIETY, ALSO LINKED TO RUSSIA'S AND CAMBRIDGE ANALYTICA'S MERCER FAMILY, FOLLOWING REPUBLICAN PARTY TREASON AND ELECTIONS FRAUD CONSPIRACIES, AND WHERE 8 OUT OF 9 SCOTUS JUSTICES COMMITTED PERJURY DURING THEIR NOMINATION AND/OR CONFIRMATION REGARDING STARE DECISIS, FOLLOWED BY MOST OF SCOTUS ENGAGING IN CORRUPTION, BRIBERY, RICO OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE, AND/OR OTHER CRIMES TO GIVE AID, COMFORT, AND ADHERE TO ENEMIES OF THE UNITED STATES, OUTSIDE OF THE SCOPE OF THEIR OATHS, OUTSIDE OF THE SCOPE OF THE CONSTITUTION, AND OUTSIDE OF THE SCOPE OF THEIR DUTIES, HAS RESULTED IN THE KLEPTOCRACY OF THE UNITED STATES BY IMPERSONATORS OF PUBLIC OFFICES AND GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES WHO THEMSELVES ARE ENEMIES OF THE UNITED STATES
As specified in the network diagram above and links above, and across our reporting, including but not limited to the Illegitimate Power section of our investigative news reporting found at https://www.uprightsnews.com/illegitimate-power, all of SCOTUS (Democratic appointments and Republican appointments) has (like getaway drivers for a bank/elections heist) overtly furthered an ongoing criminal RICO conspiracy to corrupt their public offices and to obstruct justice for enemies of the United States and organized crime linked to Jeffrey Epstein (and by doing so all of SCOTUS gave aid, comfort, and adhered to the United States, outside of the scope of their oaths and offices, making them impersonators of the same), most recently all of SCOTUS failed to protect the United States from U.S. enemies Donald Trump and the Republican Party, by keeping Trump and the GOP on the ballot, regardless of the U.S. Constitution, which prohibited the same, per the 14th Amendment Section 3, and where Congress did find that Trump did engage in an insurrection per the bipartisan (Republicans and Democrats) 01/06/2021 Committee investigation and reporting.
Accordingly, like the getaway driver for a bank/elections/insurrection heist/attempt, all of SCOTUS has overtly joined the bank/elections/insurrection heist/attempt, and where this isn't the first time they have done so, having also dismantled whistleblower laws in order to RICO obstruct justice for all investigations into Russia, Trump, and the GOP, in order to aid, comfort, and adhere to enemies of the United States here also -- including the Russian, GOP, and Trump orbit stalked, lynched, and obstructed pro se qui tam investigation of the Editor of UpRights News between at least October 20, 2013 through to at least 09/21/2014 (the lynching event by Sacramento GOP and their proxies).
This lynched and obstructed investigation elucidated an ongoing organized crime syndicate back to WWII, involving the GOP, Trump Tower tenant families, Russia, and other families linked to the crime syndicate of Jeffrey Epstein.
Accordingly, BEFORE Trump ran for office, Sacramento/CA GOP/RNC had lynched and were in possession of a Russian and GOP stalked, lynched, and RICO obstructed investigation into the ongoing organized crime syndicate of the GOP, Russians, Trump Organization, and the Trump orbit, and thus perfectly explaining Trump's 03/30/2023 comments that he knew of an investigation into him, Russia, the GOP, and/or others BEFORE he ran for office.
On 06/21/2023, the GOP's, Trump's, and Bill Barr's Special Counsel John Durham admitted and affirmed to Congress under the questioning of Congressman Adam Schiff that prior to the 2016 elections Trump and the GOP did conspire with an enemy of the United States, specifically Russia, to cheat or commit elections fraud before and after the 2016 elections, and that Trump and the GOP conspired to RICO obstruct justice for all of the same -- which proves beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump and the GOP disqualified themselves from public office having conspired with an enemy of the United States to commit treason and elections fraud BEFORE the 2016 elections -- which proves beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump and the GOP were not qualified to appoint, nominate, nor confirm SCOTUS, Judge Aileen Cannon, nor any other judge, nor were they qualified to grant pardons nor clemency to RICO obstruct justice into investigations into their crimes which disqualified them, nor were they qualified to exercise Presidential or any other immunity, impunity, privilege, nor were they qualified to see much less steal top secret government documents, nor were they qualified to make even one change to the government, nor were they qualified to run for office in 2016, 2018, 2020, 2022, nor 2024, and thus they have concealed all of the same (which also disqualified them from office and forfeiting their offices), in a manner that proves that Trump, the GOP, at least 3 out of 6 of the GOP SCOTUS majority, Aileen Cannon, and others were impersonating officers, concealed by others violating their oaths of office and the scope of duties of officers of the United States and its employees, which also proves their impersonation.
After this this 2016 treason and elections fraud conspiracy to "engineer" Russia's and Jeffrey Epstein's Donald Trump into illegitimate power, SCOTUS protected the crime syndicate, clients, financiers, and/or associates, of child kidnapper, child sex trafficker, and child rapist Jeffrey Epstein, Donald Trump, Google's founders, the Koch family, the Rockefeller family, and/or others by blocking the ability of their victims to sue them from raping them as children.
As specified in our reporting, no fewer than 6 out of 9 SCOTUS judges were hand-picked and/or associated with Jeffrey Epstein's Koch's, Google's, Rockefeller's, and Russia's Mercer family's-financed Federalist Society including John Roberts, Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Amy Barrett, Brett Kavanaugh, and Neil Gorsuch, but not limited to the same, as the judge Scott McAffee in Trump's Georgia cases, who just tossed 6 charges against Trump and/or his conspirators was also linked to the GOP and Federalist Society financed by Jeffrey Epstein's crime syndicate and/or orbit. As summarized in the network diagram, at least 6 out 9 SCOTUS justices were appointed, nominated, and/or confirmed by others who had disqualified themselves from office, and thus are illegitimately appointed, and illegitimately making changes to the U.S. government.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federalist_Society
Prior to this, SCOTUS unlawfully legalized the bribery of SCOTUS, the GOP, Trump, and others by Jeffrey Epstein's crime syndicate and/or orbit of billionaires, again in total violation of the U.S. Constitution, which makes the same an impeachable offense, followed by SCOTUS receiving bribes.
https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/the-supreme-court-gets-ready-to-legalize-corruption
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/18/opinion/supreme-court-clarence-thomas-corruption.html
Accordingly, not only has SCOTUS been almost totally installed, nominated, and confirmed by those not eligible to do the same, post-treason and elections fraud conspiracies, which made those installing SCOTUS illegitimate, but much of Congress has also been illegitimately installed in a similar manner, as have many Republican presidents per the network diagram above, and where they have committed perjury, treason, elections fraud, witness/victim/government informant stalking and intimidation, witness/investigator stalking, entrapment, and intimidation, in order to "engineer" themselves and others into public offices, who then also operated outside of the scope of their Constitutional oaths and duties, resulting in the kleptocracy of the United States by its enemies within and without the United States, including but not limited to Russia, enemies who SCOTUS, the GOP in Congress, Trump, Aileen Cannon, Scott McAffee, and/or others aided, comforted, and adhered to by obstructing justice for the victims of enemies of the United States.
SCOTUS, the GOP in Congress, Trump, Aileen Cannon, Scott McAffee, and/or others have been impersonating officers and employees of the United States by violating their Constitutional oaths of office, behaving outside of their Constitutionally-defined scope of duties (also defined by their scope of offices), and they have been serving as the personal criminal defense attorneys for their collective, ongoing, and overlapping organized crime syndicate, who has repeatedly through their RICO obstruction and corruption allowed the crime syndicate to continue their kleptocracy of the United States government, but who have operated so far outside of the Constitution, rule of law, stare decisis, a priori, and a fortiori, as to be impersonating and not functioning as officers and employees of the United States. It is reasonable that someone operating outside of the scope of their duties as an officer or employee of the United States to give aid, comfort, and to adhere to enemies of the United States, and who is also operating outside of the oath of office of officers, can't be operating as an officer of the United States (which requires adhering to their oath of office and scope of their duties), and thus has to be impersonating an officer of the United States by default.
Similarly, any officer or employee of the United States concealing documents or refusing to meet with or to acknowledge witnesses seeking to defend the United States, in order for those officers or employees to give aid, comfort, and/or to adhere to enemies of the United States by way of RICO obstruction and corruption, is like a getaway driver for treason, elections fraud, RICO obstruction and corruption, and the concealment of government documents, and witnesses -- can't be operating like an officer or employee of the United States (per the Constitutional requirements of the oath and specified duties), and thus by default is impersonating an officer or employee of the United States in an overt manner furthering all of these ongoing conspiracy spokes.
The charged and uncharged RICO corruption and obstruction of Rod Rosenstein, Bill Barr, John Durham, David Weiss, Robert Hur, Charles McGonial, and/or others, in a manner that has given aid, comfort, and/or adhered to enemies of the United States, and the many more uncharged crimes of Trump, the GOP, and others have collectively proven that enough of the United States government has been corrupted, obstructed, and kleptocaptured that the United States has seemingly been lost to its enemies and to organized crime, resulting in a two-tier legal system, one for the treasonous organized crime syndicate and enemies of the United States linked to Jeffrey Epstein, Trump, the GOP, and Russia, and another justice system for everyone else, and where the justice system giving aid, comfort, and/or adhering to enemies of the United States, doesn't just include RICO obstructing justice for their crimes, but waging lawfare against those who try and hold them accountable or elucidate their ongoing organized crime against American and Americans.
This is another reason why UpRights News simply has to stop publishing, because outside of the constant stalking and threatening behavior by this crime syndicate, there isn't enough of the United States government that hasn't been corrupted and/or who is accessible to stop the same, and so the only way to stop the stalking and threats is to give into the threats, as the treasonous organized crime syndicate who has kleptocaptured the government demands the same of the Editor of UpRights News almost daily by way of near daily intimidation, cyberattacks, stalking, cyberstalking, and/or threats with deadly weapons.
THE ARGUMENTS FOR THE REMOVAL OF HOSTILE FOREIGN AGENTS, ENEMIES OF THE U.S.A., RICO OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE AGENTS, AND CORRUPTERS OF PUBLIC OFFICES BY IMPERSONATION, AND BY OTHER MEANS, FOR CAUSE, AND WITHOUT FEAR NOR FAVOR IN SUPPORT OF THE U.S. CONSTITUTION:
AN ILLEGITIMATE, DISQUALIFIED, AND FORFEITED SCOTUS, THE GOP, TRUMP, AND/OR OTHER PUBLIC OFFICES ARE OPERATING SO FAR OUTSIDE OF THE CONSTITUTION, THEIR OATHS, THEIR OFFICES, THEIR DUTIES, AND THEIR EMPLOYMENT PROTECTIONS, THAT THEY ARE NOW IMPERSONATING THE SAME, HAVING INCREASINGLY KLEPTOCAPTURED/OVERTHROWN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES IN ORDER TO GIVE AID, COMFORT, AND ADHERE TO ENEMIES OF THE UNITED STATES BY RICO OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE AND CORRUPTION, IN THE SAME MANNER THAT A SERIES OF GETAWAY DRIVERS ARE GUILTY OF THE CRIMES THEY HELPED OTHERS ESCAPE FROM
WITHOUT FEAR NOR FAVOR
On September 20, 2023, the Attorney General for the United States, Merrick Garland, specified the following to Congress.
“Since the Justice Department was founded, it has been tasked with confronting some of the most challenging issues before the country. Today, we are handling matters of significant public interest that carry great consequences for our democracy.
A lot has been said about the Justice Department: about who we are and what we are doing; about what our job is, and what it is not; and about why we do this work.
I want to provide some clarity.
First, who we are.
The Justice Department is made up of more than 115,000 men and women who work in every state and in communities across the country and around the globe.
They are FBI, DEA, and ATF agents, and U.S. Marshals, who risk their lives to serve their communities.
They are prosecutors and staff who work tirelessly to enforce our laws. The overwhelming majority are career public servants, meaning that they were not appointed by the president of any party.
Second, I want to provide clarity about what the job of the Justice Department is, and what it is not.
Our job is to help keep our country safe.
That includes working closely with local police departments and communities across the country to combat violent crime.
In fact, today we are announcing the results of a recent U.S. Marshals operation conducted with state and local law enforcement. That operation targeted violent fugitives and resulted in 4,400 arrests across 20 cities in just three months.
Our work also includes combating the drug cartels that are poisoning Americans. Last Friday, we extradited Ovidio Guzman Lopez, a leader of the Sinaloa Cartel, from Mexico to the United States. He is the son of El Chapo and one of more than a dozen cartel [leaders] we have indicted and extradited to the United States.
Our job includes seeking justice for the survivors of child exploitation, human smuggling, and sex trafficking.
And it includes protecting democratic institutions – like this one – by holding accountable all those criminally responsible for the January 6 attack on the Capitol.
Our job is also to protect civil rights.
That includes protecting our freedoms as Americans to worship and think as we please, and to peacefully express our opinions, our beliefs, and our ideas.
It includes protecting the right of every eligible citizen to vote and to have that vote counted.
It includes combating discrimination, defending reproductive rights under law, and deterring and prosecuting attacks, such as hate crimes.
And our job is to uphold the rule of law.
That means that we apply the same laws to everyone.
There is not one set of laws for the powerful and another for the powerless; one for the rich, and one for the poor; one for Democrats, another for Republicans; or different rules, depending upon one’s race or ethnicity or religion.
Our job is to pursue justice, without fear or favor.
Our job is not to do what is politically convenient.
Our job is not to take orders from the President, from Congress, or from anyone else, about who or what to criminally investigate.
As the President himself has said, and I reaffirm today: I am not the President’s lawyer.
I will also add I am not Congress’s prosecutor.
The Justice Department works for the American people.
Our job is to follow the facts and the law. And that is what we do.”
Under the auspices of U.S. Attorney General Garland, both the son of the President of the United States and Donald Trump have each been investigated and charges brought against them, and so without fear nor favor.
“There is not one set of laws for the powerful and another for the powerless; one for the rich, and one for the poor; one for Democrats, another for Republicans; or different rules, depending upon one’s race or ethnicity or religion.
Our job is to pursue justice, without fear or favor.
Our job is not to do what is politically convenient.”
And in a similar manner, the following article, addendum, and the qui tam investigation referenced herein pursued justice with fear but without favor, and it was not politically convenient to do, and came at a great cost, because it sought to apply the law equally to the rich and the powerful on behalf of the poor and the powerless and on behalf of the government, because it was the right thing to do, and this investigation was started and continued by a swing voter, who has been a registered Republican, Independent, and Democrat, and thus had no single lane allegiance to any political party.
USING THE CONSTITUTION AND OATHS OF OFFICE TO DEFINE OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES OF THE UNITED STATES, AND COMPARING THE SAME TO KNOWN FACTS, ELEMENTS OF LAW, FALSE CLAIMS, CIRCUMSTANCES, AND AN ONGOING PATTERN OF ORGANIZED CRIME, IN ORDER TO IDENTIFY AND CHARGE IMPERSONATORS GIVING AID, COMFORT, AND/OR ADHERING TO ENEMIES OF THE UNITED STATES AND/OR ORGANIZED CRIME
On 06/21/2023, during the Hearing on the Report of Special Counsel John Durham 118th Congress (2023-2024), Special Counsel John Durham – who per the reporting of Dr. Marcy Wheeler, made significant efforts to give aid, comfort, and/or adhered to Trump, the GOP, and/or Russia – ultimately admitted under the questioning of Congressman Adam Schiff, that Trump and/or the GOP conspired/colluded to cheat (elections fraud) with an “enemy” (Russia) of the United States – which is treason – and then covered up that treason and elections fraud conspiracy with obstruction of justice, also specified by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, as follows.
“Mr. Schiff. Are you aware of the final prong [Donald Trump’s use of the stolen emails on the campaign trail more than 100 times, based on his public request to U.S. enemy Russia to engage in cyberwarfare against the critical infrastructure of the United States in order to get those emails about 5 hours later] that I mentioned, that he [Trump] lied about it, that the Trump Campaign covered it up? It’s the whole second volume of the Mueller Report. I hope you’re familiar with that.
Mr. Durham. Yes, that’s a section of the report, the second volume relating to their obstruction of justice.
Mr. Schiff. Well, thank you for confirming what my Republican colleague attacked me about. He also criticized the use of the word collusion. Apparently giving private polling data to the Russians while the Russians are helping your campaign, they don’t want to call it collusion.
Maybe there’s a better name for it. Maybe they would prefer we just call it good old fashioned GOP cheating with the enemy. Maybe that would be a little bit more accurate description.
Mr. Durham. Yes.
https://www.congress.gov/event/118th-congress/house-event/116122/text
This historical exchange is so very important because here there is a bipartisan agreement in Congress between the Trump and GOP camp, via Bill Barr’s John Durham, and Democrat Adam Schiff, as to the truth of Donald Trump’s and the GOP’s treason and elections fraud conspiracy with an enemy of the United States BEFORE the 2016 elections, and as this article will address later, treason and/or elections fraud disqualified Trump and the GOP from public office, and forever, BEFORE the 2016 elections, proven in this excerpt above, with bipartisan agreement by representatives of the executive and congressional branches as to the sworn truthfulness of these facts. Paraphrasing President John Adams, “these facts are stubborn things”.
This admission by Special Counsel Durham, is testimony by a “special” counsel that equates to the fact that Trump did not have the legitimate or lawful authority to hand-pick William Barr to retroactively and “secretly” hand-pick John Durham to investigate and ultimately reveal to Congress Durham’s, Barr’s, Trump’s, the GOP’s, and others’ illegitimacy and/or impersonation of officers, offices, and/or employees of the United States, and also has profound implications with respect to the legitimacy of Trump’s and the GOP’s other illegitimate changes to the United States government from November 2016 through to the present day, including affecting the legitimacy of pardons, the legitimacy of clemency, the legitimacy of executive privilege/immunity/orders, the legitimacy of judicial and other appointments, and the legitimacy of judicial and other nominations and confirmations, including but not limited to the GOP SCOTUS majority installed by Trump and the GOP, and Judge Cannon in Florida, but not limited to the same – because Trump and the GOP conspired with an “enemy” of the United States to “cheat” or engage in elections fraud against Hillary Clinton, thereafter RICO obstructing justice for the same – per the contributions and admissions of Special Counsels John Durham and Robert Mueller.
More simply, nothing legitimate or lawful can be born from the poisonous tree of illegitimacy or unlawfulness, which proves to be a running theme through this organized crime and public corruption research.
In fact, to argue that illegitimate government and the fruits of its poisonous tree – including but not limited to illegitimate laws, illegitimate rulings, illegitimate orders, illegitimate pardons, illegitimate clemency, illegitimate immunity or impunity, illegitimate appointment, nomination, and/or confirmation of more legitimate government – can ever result in legitimate government and legitimate changes to the government is literally to argue something that is false, or in logic, reasoning, and critical thinking known as a fallacy, and if submitted under penalty of perjury is perjury.
Later in this article is an exploration of fallacies, or inherent flaws in logic, reasoning, and critical thinking deceptively used by Trump, the GOP, the GOP SCOTUS majority, other judges, and/or others, including in a manner that constitutes perjury, in order to conceal from the government, public, and others, that Trump, the GOP, GOP SCOTUS majority, other judges, and/or others have been impersonating officers, offices, and/or employees of the United States, and/or are impersonating officers, offices, and/or employees of the United States, in an ongoing criminal conspiracy by enemies of the United States and organized crime meant to overthrow the United States, the Constitution, the American people, and/or others, with the common or central purpose of remaining in power over the legal system, in order to continue overthrowing America and in order to continue organized crime, and to be able to evade criminal, civil, and historical investigation, prosecution, and/or liability for the same, and where the crimes that have committed and have been RICO obstructing for are among the greatest crimes and pose among the greatest threat to the national security of the United States in all of its history.
Said differently, Trump and the GOP impersonated and have been impersonating officers and/or employees of the government since at least 2017 through to 2024, but the GOP and some Democrats have been doing so for at least the last 81 years back to the GOP’s Prescott Bush, FDR, and Truman in WWII, and they have concealed the same, including by concealing and destroying documents from investigations into different spokes of the ongoing and complex criminal conspiracy, in order to obtain money and other benefits from the government and taxpayers by way of deception, in a conspiracy with others doing the same, in order to give aid, comfort, and/or adhere to enemies of the United States and/or organized crime, including but not limited to funneling taxpayer funds into the coffers of the organized crime syndicate, while evade paying taxes themselves, and including but not limited to RICO obstruction of justice many different ways, including but not limited to public corruption so severe as to constitute impersonating an officer.
A primer on the 81 years of GOP illegitimate and impersonating governments, and the harm the same has caused America, and the threat to national security has been elucidated by many different investigations and investigators, including by John Hankey, filmmaker Oliver Stone, Thom Hartmann of The Hartmann Report, and by www.uprightsnews.com, as specified in this article.
Those who don’t work for the government, who can’t be further threatened by wrongful prosecution and loss of promotion and loss of benefits for their families and loss of pensions for their futures, who can’t be intimidated or coerced by their employment peers, but who have some law school, military, political, Fortune 500, G20 leadership circle, and Jeffrey Epstein’s crime syndicate orbit exposure, who are swing voters, and who come from America’s founding families, like the Adams family, are in a much better position to investigate certain investigative avenues without fear nor favor than those who do work for the government, who can be threatened by wrongful prosecution and loss of promotions and loss of benefits for their families and loss of pensions for their futures, who can be intimidated and coerced by their peers, who don’t have some law school experience, who don’t have military experience, who don’t have political experience, who don’t have Fortune 500 experience, who don’t have G20 leadership circle experience, who don’t have experience with Jeffrey Epstein’s crime syndicate, who aren’t swing voters and need their team to win, and who don’t come from America’s founding families who brought you the Declaration of Independence from their own family, may be more limited in what they are allowed to investigate, what they want to investigate, and the like, even if they have access to better intel.
More simply, there are investigators who can’t be corrupted to the same extent as some government investigators because government investigators have to follow orders – including from corrupted and impersonated public offices – and thus aren’t allowed to investigate some of the crimes of this ongoing organized crime syndicate, and anyone trying is either threatened, intimidated, and/or retaliated against, and where the investigators of Crossfire Hurricane, the Mueller Investigation, and other investigations are a perfect example of the same, with Robert Mueller having been limited by Trump, the GOP, Bill Barr, and/or Rod Rosenstein, and James Comey, Peter Stzok, Lisa Page, Andrew McCabe, Alexander Vindman, and/or others having been threatened, blackmailed, fired, replaced, and/or wrongfully-prosecuted by Trump, the GOP, Bill Barr, Rod Rosenstein, and/or their RICO proxies.
As this article will prove, GOP treason, elections fraud, impersonating, RICO, and obstruction of justice conspiracy plots back to WWII and Prescott Bush – but also including Democrats like FDR, Truman, and Johnson – have either not been properly investigated, or if investigated, then obfuscated by impersonators, concealers, RICO, traitors, and/or obstruction of justice agents, for the sake of coming to false conclusions, by ignoring key evidence, concealing key evidence, and/or mischaracterizing key evidence, in order to come to predetermined false conclusions that criminals in involved in a criminal conspiracy were not, and where those leading these investigations have later been found to have been implicated in the same or previous criminal conspiracies with those they were charged with investigating.
This is why investigative journalism, whistleblowing, and other forms of investigating are so important to the national security of the United States, because investigative journalists, whistlerblowers, insiders, truth seekers, sleuthers, academic researcher, and the like don’t have the same investigative pressures of losing promotions, losing employment, losing benefits for their families, losing their pensions, and/or losing their freedom via wrongful prosecution, that paid government investigators have, but they also have to dig and filter harder to build information puzzles because they have access to less information, and all investigators have the common problem of having to filter out misinformation, bad leads, and the like, but that’s the nature of investigating.
Accordingly, just as factual and intentionally-misleading or false government investigations are like diamonds in the rough for non-government investigators, the reporting of non-government investigators are also like diamond in the rough for government investigators, in the context that in this era there is much more information than any single investigator or even teams of investigators can process, and so any lead helps filter how much information any investigator has to process or go through. The same can also have the opposite effect, where the last thing already overwhelmed investigators need is more information, but in reality, any investigators who are very adamant about the nature of a lead they have explored, and who can find a way to communicate the same concisely, can result in major time savings for government.
For example, the specified investigation of the author of this article herein would 100% save the government time and result in an economy and a straight path to complete and correct many of their current and former overlapping investigations faster, relative to the alleged 18 billions of pages of evidence collected by the investigation of Robert Mueller alone.
THE EMPLOYMENT OF FRIVOLOUS CONSPIRACIES AND FALLACIES OR LOGIC, REASONING, AND CRITICAL THINKING FLAWS IN LEGAL ARGUMENTS BY IMPERSONATORS OF OFFICERS, OFFICES, AND GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, AS CRIMINAL DEFENSES FOR THE ENEMIES OF THE UNITED STATES AND ORGANIZED CRIME SYNDICATE OF JEFFREY EPSTEIN INVOLVED IN CRIMINAL CONSPIRACIES, WHICH THEY SEEK TO FURTHER HELP TO RICO OBSTRUCT, AND/OR TO KEEP, RETURN, AND/OR LEGITIMIZE ELIGIBILITY FOR PUBLIC OFFICE, TO OVERTHROW AMERICA, THE CONSTITUTION, AND/OR THE RULE OF LAW, WITH THE COMMON PURPOSE OF REMAINING ILLEGITIMATELY IN POWER OVER THE SAME, AND TO FURTHER RICO OBSTRUCT JUSTICE
A key tactic of Trump, the GOP, Russia, fake electors, insurrectionists, and other enemies of the United States involved in organized crime is to flood the exposure of their ongoing organized crimes with “frivolous conspiracies” to obfuscate and obstruct their “criminal conspiracies”, frivolous conspiracies which then take on their own life, to the extent that any evidence elucidated to prove their crimes, is readily labeled by them and their RICO obstructers as “frivolous conspiracy” by “radicals” out to “unfairly” subject them to “witch-hunts” and “political prosecutions and interference”, when it is the evidence of their crimes when compared to the elements of law that has determined the need to prosecute Trump and his conspiracies for no fewer than 91 felonies, and where many more serious felonies haven’t yet been charged at all, for example, but not limited to Trump’s ongoing treason as an agent of Russia, and/or other enemies of the United States like the Saudis, Iran, North Korea, Syria, Hamas-ISIS, Hezbollah, and/or others, who he has also served, aided, adhered to, leaked military or intelligence secrets to, and/or comforted.
Special Counsel Jack Smith has specified that the GOP’s Trump’s attempts to evade prosecution for his criminal conspiracies, are in fact “frivolous” in nature, to the extent that Smith has prompted Aileen Cannon to specify and acknowledge the same.
Similarly, Aileen Cannon, who has been RICO obstructing Trump’s very serious crimes has also overtly entertained “frivolous” lawsuits filed by Trump, “Aileen Cannon has floundered in her handling of former President Donald Trump's federal criminal case in Florida compared to the judge presiding over Trump's Georgia criminal case, who "has been impressive, in a quiet, competent sort of way, ever since the Fulton County case was first assigned to him," former U.S. Attorney Joyce Vance suggested in a Thursday post to her Substack.
Vance praised Georgia State Court Judge Scott McAfee for being "courteous to both sides" and seeming "fair-minded, up to speed on the law, and unafraid to rule promptly," giving credit to his courtroom proceedings in the Georgia election interference case being televised. In contrast, Vance conceded that, though she wanted to give Cannon — who the Eleventh Circuit ruled to have overstepped in her serious consideration of a "frivolous" lawsuit Trump had filed to delay the government's investigation after the FBI searched Mar-a-Lago last year — the benefit of the doubt upon her assignment to the case, she had ultimately misplaced her faith in the Trump-appointed judge.
"Initially, I wasn’t concerned. I even made the argument that every federal judge gets that gig because they’re appointed by a president from one party or the other, and there was no reason for us to be critical of her before observing how she would handle the case. Of course, I was wrong to be optimistic in that case," Vance wrote.”
Similarly, an increase in the availability of facts, the declassification of redacted investigations, and some fantastic investigative journalism has elucidated that RICO organized crime impersonating government officers, offices, and government employees limited, prohibited, concealed, obstructed, obfuscated, and mischaracterized (lied) evidence in order to come to false conclusions (frivolous conspiracies) about criminal conspiracies Trump, Russia, the GOP, fake electors, insurrectionists, the origins of COVID (per Trump’s Mike Flynn, COVID was intentionally released during Trump’s impeachment “to control” others “after stealing the elections”, and per Trump’s Paul Alexander, Trump and the GOP “intentionally sought to infect” and thus kill “as many people as possible”, while Trump and his family were invested in the response to the failed COVID response also under their control), the attacks on 9/11 (which Trump, G.W. Bush, and the GOP refused to released evidence of the Saudi royals’ involvement, whereafter Trump and Kushner became financed $2-3 billion by the Saudi royals), the assassination of President Kennedy (per John Hankey’s excellent research, it was Frank Sturgis and E. Howard Hunt of G.H.W. Bush’s CIA group known as the Anti-Castro Cubans to protect the profiteering of G.H.W. Bush’s oil company, Zapata Oil, and where Hunt bragged to a reporter, who published the same, then he sued the reporter for defamation, and lost the defamation case), and the excuses used to enter Americans and America into many different wars (for which filmmaker Oliver Stone’s Alternative History of the United States lays out fantastic and credible evidence for the same), as far back as WWII, all of which have since become the subjects of conspiracy theories, both legal conspiracies, and frivolous conspiracies, further differentiated herein this article or addendum in its own section.
Often frivolous conspiracies used to obstruct justice for criminal conspiracies, like those above, are debunked when concealed government and other documents are discovered, often by investigative journalists and academics, which prove the frivolous conspiracies are plainly impossible, and often prove a motive for a criminal conspiracy.
Much like the nature of some fallacies used as a frivolous conspiracies to coverup criminal conspiracies, more and more evidence debunks frivolous conspiracies as more likely than not and/or beyond a reasonable doubt as criminal conspiracies.
Part of the RICO obstruction and obfuscation by the GOP for no less than 81 years, has employed other frivolous conspiracies theories (meant to both manufacture reasonable doubt where there is none, and to discourage further investigation which would prove frivolous conspiracies are actually criminal ones) used to obstruct justice for criminal conspiracies they and their proxies overtly furthered, which this article and other investigations have since debunked as frivolous conspiracy theories, and where the elements of law, their sources, and their authorities and the facts are what differentiate between a frivolous conspiracy and criminal conspiracy theories, versus personal feelings, propaganda, or personal political party affiliation, which per Merrick Garland’s opening statement above isn’t what any Department of Justice is about, but rather, government investigators must “without fear nor favor” investigate harm on behalf of victims, even if the investigators like, know, adhere to, and are comforted by the violators – because otherwise they are involved in RICO obstruction of justice and in a manner that threatens their livelihoods in a comparable manner as not investigating, when RICO corrupted leaders tell them not to, and so a “rock and a hard place” for government investigators, but where the law, their oaths of office, and the Constitution are on their side, and lean towards investigating.
And so non-government investigators like academic, investigative journalists, whistleblowers, victims, government informants, and others play a key role in filling in the cracks, when government investigations intentionally and/or by way of coercion and RICO obstruction are forced to fall through the cracks for political reasons (which is synonymous with criminal RICO obstruction of justice), and the way they do so is by elucidating and introducing the evidence and lines of inquiry government investigations intentionally and/or by way of coercion, RICO obstruction, treason, insurrection, sedition, terrorism, and/or impersonation concealed and/or were forced to conceal, abandon, falsify, obfuscate, taint, and the like, but not limited to the same.
In a similar manner, non-government investigators can also identify fallacies employed by government investigators, a type of perjury and legal trickery, using false arguments, to conceal and deceive the truth of threats to the government and/or government investigations, or to avoid government investigations altogether.
This non-government reporting can in retrospect and/or currently prove corruption of the legitimacy of some public offices, and where of course doing so is important, to not allow those who were never qualified for certain government offices, and/or who disqualified themselves from the same, and/or forfeited the same, from changing even one thing about how the government operates.
For example, if I specify that an orange is a banana, other than the statement being false on its face, an investigation into the same would reveal the false nature of that statement, but a failure to investigate the same or rebut the false argument would leave the false argument in place, and then a cult of personality could be developed around those who really want to pretend a banana is an orange, regardless of the obvious, regardless of the facts differentiating between bananas and oranges, and regardless of the false reasoning, logic, and critical thinking required to arrive to this false conclusion.
In a similar manner, if a minor claims to be eligible for public office, other than the statement being false on its face, an investigation into the same would reveal the false nature of the statement, but a failure to investigate the same or rebut the same wouldn’t leave the false argument in place, because of self-executing laws specified in the Constitution.
Similarly, just because Trump, the GOP, the GOP SCOTUS majority, Aileen Cannon, other judges, and/or their proxies collectively specify they are eligible to run for public office, eligible to hold public office, haven’t disqualified themselves from office, haven’t forfeited themselves from public office, doesn’t mean the same is true, and where in actuality, the facts and the law can prove their self-serving and overlapping legitimacy claims are false, as specified by the Constitution, but where these ongoing criminals have conspired to act outside of their oaths and former oaths of office, and outside of the scope of the duties of their offices and former offices, to falsely argue their own legitimacy, which is in fact a type of perjury by way of false reasoning – and therefore separately and collectively make the case that they engaged in and are engaging in impersonation of government officers, offices, and employees (by not abiding by their oaths of office, by not abiding by the scope of their duties for office, by concealing incriminating and disqualifying facts, by concealing incriminating and disqualifying law, and by employing false to no reasoning, false to no logic, and false to no critical thinking) – in order to give aid, comfort, and/or adhere to enemies of the United States, including but not limited to themselves, Russia, fake electors, insurrectionists, the organized crime syndicate of Jeffrey Epstein, and/or others, by way of impersonating offices, and using the same to RICO obstruct justice for themselves and other enemies of the United States, to be able to perpetuate their harm to America, including by impersonating offices they and others were not and are not eligible for having disqualified themselves from the same, and having forfeited the same, as a manner of fact and law..
Furthermore, it is a type of perjury to employ legal deceit to argue fallacies or false logic, reasoning, and critical thinking, while concealing evidence to the contrary, and a type of impersonation by those who take an oath to investigate or rule on the same if they corroborate the same, and if to aid, comfort, and/or adhere to enemies of the United States and/or organized crime waging war against the United States, even more – because the nature of a fallacy is that it is not true, and so to submit a fallacy in an investigation, ruling, and/or to prevent the same to aid enemies and organized crime, has the same consequences as making a false filing to overtly further the criminal conspiracies of enemies and organized crime.
Here, in the same nature that a frivolous conspiracy can be and has been used to defend investigations and prosecutions of criminal conspiracies, many fallacies can’t be exposed as fallacies and/or can be exposed as fallacies, with greater access to facts. Some of the fallacies are so troublesome that most people practicing law would struggle not to commit a fallacy, due to the paradoxical nature of some fallacies, but others are much more straightforward.
More simply, some fallacies are seemingly unavoidable in human communication and in legal arguments, because of the inherent paradox in some lines of reasoning, logic, and critical thinking, illustrated by the likes of Nietzche’s Birds of Prey observation (where it is true and it is false that it is good and it is bad when one living thing kills another living thing to survive), resulting in semantics, and/or unwinnable semantic arguments. That said, more evidence regarding what is true, and structuring arguments as well as possible, can help better ground the premises for and better make legal arguments, to steer away from fallacy, some of which are very hard to avoid during legal arguments.
“A fallacy is the use of invalid or otherwise faulty reasoning in the construction of a[n] [legal] argument.
All forms of human communication can contain fallacies.
Because of their variety, fallacies are challenging to classify. They can be classified by their structure (formal fallacies) or content (informal fallacies).
[To differentiate between the two, it is an informal fallacy to claim that a banana resembles (isn’t always true) an orange in that they are both fruit (always true), for the purpose of engaging in a formal or structural fallacy that all bananas are oranges because fruits resemble one another, where the structural or formal fallacy comes to a conclusion that doesn’t make sense or doesn’t follow logic, reasoning, and critical thinking, in part because a “fact” was introduced that wasn’t a “true fact”, that bananas and oranges resemble one another (when that isn’t always true) because they are fruit. And so introducing false subject matter as “facts” is an informal fallacy, and then making nonsense arguments that don’t follow from facts is a formal fallacy. However, the elucidation of more facts, or evidence beyond a reasonable doubt, can elucidate a more factual or true conclusion in an argument, in such a manner that even if some of the thought to be facts turn out not to be facts, then much more facts still result in the same conclusion. For example, if bank/elections robbers accused of five bank/elections robberies are later only proven to have four banks/elections, then the original conclusion is still true, that those accused are bank/elections robbers, even if one of the heists wasn’t proven true, not found true, and/or was true but was not proven true with enough evidence.
The law’s burdens of proof are helpful in this regard, because more access to facts helps prove legal arguments that laws and/or rights were violated, and so anyone like Trump, the GOP, Aileen Cannon, GOP’s SCOTUS majority, and/or others facing the prospect of removal, voiding of all of their conduct, barring from public office, forfeiture of public office, and/or criminal prosecution, would not want trials to move forward that would prove the same, and they would delay the same, and they would make rulings to intimidate witnesses and prosecutors, and they would make rulings to prevent facts from coming forward, and they would RICO obstruct as much as possible, for as long as possible, and for as long as would serve them, instead of the Constitution, the scope of their office, and/or their country in aid of hostile foreign enemies and countries, as organized crime would.
However, there is an argument that fallacies are self-defeating, and also an argument that all law or legal arguments can’t escape fallacy, for example, but not limited to the fallacies of “Affirming the consequent, if A, then B; B, therefore A”, and Denying the antecedent, if A, then B; not A, therefore not B”, which is precisely how law is argued and ruled on. If the elements of law, their sources, and their authorities are violated (A), then the law and/or rights require a remedy (B), and If the elements of law, their sources, and their authorities have not been violated (A), then the law and/or rights do not require a remedy (B). And so from this perspective, some to all legal arguments are fallacies.
In a similar manner, if the rules of fallacy have been violated (A), then (B) the argument is not true, not valid, not logic, not reasonable, nor involved critical thinking, and if the rules of fallacy have not been violated (A), then (B) the argument is true, valid, logical, reasonable, and involved critical thinking. And so from this perspective, some to all fallacies are fallacies, which is also a type of fallacy.
More simply, there are inherent conflicts, and/or paradoxes across human logic, reasoning, and critical thinking, some of which are more difficult to navigate than others, but others which are more easily navigated when standards or rules are agreed to, known in law as precedent, stare decisis, a priori, and/or a fortiori, and when facts and evidence are not concealed or usurped from the arguments, and when efforts are made to navigate informal and formal fallacies as much as possible, and where the contrary to the same, the failure to use established standards, precedent, stare decisis, a priori, and/or a fortiori, resulting in the strongest argument (which but for RICO obstruction of justice to aid, comfort, and adhere to enemies of the United States, is the argument that is supposed to win over any weaker argument), and where the failure to allow or use facts and evidence to conceal or usurp the same from the arguments, and the failure to make efforts to navigate informal and formal fallacies, but rather to employ them as much as possible, is what is known as a weak or “frivolous” argument (which but for RICO obstruction of justice to aid, comfort, and adhere to enemies of the United States, is the argument that is supposed to lose over any stronger argument).
Informal fallacies, the larger group, may then be subdivided into categories such as improper presumption, faulty generalization, error in assigning causation, and relevance, among others. [Here is where more facts help debunk some of these informal fallacies, by correcting the premise or founding arguments or facts on which to build better legal arguments].
The use of fallacies is common when the speaker's goal of achieving common agreement is more important to them than utilizing sound reasoning.
When fallacies are used, the premise should be recognized as not well-grounded, the conclusion as unproven (but not necessarily false), and the argument as unsound.[1]
Formal fallacies
A formal fallacy is an error in the argument's form.[2] All formal fallacies are types of non sequitur fallacies [a failure to apply logic, reasoning, or critical thinking, when otherwise required; The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition defines non sequitur as “An inference or conclusion that does not follow from the premises or evidence. A statement that does not follow logically from what preceded it. Any abrupt and inexplicable transition or occurrence.” Accordingly, here too, more evidence can help make better arguments.]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=non+sequitur&atb=v363-3__&ia=web
The fallacy of probability
Beginning with the first formal fallacy of the list above, “appeal to probability is taking something for granted because it would probably be the case (or might possibly be the case).[3][4]”
And so from the Privilegium maius-forged royal claims, but not limited to the same, of the Habsburg crime family, who devolved into the organized crime syndicate of Jeffrey Epstein and Russia, for example but not limited to “princes” Andrew, Michael of Kent, and/or Ivar Mountbatten of Cambridge Analytica’s SCL, to the forged Presidential claims of Donald Trump of the organized crime syndicate of Jeffrey Epstein and Russia – after Trump, his family, their organizations, the GOP, Russia, and other enemies of the United States conspired to overthrow the United States and United Kingdoms in 2016 (and/or thereafter) via an ongoing treason and elections fraud conspiracy – it is a formal fallacy to appeal to the probability that the European royals are probably royals because of the vast resources in a vast number of media outlet types telling the public on a daily basis that they are “royals, princesses, princes, queens, kings, dukes, duchesses”, and the like, when they aren’t in the least when the original and some current laws of royal succession are considered (and where they and/or others including, but not limited to, Michael Edward Abney-Hastings have repeatedly acknowledged the UK royals don’t have superior claims to the throne, and where there has been at least one lawsuit over the same, and there has even been a movie about the same, Britain’s Real Monarch), but rather they are pretenders and usurpers based on the historical record, who have illegally perpetuated illegitimate and inferior claims to the thrones of England, relative to the families they stole those thrones from.
Accordingly, arguing that the UK royals are probably royals, because they and their proxies say they are, is a fallacy, and in fact more than one type of fallacy, or false reasoning, logic, and/or critical thinking, debunked by the actual facts of the Privilegium maius-forged royal claims of the Habsburgs, the Archer Blaybourne’s bastardization of the royal blood line, the treason of Henry Bolingbroke, the illegitimacy of Henry VIII, Richard IV’s bastardization of the royal blood line, and the inferior royal claims of the UK royals, when compared to the surviving members of the Plantagenet, Beaufort, and Fitzalan family members. UpRights News conducted an investigation into the fake royal claims of the UK royals and found no fewer than 50 different ways they violated laws of royal succession, back to Privilegium maius.
In a similar manner, it is a formal fallacy of probability that Trump, the GOP, and any change they made to the government after the 2016 elections was probably legitimate, when the opposite is true due to their treason and elections fraud with Russia, which disqualified Trump and the GOP from public office before the 2016 elections, in which case it is a fact that they could not have legitimately appointed, nominated, nor confirmed a GOP SCOTUS majority, Aileen Cannon, other judges, and/or others, to later call on them to legitimatize their collective illegitimacy, which is another type of fallacy or type of perjury being used to sustain and conceal their collective impersonation of officers, offices, and government employment to give aid, comfort, and adhere to enemies of the United States by way of treason (also disqualifies them all by self-executing law), insurrection (also disqualifies some to all of them like getaway drivers of a bank/elections heist by self-executing law), concealment of evidence proving their illegitimacy (which also disqualifies them and requires those still in office to forfeit the same, and not requiring impeachment, as self-executing law), but not limited to the same.
More simply, just because Trump, the GOP, Russia, insurrectionists, fake electors, a GOP SCOTUS majority, Aileen Cannon, other judges, and/or others who are enemies of the United States have used the offices they weren’t eligible to hold in order to legitimize themselves in a manner that may seem probable, the facts and the law prove this to be a fallacy of probability, because the actual facts and the law that came before them all, supra, stare decisis, a priori, and/or a fortiori make clear that they were not and are not eligible for public office, nor in a position to self-legitimize their own illegitimate offices, and/or former offices.
The RICO corruption of Trump’s criminal cases by Aileen Cannon, the GOP’s SCOTUS majority, and/or others is an invitation by Trump to not just RICO obstruct his serious crimes against the United States, and not just to allow him to claim eligibility for the 2024 elections, but is an invitation for Aileen Cannon, the GOP’s SCOTUS majority, and/or others to unlawfully self-legitimize the offices Trump wasn’t eligible to install them in after his treason and elections fraud with Russia and the GOP before the 2016 elections. Him asking some to all of them for immunity, and to be eligible for public office, despite the Constitution specifying otherwise, is not different than him asking those not eligible for public office he installed to rule on their own illegitimacy as legitimate, which is also a fallacy that will be addressed below.
Argument from fallacy
The second formal fallacy from the list above is the “Argument from fallacy (also known as the fallacy fallacy) – the assumption that, if a particular argument for a "conclusion" is fallacious, then the conclusion by itself is false.[5]”
More simply the fallacy of arguing that if one part of the argument can be discredited, then all of the other arguments must also be discredited, even if they are valid and based in evidence.
This is a key part of Trump’s, the GOP’s SCOTUS majority, Aileen Cannon’s, and the GOP’s misinformation, fraud, and RICO obstruction ongoing conspiracy strategies, where when some facts are revealed or manufactured in their favor, they immediately jump to the conclusion that all other allegations against them are totally baseless, and prove a witch-hunt, and that they are totally exonerated, and/or there is no need to investigate, nor remove them, nor introduce concealed evidence in forfeiture of their offices, which would prove them collectively ineligible to hold current and/or former public offices, nor make any changes to the government thereafter, in the same manner that just because I say a banana is an orange, the facts concerning the nature of a banana and orange would prove the ineligibility of the banana as an orange, and in a manner that never made the banana an orange.
To date this organized crime syndicate above has used the Mueller Investigation that Mayflower Hotel’s Jeff Session’s Rod Rosenstein’s and Jeffrey Epstein’s William Barr’s RICO obstruction and practice of preventing career investigators to investigate Trump, his family, the White House, Trump’s acquaintances, in order to disconnect the dots to Trump’s ineligibility along with the GOP, then Bill Barr used what was allowed to be investigated, the proof of Trump’s campaign ties to enemies of the United States (Part I of the Mueller Investigation), and the proof Trump’s representatives and/or Trump RICO obstructed investigations into their treason and elections crimes, in order to falsely and criminally-clear Trump of conspiring with Russia, which John Durham, allegedly “secretly” and retrospectively made Durhan Special Counsel by Jeffrey Epstein’s Bill Barr to investigate Jeffrey Epstein’s Donald Trump, has since refuted on the record with Adam Schiff.
Paired with the fallacy of probability, the argument from fallacy, when paired together accurately describe a chief source of false propaganda and a chief legal defense of the Republican Party, Trump, the GOP SCOTUS majority, Aileen Cannon, other judges, and/or their proxies.
They have collectively and/or respectively have falsely submitted to the public, government, and/or others via public statements, legal filings, government filings, and rulings that they are legitimate officers, offices, and/or employees of the government, and/or have been, and in doing so have committed perjury, impersonation, and RICO obstruction of justice, in a manner meant to use illegitimate offices, laws, rulings, and the like to self-legitimize their ineligibilities to hold offices and/or employment with the government – which non-government investigators are otherwise well-suited to elucidate and prove for the government and in protection of the country – without the political or career pressures otherwise tampering, coercing, and RICO-obstructing the ability of government investigators to investigate and/or prosecute the same.
For example, despite Trump specifying he’s won every election he was not eligible for before the 2016 elections, due to his treason and elections fraud with Russia, he’s in fact specifying in a different manner that there is zero probability that he didn’t win, zero probability that he cheated to win with an enemy of the United States (as John Durham finally admitted Trump did in a conspiracy with Russia, and then obstructed the same per the 06/21/2023 interaction between John Durham and Adam Schiff in Congress).
Trump, Barr, Rosenstein, Durham, Russia, GOP’s SCOTUS majority, Aileen Cannon, other judges, other investigators, and/or the GOP and/or some to all of their proxies, have all used the arguing from fallacy as a means of deceiving the public and the government that the evidence they have manufactured or had others do, and/or concealed (forfeiting their offices via self-executing law and making them ineligible to hold future office), totally exonerates Trump, Barr, Rosenstein, Durham, Russia, GOP’s SCOTUS majority, Aileen Cannon, other judges, other investigators, and/or the GOP and/or some to all of their proxies, who also employ the fallacy of probability, that it is probably true that their statements, filings, rulings, conclusions, and/or eligibility are true, when the facts and law prove the contrary.
Base rate fallacy
From the list of fallacies above, “Base rate fallacy is making a probability judgment based on conditional probabilities, without taking into account the effect of prior probabilities.[6]”
Trump, Barr, Rosenstein, Durham, Russia, GOP’s SCOTUS majority, Aileen Cannon, other judges, other investigators, and/or the GOP and/or some to all of their proxies, have also employed this fallacy or deceptive flaw in logic, reasoning, and critical thinking, having made reference to polls, elections, lawsuits, rulings, law, corrupted investigations, tainted evidence, corrupted offices, and/or more in order to claim their respective legitimacy for public offices and/or government employment, and the fruits of the same, rulings, law, orders, proceedings, investigations, prosecutions, pardons, clemency, immunity, impunity, privileges and the like, which the fact and the law can now prove they were not eligible for, and so in making their false claims, or probability judgements, they are in fact falsely claiming probabilities of 100% that they are eligible to legitimately bear these fruits of illegitimacy, when in fact they aren’t, and then are in fact falsely claiming probabilities of 100% that the fruits of their illegitimacy are also true and/or legitimate, when the facts and the law prove the same false.
Non sequitur fallacy
From the list above, “Non sequitur fallacy is where the conclusion does not logically follow the premise.[8]”, and again where all of these formal fallacies are non sequitur in nature because they are attempts to make true something that can’t be true, nor be constructed to be true, and in a self-executing manner, with respect to the truth, in the same manner that it can’t ever be true that a banana is an orange, no matter what needs to be concealed, nor who needs to be corrupted, nor which elections or offices need to be stolen, impersonated, and/or conspired with to state the contrary.
The central arguments of The Hartmann Report and www.uprightsnews.com debunk the non sequitur fallacies being used to falsely legitimize Trump, Barr, Rosenstein, Durham, Russia, GOP’s SCOTUS majority, Aileen Cannon, other judges, other investigators, and/or the GOP and/or some to all of their proxies, using the law unlawfully to do so, using impersonation to do so, using RICO obstruction of justice to do so, using concealment of government documents to do so, using treason, sedition, insurrection, terrorism, and/or organized crime to do so – and yet all of the same can’t make their false and illegitimate statements, rulings, orders, pardons, clemency, immunity, impunity, RICO, perjuries, offices, employment, and/or other matters true nor legitimate, because these are fruits from the poisonous tree of illegitimacy or falsehoods, and the nature of the same is that nothing legitimate can be born out of something illegitimate, nor can the truth be born out of lies.
Propositional fallacies
From the list of fallacies above, “A propositional fallacy is an error that concerns compound propositions. For a compound proposition to be true, the truth values of its constituent parts must satisfy the relevant logical connectives that occur in it (most commonly: [and], [or], [not], [only if], [if and only if]). The following fallacies involve relations whose truth values are not guaranteed and therefore not guaranteed to yield true conclusions.
Types of propositional fallacies:
Affirming a disjunct – concluding that one disjunct of a logical disjunction must be false because the other disjunct is true; A or B; A, therefore not B.[10]”
This is the very nature of Nietzsche’s moral relativism, also a key strategy employed by Trump, Barr, Rosenstein, Durham, Russia, GOP’s SCOTUS majority, Aileen Cannon, other judges, other investigators, and/or the GOP and/or some to all of their proxies.
Here, as Nietzche’s Bird of Prey argument argues, it is true and it is false at the same time, that it is good and it is evil at the same time, when one animal murders another animal, in order to survive, because it is true that it is good for the murdering animal, at the same time that it is evil for the animal being murdered, in which case it is false that it is only good.
Accordingly, the Bird’s of Prey argument or moral relativism argument has been regularly-employed by Trump, Barr, Rosenstein, Durham, Russia, GOP’s SCOTUS majority, Aileen Cannon, other judges, other investigators, and/or the GOP and/or some to all of their proxies, who argue that most to all of the facts that are good for them, are the only facts that need to be considered (A or B; A, therefore not B), and most to all of the facts that are evil for them are not the facts that need to be considered, regardless if their crimes were evil as determined by the law and the facts, as was/were/is/are their RICO obstruction of the same, by concealment, intimidation, impersonation, elections fraud, defamation, and/or other preemptive defenses.
Affirming the consequent
Per the list of formal fallacies above, “Affirming the consequent is the antecedent in an indicative conditional is claimed to be true because the consequent is true; if A, then B; B, therefore A.[10]”
Here, Trump, Barr, Rosenstein, Durham, Russia, GOP’s SCOTUS majority, Aileen Cannon, other judges, other investigators, and/or the GOP and/or some to all of their proxies – as well as Privilegium maius-forged royals of the UK and EU now heavily-linked to Jeffrey Epstein along with the Trump family per www.epsteinsblackbook.com but not at all limited to the same per the lawsuits of Katie Johnson and Virgina Guiffre – have falsely argued and/or concluded, and/or have deceptively influenced others into believing that they were and/or are legitimately occupying positions of power in the governments of the US and UK Commonwealth, because their organized crime syndicate and/or they have said, implied, postured, and/or accepted that they were and/or are legitimately occupying power, when the facts and the law prove otherwise.
More simply, this ongoing organized crime syndicate linked to Jeffrey Epstein and enemies of the United States have been pretending and deceiving others into accepting that their illegitimacy to hold positions of power is otherwise legitimate because they are using the illegitimate offices they are usurping to express and/or imply they are legitimate, when they are not.
The same is similar if not the same to the construct of a circular argument, where they offer illegitimate fruits from the poisonous tree of illegitimacy as proof that they and others in their ongoing organized crime syndicate are legitimate, including but not limited to illegitimate rulings and/or laws that they and/or their ongoing organized crime syndicate has manufactured to self-justify and self-legitimize their illegitimacy, which as illustrated by the example of the banana claimed to be an orange, can’t make their illegitimacy legitimate as a matter of truth, as determined by stare decisis, a priori, and a fortiori, or earlier and stronger legal arguments and facts that prove the same. No matter how and no matter how long these bananas claim to be oranges, will never make them oranges, and anyone arguing the same is a fruit.
Denying the antecedent
Per the list of fallacies above, “Denying the antecedent is the consequent in an indicative conditional is claimed to be false because the antecedent is false; if A, then B; not A, therefore not B.[10]”.
This is a good example of a fallacy (a falsehood in fact, logic, reasoning, and/or critical thinking) that may seem like a fallacy based on construct alone, but where more facts can prove that this isn’t a fallacy.
For example, I or anyone else performing legal analysis, or the analysis of logic, reasoning, critical thinking, and/or fallacies could be accused of this fallacy of denying the antecedent by arguing that (A) the elements of law if violated by the fact pattern make someone (B) guilty or liable, but if the fact pattern (A) hasn’t violated the elements of law, then others can’t be guilty or liable, and vice versa.
Accordingly this fallacy can be and/or is one of the many paradoxes in logic, reasoning, and critical thinking (similar to Nietzsche’s moral relativism) in that it can’t be true that the search for the truth can elucidate the truth, and where this paradox is in fact remedied by existentialism (what is true or not) by the principles of objective and subjective reality, where objective reality is what is true, and where subjective reality is what any person or animal believes is true in an expressed and/or implied manner, and where because of the scale of any person or animal on Earth, or when compared to the universe and infinite time (based on Emile de Chatelet’s and others’ proofs that at least something in the universe can’t be created nor destroyed, specifically energy), it is literally impossible for any person or animal to claim that they know the truth about everything, which doesn’t affect their ability to elucidate some objective truth, which is why observations, patterns, trials, debate, facts, evidence, logic, reasoning, and critical thinking are employed to elucidates the objective truths that can be known, for example that a banana can never simultaneously be an orange, an objective truth, in the same manner that no illegitimate, disqualified, and/or forfeited person in, having been in, and/or seeking public office can legitimately make rulings, issue orders, change the law, change anything about how the government operates, grant pardons or clemency, exercise immunity nor impunity, and the like, no matter how much or how they try and argue the contrary.
Quantification fallacies
Per the list of fallacies above “A quantification fallacy is an error in logic where the quantifiers of the premises are in contradiction to the quantifier of the conclusion.
Types of quantification fallacies:
Existential fallacy is an argument that has a universal premise and a particular conclusion.[11]”
This is another example of a sort of paradox in logic, reasoning, and critical thinking remedied by the difference between objective reality and subjective reality, where here the paradox specifies that no objective reality can be determined subjectively, which isn’t true, as proven by the argument that bananas aren’t oranges, which is what makes this fallacy a paradox, and where ironically, fallacies are meant to objectively define the truth, by elucidating what is objectively false concerning subjective reality, in what can be argued that existential fallacy violates the fallacy and/or fallacies of affirming the consequent, and/or denying the antecedent.
More simply, this fallacy argues that this finite version of me can’t be used to accurately, logically, reasonably, and/or critically elucidate anything true, objective, or absolute, which in itself is not true. For example, as a finite being, if I specify that the moon didn’t crash into the Earth yesterday, that would be objectively and absolutely true, and not some subjective falsehood.
The law and science work in a similar manner, where they retrospectively look at the objective nature of evidence to subjectively determine the objective nature of the truth of a situations, unless of course they have been RICO corrupted to obstructed justice for the United States to give aid, comfort, and/or adhere to enemies of the United States and organized crime, in which case the truth is not likely to be elucidated.
Modal scope fallacy
From the list of fallacies above “Modal scope fallacy is when a degree of unwarranted necessity is placed in the conclusion.
Here is a great place to differentiate between between the unwarranted necessity placed in the conclusions of Trump, Barr, Rosenstein, Durham, Russia, GOP’s SCOTUS majority, Aileen Cannon, other judges, other investigators, and/or the GOP and/or some to all of their proxies – that they aren’t part of any sort of criminal conspiracy against the United States, when the facts and law prove the contrary – and the warranted necessity of faithful and determined investigators like Letitia James, Alvin Bragg, Special Counsel Jack Smith, and Fani Willis, but not limited to the same, as specified in their charging documents and/or indictments of Trump and his conspirators.
Informal fallacies
Per the list of fallacies above, “Informal fallacies are arguments that are logically unsound for lack of well-grounded premises.[14]”, and where here for legal purposes, the facts and the law, stare decisis, a priori, and a fortiori, which came before Trump, Barr, Rosenstein, Durham, Russia, GOP’s SCOTUS majority, Aileen Cannon, other judges, other investigators, and/or the GOP and/or some to all of their proxies became corrupting public offices at least 81 years ago – are what prove that their arguments of legitimacy and their illegitimate fruits of the same are illegitimate.
It is the evidence and the law that came before their corruption of the same that proves their illegitimacy and subsequent and preemptive arguments false, and prove the same to be fruits of the poisonous tree of illegitimacy, in the same manner that a banana can’t be an orange, because a banana is a banana, and and orange is an orange, and so a banana can’t be an orange at the same time that it is a banana.
Argument to moderation
Per the list of fallacies above, the argument to moderation (false compromise, middle ground, fallacy of the mean, argumentum ad temperantiam) is one assuming that a compromise between two positions is always correct.[15]
This is the fallacy being employed by the GOP’s SCOTUS majority and Aileen Cannon, where false compromises are being made, including concealing or excluding evidence of the illegitimacy of the GOP’s SCOTUS majority, Aileen Cannon, Trump, and the GOP, and/or granting Trump immunity when he was never eligible for the same, in order to come to the conclusion that the GOP’s SCOTUS majority, Aileen Cannon, Trump and the GOP are legitimate and/or were. This is also similar in construct to a circular argument, affirming the consequent and/or denying the antecedent, by falsely compromising on the proceedings and evidence regarding Trump’s and the GOP’s past crimes to confer their collectively legitimacy, where there is none.
Continuum fallacy
Per the list of fallacies above, “Continuum fallacy (fallacy of the beard, line-drawing fallacy, sorites fallacy, fallacy of the heap, bald man fallacy, decision-point fallacy) – improperly rejecting a claim for being imprecise.[16]”
The GOP’s SCOTUS majority, and/or other judges who either are illegitimate and/or who have made themselves illegitimate by disqualification and/or forfeiture to hold offices, have relied on this fallacy in the past, specifically on their attack on whistleblower laws passed by both Congress and signed by Presidents, in order to RICO obstruct the illegitimacy of the GOP’s SCOTUS majority, and/or other public offices, and/or government employees.
In law this is also known as a lack of specificity, and so organized crime usurping public offices and/or on their behalf regularly argue a lack of specificity gives just cause to toss some to all of the claims against their ongoing organized crime syndicate, as organized crime would, but as specified in the formal fallacy section, a weaker, weaker, or less specific class or premise, doesn’t invalidate the conclusion.
For example, when an organized crime of bank/elections robbers are caught robbing bank/election-after-bank/election for 81 years, and the robberies included crimes like murder and the RICO obstruction of the same (which is like a getaway driver for murder, implicating obstructive activities as equal to murders as part of a broader criminal conspiracy with many spokes) – then one witnesses or one page of evidence out of no fewer than 18 billion pages of evidence proving the same – can’t legitimately be used to come to the conclusion that no bank/elections/treason conspiracy never took place.
Correlative-based fallacies
Per the list of fallacies above, “Suppressed correlative – a correlative is redefined so that one alternative is made impossible (e.g., "I'm not fat because I'm thinner than John.").[17]”
This may also be a paradox, or not. For example, if I am fat, and claim that I am not because John is much fatter, that doesn’t make me skinny nor does it make me not fat, but it does make me skinnier than John, which isn’t false, and thus it must be true.
Definist fallacy – defining a term used in an argument in a biased manner (e.g., using "loaded terms"). The person making the argument expects that the listener will accept the provided definition, making the argument difficult to refute.[18]
Here, I might be accused of employing this fallacy, when describing “Jeffrey Epstein’s” or “Russia’s” Donald Trump in the possessive, but where I have a reasonable basis to do so in that Trump’s conduct has been “owned” by the compromising evidence of child and/or other sex crimes for example, but not limited to, as specified in the lawsuits of Katie Johnson against Trump and Jeffrey Epstein, the Steele Dossier, the Mueller Investigation, congressional investigations, investigative journalism reporting, both of the publicly-available client, financier, and/or associates “black books” of contact of Jeffrey Epstein, and other supporting evidence and situations, and so it would be inaccurate or a fallacy or a faulty premise to propose that Trump’s misconduct against the United States hasn’t in part and/or in full been owned by Jeffrey Epstein, and/or Russia’s overlapping crime syndicates.
There is no loaded argument or premise, when the premise is true and/or can be supported with an abundance of evidence, if not evidence beyond a reasonable doubt, but where employing the frivolous conspiracy of accusing definist fallacy has certainly been used by RICO corrupted and/or coerced public offices to not investigate, charge, and prosecute many, many different crimes of Donald Trump and/or the GOP in a manner that falsely finds them qualified for office, when they are not, and have all forfeited the same, and/or using definist fallacy themselves – to preemptively and falsely claim “bias”, “radical”, “unhinged”, “illegal”, “frivolous”, and/or other inquires against Trump, the GOP, Russia, insurrectionists, fake electors, and/or their proxies.
Divine fallacy
From the list of fallacies above, “Divine fallacy (argument from incredulity) – arguing that, because something is so incredible or amazing, it must be the result of superior, divine, alien or paranormal agency.[19]”
Here Trump, the GOP, Russia, the Habsburg crime family, and/or their proxies, cult followers, organized crime, Jeffrey Epstein’s crime syndicate’s media empire, and/or others have specified, and/or implied and repeatedly, that that Trump, the GOP, Russia, and/or their proxies, cult followers, organized crime, Jeffrey Epstein’s crime syndicate’s media empire, the Habsburg crime family, and/or others are God, the son of God/Jesus Christ, God/Jesus returned (and yet at the same time believing God and/or Jesus are always with us in a paradox), the chosen one, the second coming of Christ/God, soldiers of Christ, defenders of the faith, divine, and/or so “so incredible or amazing, it must be the result of superior, divine, alien or paranormal agency”, and yet the promise of God and/or Jesus is that they are going to save us, and not that we have the power nor role in saving them, which would be like a metal burr on a screw on a car being chosen by God to save the car, when it is not possible for a metal burr on a screw sticking out into the air in contact with nothing, to save a car, nor its drivers, because the metal burr is totally useless, and so useless things can’t truthfully be useful.
God, Jesus, the universe, and everything are synonyms, and are so large, if not infinite in scale, that not insignificant speck of dirt known as a human being is going to significantly alter, aid, comfort, serve, and/or defend God, Jesus, the universe, and everything, like a metal burr on a screw on the car of God, Jesus, the universe, and everything. It just isn’t possible or truthful, and again, the promise is that God, Jesus, the universe, and everything are going to save us – and not that we have any significant power to save God, Jesus, the universe, and everything in the least, because don’t, and if we did, that would make us God, Jesus, the universe, and everything, which is also impossible, because no part can be the whole it is a part of.
Equivocation
Per the fallacies listed above, “Equivocation – using a term with more than one meaning in a statement without specifying which meaning is intended.[20]”
Trump uses this fallacy regularly, for example when he specifies how “unfair” accountability for his ongoing crimes is (to him), without always specifying that he is the one perceiving the same as unfair, concealing how fair accountability is for his hundreds of millions of victims.
He employs a variation of this fallacy when he specifies that “radicals”, “criminals”, and/or anyone trying to hold his crime syndicate accountable are trying to “destroy OUR great country”, “steal elections” from “you/us”, et cetera, but withholding that that “OUR” only pertains to his crime syndicate, and/or those they seek to deceive, and not to any of their hundreds of millions of victims, and/or when he specifies elections or the country are being stolen from “you/us”, again he is withholding that “us/you” only pertains to his organized crime syndicate and/or those they seek to deceive, in order to (1) evade accountability for decades of crimes (81 years) and/or (2) to continue to expand their criminal enterprise and harm to the hundreds of millions of their unsuspecting and deceived victims – and he is withholding that Trump and the GOP are who have collectively been stealing elections since at least the murder of President Kennedy.
Ambiguous middle term
Per the list of fallacies above, “Ambiguous middle term – using a middle term with multiple meanings.[21]”, and this is similar to Equivocation, and where a version of this would be to remove the middle term with multiple meanings in order to deceive or render false a conclusion, which is what Trump, the GOP, Rosenstein, Barr, Durham, and/or others attempted to do with investigations into Trump, the GOP, and Russia, for example by limiting the scope of these investigations to not include investigations into Trump, the White House, his family, and/or his associates, because the same would have linked Parts I and Parts II of the Mueller Investigation, and proven the proper predication of Crossfire Hurricane, and thus debunked the need to employ John Durham to RICO obstruct and obfuscate the same or overlapping matters.
Definitional retreat
Per the list of fallacies above, “Definitional retreat – changing the meaning of a word when an objection is raised.[22] Often paired with moving the goalposts (see below), as when an argument is challenged using a common definition of a term in the argument, and the arguer presents a different definition of the term and thereby demands different evidence to debunk the argument.”
This is formerly and currently what the GOP SCOTUS majority, Aileen Canon, other judges, Rosenstein, Barr, Durham, and/or others have done in violation of their oaths of office to support and not violate the Constitution, the scope of their duties, the law, stare decisis, a priori, and/or a fortiori to give aid, comfort, and/or adhere to enemies of the United States and organized crime by RICO obstructing and concealing evidence of guilt for the same, and/or by intentionally mischaracterizing, intentionally misinterpreting, stretching, and/or intentionally redefining, nullifying, significantly dismantling, and/or attacking the Constitution, rule of law, stare decisis, a priori, a fortiori, rulings, regulations, policies, memos, and/or any other thing in order to help enemies and organized crime evade accountability, stay in power, and/or further expand their criminal enterprise.
Trump, the GOP, GOP SCOTUS majority, Aileen Canon, other judges, Rosenstein, Barr, Durham, and/or others have respectively and/or collectively engaged in this fallacy in a self-serving and criminal manner towards this common purpose, by challenging Whistleblower and False Claims Acts, immunity, and/or eligibility for holding office to overtly further the common purpose of this criminal enterprise.
In a similar manner they have also engaged in a similar fallacy as above here, specifically the persuasive definition fallacy.
Persuasive definition
Per the list of fallacies above, “Persuasive definition – purporting to use the "true" or "commonly accepted" meaning of a term while, in reality, using an uncommon or altered (including the opposite) definition.
(cf. the if-by-whiskey fallacy)”, specifically by arguing their own legitimacy, where there is none, and/or the legitimacy of others, where there is none, and/or arguing that their version of reality is the “truth”, and discrediting the reality of those with the evidence and law proving they are liars, and as specified specifically and generally at www.uprightsnews.com, and herein this article or addendum.
Ecological fallacy
Per the fallacies list above, “Ecological fallacy – inferring about the nature of an entity based solely upon aggregate statistics collected for the group to which that entity belongs.[26]”
Here, the polls, facts, legitimacy of and for government, immunity, non-prosecuting nature of, media, influence, and/or nature of the crime syndicate of Jeffrey Epstein and Russia infer the nature of “reality” and/or the “truth”, as forward by this enormously wealthy and influential organized crime syndicate – corrupting government offices, and owning most of the largest media, news, social media, and advertising, and/or similar influencing channels – projects a false and parallel universe of the truth, which is weak or void on facts, which requires them to “manufacture” truth or fake news, regarding their own nature onto those they seek to deceive in the public and public offices.
Quoting Stephanie Grisham, “Former Trump White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham recalls a moment when former President Donald Trump told her, "As long as you keep repeating something, it doesn't matter what you say" … a “method of lying he taught her”.
And per Dr. Marcy Wheeler of Empty Wheel, John Durham, William Barr, Trump, the GOP, and/or others significantly obstructed and/or corrupted their offices, investigations, and/or established investigation methods, over and over and over against, in such a manner that does prove that Trump didn’t just Stephanie Grisham to lie in this manner, but all of them, and where both John Durham and Bill Barr have each expressed, implied, and/or proven as much.
For example, Barr specified that Trump and/or the GOP’s elections fraud lies were “bullshit”.
And again Durham affirmed on 06/21/2023 in Congress to Adam Schiff that Trump and the GOP cheated (via elections fraud) in a conspiracy/collusion with Russia, who was an enemy of the United States, supra.
Per the list of fallacies above, ““Fallacy of composition – assuming that something true of part of a whole must also be true of the whole.[28]”, and Fallacy of division – assuming that something true of a composite thing must also be true of all or some of its parts.[29]”, an example of the same concerns the truth of Part I of the Mueller Investigation regarding the Trump and GOP campaign links to U.S. enemy Russia, and the truth of Part II of the same investigation regarding Trump and the GOP’s obstruction of justice into the Mueller and/or related investigations, did not substantiate falsehood and/or perjury concerning Bill Barr’s mischaracterization that the investigations didn’t reveal that Trump colluded or conspired with Russia. Here the truths found and concealed in the Mueller Investigation were not part of the whole, which included Bill Barr’s mischaracterization of the truth, is the similar manner that the truth of the Mueller Investigation did not make true Bill Barr’s lies as part of the conclusion of the Mueller Investigation.
Per the list of fallacies above, “False attribution – appealing to an irrelevant, unqualified, unidentified, biased or fabricated source in support of an argument.”
Trump and the GOP’s elections fraud lies, “stolen elections” claims, fake electors plot, and/or stolen and concealed documents (which required Trump and the GOP to forfeit office and to never hold office again, with no exceptions), which respectively, and/or collectively caused the insurrection on 01/06/2021, but not limited to the same, appealed to irrelevant, unqualified, unidentified, and a fabricate source of an argument, to such an extent that Trump, the GOP, and/or others lost no fewer than 60 lawsuits, and contributed to indictment for 91 different felonies.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/trump-charges-jan-6-classified-documents/
https://news.yahoo.com/trump-cases-georgia-washington-florida-nyc-charges-key-dates-213951743.html
With respect to Trump’s and the GOP’s frivolous claims, they have generated over 30,000 frivolous claims, lies, false statements, and/or frivolous claims in just a 4 year period, which is an average of about 20 lies per day.
Per the list of fallacies above, “Fallacy of quoting out of context (contextotomy, contextomy; quotation mining) – selective excerpting of words from their original context to distort the intended meaning.[30]”
Similarly, “Homunculus fallacy – using a "middle-man" for explanation; this sometimes leads to regressive middle-men. It explains a concept in terms of the concept itself without explaining its real nature (e.g.: explaining thought as something produced by a little thinker – a homunculus – inside the head simply identifies an intermediary actor and does not explain the product or process of thinking).[36]”
Here of course Trump, the GOP, William Barr, and/or others have infamously claimed “no collusion” in Robert Mueller’s investigation (instead of Robert Mueller summarizing his own investigation without a middle-man, Barr), since debunked by John Durham 06/21/2023 in Congress with Adam Schiff, and that investigations into Trump and Russia’s treason and elections fraud, each of which disqualified Trump and the GOP, are “hoaxes” and “witch-hunts”, debunked by Trump’s attorney in a different lawsuit, claiming there was no Russia hoax, so many years later.
https://www.emptywheel.net/2024/02/06/john-durham-feigns-totally-dumb-about-russian-collusion/
Rod Rosenstein, Bill Barr, Trump, the GOP, and/or others also committed this fallacy by limiting the scope of the investigations into Trump, his family, and his associates to force the selective excerpting of words to distort the intended meaning, also achieved by Trump, the GOP, Mark Meadows, and/or others stealing documents like the binder for the origins of Crossfire Hurricane, or obstructing the release of evidence concerning 9/11 attacks, but not limited to the same, also achieved by their RICO obstruction of justice, and by their ongoing witness, victim, and government informant intimidation, but not limited to the same.
Per the list of fallacies above, “False authority (single authority) – using an expert of dubious credentials or using only one opinion to promote a product or idea. Related to the appeal to authority.”
This false authority fallacy overlaps with the impersonation of officers, offices, and/or government employees addressed herein this addendum, and overlaps with the violations of oaths and scope of duties also addressed herein this addendum, and overlaps with the treason, sedition, insurrection, elections fraud, terrorism, fake electors, and/or stolen documents cases against Trump, and/or overlapping with the origins of Crossfire Hurricane, the Mueller Investigation, and in part their precursor, the specified Russia and GOP stalked and lynched pro se qui tam 09/21/2014 herein this addendum, but not limited to the same, by CA/Sacramento GOP/RNC, supra and infra – more specifically, Trump, the GOP, Aileen Cannon, GOP’s SCOTUS majority, and/or others have impersonated officers, offices, and/or employees to manufacture “false authority”, after they disqualified themselves from holding public office, and separately after forfeiting their public offices, by way of treason, elections fraud, insurrection, concealing and destroying documents, but not limited to the same, infra.
Per the list of fallacies above, “False equivalence – describing two or more statements as virtually equal when they are not.”
This is what Trump, the GOP, Bill Barr, and/or others have done by claiming evidence of a criminal conspiracy to commit treason and elections fraud disqualifying Trump and the GOP for public office BEFORE 2016, proves there was no conspiracy or collusion involving the same. Similarly, judge Aileen Cannon, Bill Barr, the GOP SCOTUS majority, Trump, the GOP, and/or others have falsely claimed and/or implied that the evidence against Trump doesn’t justify removing him from office, and/or from the ballot, but does warrant partisan intervention that is fully consistent with RICO obstruction of justice by false authorities, who Trump didn’t have the authority to install, having disqualified himself from office before the 2016 elections.
Per the list of fallacies above, “Intentionality fallacy – the insistence that the ultimate meaning of an expression must be consistent with the intention of the person from whom the communication originated (e.g. a work of fiction that is widely received as a blatant allegory must necessarily not be regarded as such if the author intended it not to be so).[39]”
Trump, the GOP, and others are the best examples here, where their insistence of unfair treatment, political prosecutions, deep state witch hunts, hoax claims must be the ultimate truth because of how much they insist, despite not having much to any evidence to support their position, and the little evidence they have manufactured is regularly debunked as corruptly-derived, for example, but not limited to Bill Barr’s mischaracterization and/or scope limiting of the Mueller Investigation, the manufactured cases against their perceived rivals (including in Ukraine and/or against the author of this addendum), and/or the Durham investigation, but not limited to the same, and collectively resulting in the fallacy of “Kettle logic – using multiple, jointly inconsistent arguments to defend a position.”
From the list of fallacies above, “Reification (concretism, hypostatization, or the fallacy of misplaced concreteness) – treating an abstract belief or hypothetical construct as if it were a concrete, real event or physical entity (e.g.: saying that evolution selects which traits are passed on to future generations; evolution is not a conscious entity with agency).”
An example of this would be Trump, the GOP, Bill Barr, John Durham, fake electors, and/or insurrectionists treating an abstract belief like (A) the elections were stolen, (B) Trump had immunity to commit crimes (despite the GOP in Congress RICO obstructing impeachment on the basis that he did not have immunity) before, during, or after his term was over, (C) Trump, Meadows, and others were allowed to steal top secret government documents (even though White House counsel told him he couldn’t and that it would be a crime), (D) that Trump was allowed to commit espionage against the United States with the top secrets he stole (which former CIA Director affirmed that Trump should be put to death for having done the same), (E) that Trump and the GOP were allowed to conspire to treason and elections fraud and not disqualify themselves, (F) that Trump and the GOP were allowed to conceal or destroy government documents without forfeiting their offices and without barring them from future office, that Trump and the GOP were allowed to commit an insurrection without being barred from public office – despite the law and the facts proving the contrary, and despite ongoing RICO obstruction of justice by GOP’s majority SCOTUS, Aileen Cannon, and/or others, which makes them accomplices after the fact.
Per the fallacies list above, “Retrospective determinism – believing that, because an event has occurred under some circumstance, the circumstance must have made the event inevitable (e.g.: because someone won the lottery while wearing their lucky socks, wearing those socks made winning the lottery inevitable).”
Here, because Trump and the GOP were not eligible for office before or after the 2016 elections and forfeited their offices, this can’t be argued in such a manner that this means they were inevitably eligible for office and didn’t inevitably forfeit their offices.
Per the fallacies list above, “ the fallacies list above, Slippery slope (thin edge of the wedge, camel's nose) – asserting that a proposed, relatively small, first action will inevitably lead to a chain of related events resulting in a significant and negative event and, therefore, should not be permitted.[46]”
This is Trump’s, the GOP’s, GOP’s SCOTUS majority, and/or others asserting in a direct and/or implied manner that prosecuting Trump, the GOP, GOP’s SCOTUS, Aileen Cannon, and/or others for much worse crimes – like, but not limited to, (A) treason (former CIA Director John Brennan specified that Trump’s conduct at the Helsinki meeting with Putin did constitute treason, and former prosecutor Glenn Kirschner also specified Trump committed treason), (B) espionage (Trump leaked intel to Russia and others on more than one occasion, and CIA Director Hayden affirmed Trump should be put to death for the same), (C) elections fraud barring office, (D) concealment and destruction of government documents (for example the origins of Crossfire Hurricane binder), (E) murder-for–profit during COVID (Mike Flynn specified COVID was intentionally released to control after the elections were stolen, and Paul Alexander specified that Trump, the GOP, and/or others intentionally infected, and thus killed, as many people as possible); and/or (F) arrest the GOP SCOTUS majority, the GOP in Congress, Aileen Cannon, Bill Barr, John Durham, Rod Rosenstein, and/or others for RICO obstructing just for the U.S. government, and hundreds of million of Americans, would ruin the country, destroy the country, be unfair, be unlawful, be unconstitutional, would cause civil war, cause a constitutional crisis, and/or other nonsense, and therefore some of the worst crimes against America and Americans in American history should not be charged in order to protect enemies of the United States and organized crime heavily-linked to the child sex trafficking rings of Jeffrey Epstein, NXIVM, Hamish Ogston, Matt Gaetz, Donald Trump, ICC’s child (sex) trafficker Vladimir Putin, Russia, and/or others, and of course where not charging all of these is nonsense on its face, and overt furtherance of RICO obstruction of justice to aid, comfort, and adhere to enemies and organized crime is clear.
Per the fallacies list above, “Special pleading – the arguer attempts to cite something as an exemption to a generally accepted rule or principle without justifying the exemption (e.g.: an orphaned defendant who murdered their parents asking for leniency).”
In a similar manner as the fallacy above, Trump, the GOP, GOP’s SCOTUS majority, Aileen Cannon, Bill Barr, John Durham, and/or others have argued in an expressed and/or implied manner that Trump, the GOP, GOP’s SCOTUS majority, Aileen Cannon, Bill Barr, John Durham, and/or others are exempt from following the law, that they and/or others are above the law, that they are immune from prosecution based on magical non-existent powers, memos, laws, and/or other invalid justifications of their offices, offices they were not eligible for because of Trump and the GOP’s treason and elections fraud with Russia before Trump and the GOP illegitimately installed them in office, and/or that some to all of them will be their own judges as to whether or not they or others may hold office, prosecuted, and the like – despite the fact that all sorts of laws made all of them ineligible for public office, and forfeited their offices, addressed elsewhere herein this addendum but not limited to the same.
Improper premise
Per the list of fallacies above, “Begging the question (petitio principii) – using the conclusion of the argument in support of itself in a premise (e.g.: saying that smoking cigarettes is deadly because cigarettes can kill you; something that kills is deadly).[47][48]”
Here concluding that because Trump, the GOP, Bush family, Habsburg crime family (SCL’s Cambridge Analytica, but not limited to the same per Privilegium maius), and/or others stole power before, during, and/or after then they had, have, and will have legitimate power to change the laws, or legal landscape to ensure the same, when nothing illegitimate can be born out of legitimacy, and if exceptions are made to some, then exceptions must be made to all.
Per the list of fallacies above, “Circular reasoning (circulus in demonstrando) – the reasoner begins with what they are trying to end up with (e.g.: all bachelors are unmarried males).”
This is a central fallacy employed by Trump, the GOP, GOP’s SCOTUS majority, Aileen Cannon, Bill Barr, John Durham, Rod Rosenstein, and/or others, who have expressed and/or implied that they have legitimately been installed in public offices and not forfeited the same, as evidence or proof that that they have expressed and/or implied that they have legitimately been installed in public offices and not forfeited the same, by concealing evidence, the applicability of laws, by not supporting the Constitution, and/or other facts and law that would prove their ineligibility, and that of others, to give aid, comfort, and adhere to enemies of the United States and the child sex trafficking rings of Jeffrey Epstein, Trump Tower, and Vladimir Putin, per Katie Johnson’s lawsuit, per the ICC arrest warrant for Putin, and per the Trump Tower meeting June 9, 2016, but not limited to the same, infra.
Faulty generalizations
From the list of fallacies above, “Faulty generalization – reaching a conclusion from weak premises.”
Here, reaching the conclusion that Trump, the GOP, GOP SCOTUS majority, Aileen Cannon, Bill Barr, John Durham, and/or others were eligible for public office in the manner that they expressed and/or implied is based on very, very weak premises, because of all of the laws they and/or others are known to have violated before, during, and after the 2016 elections, supra and infra, which disqualified them and others from public office, as well as disqualified them from installing others in public office, and from remaining in public office, and from changing even one thing about how the government changes.
From the list of fallacies above, “Cherry picking (suppressed evidence, incomplete evidence, argument by half-truth, fallacy of exclusion, card stacking, slanting) – using individual cases or data that confirm a particular position, while ignoring related cases or data that may contradict that position.[52][53]”
This of course is an integral part of the illegitimate and weak defense with little to no evidence or law supporting the same, that Trump, the GOP, GOP SCOTUS majority, Aileen Cannon, Bill Barr, John Durham, and/or others have used to evade prosecution for themselves and/or others, and to justify their eligibility for public office, when there is little to no evidence or law supporting the same, supra and infra.
Per the fallacies list above, Nut-picking (suppressed evidence, incomplete evidence) – using individual cases or data that falsify a particular position, while ignoring related cases or data that may support that position.
This is another central tactic employed by Trump, the GOP, John Durham, Bill Barr, GOP’s SCOTUS majority, and/or others, who have used individual cases or data to falsify that they and/or others have not violated some of the most serious laws in American history in a bid for them and/or others to evade prosecution, remain eligible to hold office, when they have forfeited the same, and are not eligible for the same, nor were they eligible in the manner they have claims and/or implied after Trump, the GOP, and/or conspired with enemies of the United States before the 2016 elections, specifically Russia. What they have done is they have cherry-picked some to all of the evidence and laws they collectively violated that proves their felonies and ineligibility for public office in order to argue that they shouldn’t be prosecuted, they shouldn’t receive the death penality, they should not be liable, and that they were and are eligible for public office with respect to making changes to the government, when they weren’t under the circumstances specified in this addendum but not limited to the same.
Per the fallacies list above, “Survivorship bias – a small number of successes of a given process are actively promoted while completely ignoring a large number of failures.”
Here, becauseTrump, the GOP, GOP SCOTUS majority, Aileen Cannon, Bill Barr, John Durham, the Habsburg crime family, and/or others have survived not being prosecuted, jailed, subjected to the death penalty, removed from power, and/or made ineligible for the power they usurped, and because the fruits of the poisonous tree of ineligibility of their illegitimate changes to the governments has survived as a result, then they collectively argue that despite the perception they are not legitimate (their failures based on facts and law), that they are eligible for office, future office, and all of the changes they made which they weren’t allowed to make are also legitimate.
Per the list of fallacies above, “Hasty generalization (fallacy of insufficient statistics, fallacy of insufficient sample, fallacy of the lonely fact, hasty induction, secundum quid, converse accident, jumping to conclusions) – basing a broad conclusion on a small or unrepresentative sample.[55]”
Here, given that a large body of facts and law can prove that Trump, the GOP, GOP SCOTUS majority, Aileen Cannon, Bill Barr, John Durham, and/or others were not eligible for public office, nor are they now, arguing the contrary using law and facts is doing the same based on small, insignificant, to no evidence or law to support that conclusion.
Per the list of fallacies above, “Argument from anecdote – a fallacy where anecdotal evidence is presented as an argument; without any other contributory evidence or reasoning”.
Here an example would be the impeachments of Trump, the Mueller Investigation, Crossfire Hurricane Investigation, and Durham investigation, or Trump’s claims of elections fraud and stolen elections, or the Russia, Russia, Russia hoax, but not limited to the same, where Trump, the GOP, Bill Barr, John Durham, Rod Rosenstein, and/or others argued conclusions of not violating the law to support prosecutions of Trump, the GOP, and others based on anecdotal evidence, and/or weak to no evidence, nor employing proper reasoning.
From the list of fallacies above, “Overwhelming exception – an accurate generalization that comes with qualifications that eliminate so many cases that what remains is much less impressive than the initial statement might have led one to assume.[56]”
Here, an accurate generalization is that Trump, the GOP, GOP SCOTUS majority, Aileen Cannon, Bill Barr, John Durham, and/or others remained and/or remain, and the same comes with qualifications that eliminate so many cases, specifically the cases for disqualification and forfeiture of office by sefl-executing laws, that what remains is much less impressive, specifically that Trump, the GOP, GOP SCOTUS majority, Aileen Cannon, Bill Barr, John Durham, and/or others remained and/or remain in power despite not being eligible for their offices.
Questionable cause
Per the list of fallacies above, “Questionable cause is a general type of error with many variants. Its primary basis is the confusion of association with causation, either by inappropriately deducing (or rejecting) causation or a broader failure to properly investigate the cause of an observed effect.”
Here of course a failure to properly investigate is what caused the confusion that Trump, the GOP, GOP SCOTUS majority, Aileen Cannon, Bill Barr, John Durham, and/or others were eligible for public office, when they were not, and caused by 81 years or ongoing and overtly furthered treason and elections fraud conspiracies, beginning with Prescott Bush in WWII, but not limited to the same, per Privilegium maius, which were not properly investigated, resulting the sum of errors that conclude legitimate office or governance, despite the contrary per the facts and the law.
Per the list of fallacies above and per a previous discussion above regarding the nature of many fallacies being paradoxes, “Furtive fallacy – outcomes are asserted to have been caused by the malfeasance of decision makers.” This is one of those fallacies that almost everyone practicing law has violated, because the decision of the violator of law made a decision and that decision resulted in a violation of law, and where this can be objectively true, but where the nature of a fallacy is that there is no truth in the logic, reasoning, and/or critical thinking where there is fallacy, resulting in the paradox.
Not every fallacy on the list above is addressed herein this addendum, and not to cherry-pick fallacies nor be evasive, but because some fallacies are easier to illustrate as flawed tactics employed to keep those not eligible for public office in public office.
Similarly, not all paradoxes are addressed, but some are to illustrate that some fallacies are themselves fallacies or poorly reasoned, because they reason that situations that are argued in a reasonable manner, are not always reasonable.
Furtive fallacy is one such fallacy, “outcomes are asserted to have been caused by the malfeasance of decision makers.”
Here it would also be a fallacy or false reasoning to argue the contrary, that Hitler’s or Netanyahu’s execution of Jews and Palestinians were not caused by the evil decision making of their decisions, illustrating the paradox in some fallacies, which if not elucidated would be cherry-picking.
Per the list of fallacies above, “Magical thinking – fallacious attribution of causal relationships between actions and events. In anthropology, it refers primarily to cultural beliefs that ritual, prayer, sacrifice, and taboos will produce specific supernatural consequences. In psychology, it refers to an irrational belief that thoughts by themselves can affect the world or that thinking something corresponds with doing it.”
Here of course Trump, the GOP, and/or others have been posturing that Trump is God, Jesus Christ, Jesus Christ returned (though Christ is always with us and thus doesn’t need to return), “the chosen one”, “the second coming”, and yet Trump has violated all of the core teachings of Jesus, all of the 10 Commandments, all of the 7 deadly sins, and only with magical thinking does that make Trump the leader of some movement to save God, religion, faith, and the like, when no person can do this, and where the promise is that God will save us, not that anyone of us nor Trump can save God, which is vain, and blasphemous.
https://baptistnews.com/article/donald-trump-and-the-10-commandments/
Furthermore, per Michael Cohen, David Kay Johnson, and others, Trump has specified that he believes that Christianity is “bullshit”, a “racket”, and that Christians are ”fools, schmucks, and idiots”, and that Protestant Evangelical leaders are “pieces of shit”, which collectively make Trump a very unlikely candidate for Jesus or God, magical thinking and utterings of great deceivers seeking to return to power unlawfully to evade accountability for some of the worst crimes against the American people in American history.
Per the list of fallacies above, “Appeal to the stone (argumentum ad lapidem) – dismissing a claim as absurd without demonstrating proof for its absurdity.[62]”
Here, for example if after reading this addendum and its supporting materials, if others were to dismiss all of the claims found herein and therein, without demonstrating proof rebutting every claim, then doing so would be absurd, and dismissing every claim as absurd without demonstrating proof for its absurdity, would be a fallacy, but where it would be impossible to demonstrate this addendum and its referenced materials, because they are rooted in significant laws, elements of law, their sources, their authorities, and evidence beyond a reasonable doubt, which would need to be ignored or cherry-picked in a RICO obstruction manner, to give aid, comfort, and adhere to enemies of the United States and organized crime linked to Jeffrey Epstein.
In fact RICO obstruction of justice agents of enemies of the United States would have to engage in “Invincible ignorance (argument by pigheadedness) – where a person simply refuses to believe the argument, ignoring any evidence given.[63]”, in order to not determine the ineligibility of Trump, the GOP, GOP’s SCOTUS majority, Aileen Cannon, Bill Barr, John Durham, Rod Rosenstein, Paul Alexander, Mike Flynn, Felix Sater, Michael Cohen, and/or others, and to not prosecute them for some of the most serious crimes against the U.S. government and American people in all U.S. history, supra and infra.
Similarly, RICO obstructers for enemies of the United States and Jeffrey Epstein’s crime syndicate would have to employ the fallacy “Argument from incredulity (appeal to common sense) – "I cannot imagine how this could be true; therefore, it must be false."[65]”, but to do so these RICO obstructers for enemies of the United States would have to ignore all of the evidence and violations of law before, during, and after the 2016 elections, but not limited to the same (as far back as G.H.W. Bush and Prescott Bush), that made Trump, the GOP, GOP’s SCOTUS majority, Aileen Cannon, Bill Barr, John Durham, Rod Rosenstein, Paul Alexander, Mike Flynn, Felix Sater, Michael Cohen, and/or others ineligible for public office, supra and infra.
Per the list of fallacies above, “Argument from repetition (argumentum ad nauseam or argumentum ad infinitum) – repeating an argument until nobody cares to discuss it any more and referencing that lack of objection as evidence of support for the truth of the conclusion;[66][67] sometimes confused with proof by assertion.”
Here, Trump, the GOP, GOP’s SCOTUS majority, and/or others arguing their lawfulnesses and/or legitimacy for office, and repeatedly the same until nobody cared to discuss the same any more, and/or referencing lack of objection in support for the truth of the conclusion, still doesn’t make them eligible for office, nor immune from prosecution and removal from office by forfeiture and the other violated self-executing laws specified herein.
Red herring fallacies
Per the list of fallacies above, “A red herring fallacy, one of the main subtypes of fallacies of relevance, is an error in logic where a proposition is, or is intended to be, misleading in order to make irrelevant or false inferences. This includes any logical inference based on fake arguments, intended to replace the lack of real arguments or to replace implicitly the subject of the discussion.[70][71]
Red herring – introducing a second argument in response to the first argument that is irrelevant and draws attention away from the original topic (e.g.: saying "If you want to complain about the dishes I leave in the sink, what about the dirty clothes you leave in the bathroom?").[72] In jury trial, it is known as a Chewbacca defense. In political strategy, it is called a dead cat strategy. See also irrelevant conclusion.”
Trump, the GOP, GOP’s SCOTUS majority, Aileen Cannon, Bill Barr, and/or others have regularly employed this fallacy to perpetuate their illegitimate power grab, most recently Aileen Cannon employed the same to RICO obstruct justice for Trump, which indirectly defends her own legitimacy by protecting his illegitimacy.
“"Aileen Cannon's worry that, based on a Justice Department policy, starting a trial could be viewed as "political" depending on the subject of the investigation. At the core of Cannon's concern was the DOJ's so-called "60-day rule," which bars federal investigators from bringing charges against or publicly investigating candidates near an election. Not only does that prohibition not apply in Trump's classified documents case, it's less of a hard-and-fast rule and more like a guideline, explained Andrew Weissmann, a former Justice Department Fraud Section chief who served on special counsel Bob Mueller's team.
There are two issues with Judge Cannon raising it," Weissman told MSNBC host Jen Psaki in a clip flagged by RawStory. "First of all, it's an internal rule. It is not a law, it is not something that gives any rights to any defendant. And Judge Cannon had been at the Justice Department — she knows that. So the idea that she raised it is issue number one."
That internal department guidance could also be changed by the attorney general "any day of the week," Weissmann explained.
"Second, the rule does not apply! For anyone who has been at the Justice Department, this is such a red herring," Weissmann continued. "This is why it completely wrong: that rule is intended so that the Justice Department does not take action in a covert case that is suddenly overt shortly before an election. Why? Because you don't want to influence the election when that person — the candidate — doesn't have an opportunity to get to trial."
Instead, in this federal case against Trump, the Justice Department is requesting "a day in court" to give the defendant the opportunity to refute these "overt allegations," Weissmann said. The suggestion the provision applies "could not be more wrongheaded," he added.”
Per the list of fallacies above, “Ad hominem – attacking the arguer instead of the argument. (Note that "ad hominem" can also refer to the dialectical strategy of arguing on the basis of the opponent's own commitments. This type of ad hominem is not a fallacy.)
Circumstantial ad hominem – stating that the arguer's personal situation or perceived benefit from advancing a conclusion means that their conclusion is wrong.[73]
Poisoning the well – a subtype of ad hominem presenting adverse information about a target person with the intention of discrediting everything that the target person says.[74]
Appeal to motive – dismissing an idea by questioning the motives of its proposer.
Tone policing – focusing on emotion behind (or resulting from) a message rather than the message itself as a discrediting tactic.
Appeal to ridicule (reductio ad ridiculum, reductio ad absurdum, ad absurdum) – mocking or stating that the opponent's position is laughable to deflect from the merits of the opponent's argument. (Note that "reductio ad absurdum" can also refer to the classic form of argument that establishes a claim by showing that the opposite scenario would lead to absurdity or contradiction. This type of reductio ad absurdum is not a fallacy.)[82]
Appeal to spite – generating bitterness or hostility in the listener toward an opponent in an argument.[83]
Judgmental language – using insulting or pejorative language in an argument.
Courtier's reply – a criticism is dismissed by claiming that the critic lacks sufficient knowledge, credentials, or training to credibly comment on the subject matter.
Pooh-pooh – stating that an opponent's argument is unworthy of consideration.[84]
Argumentum ad baculum (appeal to the stick, appeal to force, appeal to threat) – an argument made through coercion or threats of force to support position.[92]
Argumentum ad populum (appeal to widespread belief, bandwagon argument, appeal to the majority, appeal to the people) – a proposition is claimed to be true or good solely because a majority or many people believe it to be so.[93]”
And yet where they don’t want anyone probing into whether or not their credentials, qualifications, changes to office, and/or installment into office was/were/is/are valid or legitimate, because the evidence and laws will prove beyond a reasonable doubt they were not legitimately occupying those office, nor are they, nor can they, supra and infra.
All of these are chief defense tactics of Trump, Kash Patel, the GOP, Bill Barr, John Durham, GOP’s SCOTUS majority, their RICO obstructers, and/or others, who have attacked witnesses, victims, government informants, whistleblowers, academics, journalists, law enforcement, U.S. military personnel, judges, clerks of judges, jury members, prosecutors, and/or others trying to hold them accountable in lieu of defending against the facts and the laws that need to be used to remove them from power, bar them from returning from power, voiding all of their illegitimate changes to the government, and prosecuting them to the fullest extent of the law for having overtly furthered some of the worst crimes in U.S. history, with little to no justice nor relief from the same since having done the same, and posturing to harm America and Americans even more, and publicly.
Per the list of fallacies above, Traitorous critic fallacy (ergo decedo, 'therefore I leave') – a critic's perceived affiliation is portrayed as the underlying reason for the criticism and the critic is asked to stay away from the issue altogether. Easily confused with the association fallacy (guilt by association) below.”
Here, Trump, the GOP, and/or others have accused anyone trying to hold them accountable for some of the worst crimes in U.S. history of being “radicals” (when it is pretty clear that Trump is the radical), “leftists”, “Marxists”, “Communists” (and yet it was Trump and Ivana Trump who were investigated by the FBI for their communist ties in Europe, and where Putin has specified that he likes a lot of communist and/or socialist ideas, and he’s the one who engineered Trump into power), RINOs (attacks his own if they step out of line), and the like, or he and/or the GOP have accused others of affiliation, as the reason behind his prosecutions, investigations (witch-hunts), instead of admitting to all of his crimes as the underlying reason for his prosecutions and lawsuits.
Per the list of fallacies above, “Appeal to authority (argument from authority, argumentum ad verecundiam) – an assertion is deemed true because of the position or authority of the person asserting it.[75][76]”
This of course is similar to the circular argument, where Trump, the GOP, GOP SCOTUS majority and others want everyone to believe they were and/or are eligible for office, because they and/or their crime syndicate usurping offices said they are/were, and/or wouldn’t say they aren’t/weren’t.
This is similar to the fallacy of “Appeal to accomplishment – an assertion is deemed true or false based on the accomplishments of the proposer”, where they want others to believe they were and/or are eligible for public office because they usurped and/or usurping those offices.
Per the list of fallacies above, “Appeal to emotion – manipulating the emotions of the listener rather than using valid reasoning to obtain common agreement.[78”, and “Style over substance – embellishing an argument with compelling language, exploiting a bias towards the esthetic qualities of an argument, e.g. the rhyme-as-reason effect[85]” and Wishful thinking – arguing for a course of action by the listener according to what might be pleasing to imagine rather than according to evidence or reason.[86]]”
This is a chief tactic employed by Trump, the GOP, the GOP SCOTUS majority, and/or others, who constantly want others not to focus on his/their major crimes against America and the American people, and instead to focus on radical, leftist, Communist, Marxist, democrats, liberals, socialists, LGBTQ+, abortion clinics, wars, and/or others trying to destroy, dilute, replace, the government, American faith, American families, and/or other Russian military active measures – meant to distract from their crimes and to polarize natural differences in populations, in order to cleave off a percentage of Americans that they have exploited and harmed, into a base of support for them, because otherwise they can’t engineer themselves to steal another election to take control of the justice system coming after them, but not limited to the same. Here, those who behave in a manner that proves they reject the 10 Commandments, Romans 13, and/or the teachings of Jesus, will heavily refer to themselves in an expressed or implied manner as the saviors of Christianity, like wolves in sheeps clothing seeking to kill, harm, and exploit more sheep by getting closer and closer to them with more and more lies and deception, until its too late to stop them.
Per the fallacies list above, and really proving that Trump, the GOP, and their crime syndicate employ fallacies, deceit, flaws in legal logic, reasoning, and critical thinking as a sort of evil henchmen and enemies checklist, used to remain in illegitimate power, and used to keep the changes to government they were not allowed to make (for example pardons and clemency for witnesses that could prove their illegitimacy), Trump and the GOP regularly “Appeal to fear – generating distress, anxiety, cynicism, or prejudice towards the opponent in an argument.[79]”, against as agents of Russia facilitating active measures of polarizing or weaponizing every natural difference normally found in populations, ethnicity, faith, age, gender, wealth, politics, sexual preference, and the like.
Per the fallacies list above, “Appeal to pity (argumentum ad misericordiam) – generating feelings of sympathy or mercy in the listener to obtain common agreement.[81]”
Here again, Trump, the GOP, GOP SCOTUS, and/or others regularly engage in this tactic crying foul where there is none, wailing how “unfair” Trump and others have been treated, specifying their own legitimacy (SCOTUS) where there is none, specifying insurrectionists who tried to overthrow the United States are “hostages”, regularly defending the war crimes of Putin in Russia, but not limited to the same, constantly applying DARVO, to posture as the victims, instead of the violators.
As there are many other fallacies or violations of logic, reason, and/or critical thinking employed by the ongoing organized crime syndicate specified above, supra, this article won’t go through every single one of them, while noting that almost every one of them have been used as ad hoc criminal defenses to the undefendable crimes of their ongoing crime syndicate, and many of the fallacies not addressed herein can be described as near identical to other fallacies, aberrations of truth in logic, reasoning, and critical thinking, and where the examples above constitute evidence beyond a reasonable doubt of the use of these fallacies to sustain illegitimate power by Trump, the GOP, GOP SCOTUS majority, Aileen Cannon, and/or others.
Accordingly, violating truth, logic, reasoning, and critical thinking in this manner above is really a form of perjury (with except to the addressed and unaddressed paradoxes, which form the very nature of law, and legal argument), and employing frivolous conspiracy to defend criminal conspiracy, by engaging in RICO obstruction of justice, witness intimidation and preemptive defamation, victim intimidation and preemptive defamation, government informant intimidation and preemptive defamation, government official intimidation and/or preemptive defamation, and in an ongoing manner has become the criminal defense of Trump, the GOP, GOP’s SCOTUS majority, Aileen Cannon, and/or others seeking to give aid, comfort, and/or adhere to these and other enemies of the United States and their collectively and ongoing organized criminal enterprise, supra – in lieu of having sufficient evidence, facts, and/or law in defense of their ongoing organized crimes, and/or those of others in their ongoing organized criminal enterprise.
Therefore, within the context of all of the above, in the era where serial-accused Russian traitor, insurrectionist, terrorist, elections fraudster, seditionist, government documents thief and concealer, foreign agent, and/or rapist – Donald Trump – has asked the Supreme Court of the United States’ (SCOTUS’) GOP majority (who Trump and the GOP installed after U.S. enemy, Russia, “engineered” Trump and the GOP into office via an ongoing treason and elections fraud conspiracy per emails between Felix Sater and Michael Cohen 11/03/2015) to consider both,
(1) RICO-obstructing Trump’s enormous crimes against the United States and the American people, by not supporting the Constitution or legal precedent, in violation of their oaths of office and scope of their offices, and to instead support and/or invent novel, frivolous, baseless, and/or unhinged legal theories that would allow Donald Trump in a qui pro quo (bribery, racketeering, corruption) not to be treated equally under the eyes of the law (violation of 14th Amendment Section 1), and
(2) to allow Trump by way of RICO obstruction to run for office despite a large volume of laws Trump violated disqualifying and forfeiting Trump from office – and where the GOP SCOTUS majority has agreed to hear these cases for settled and established law despite Supreme Courts of states like Colorado having found Trump ineligible for office, and where after being confronted with evidence no fewer than four grand juries have separately found there is evidence beyond a reasonable doubt to move ahead with the prosecution of Donald Trump and his conspirators for 91 felonies – and in the context that Trump, the GOP, and their proxies have threatened to round up their perceived enemies (U.S. military personnel, U.S. law enforcement, prosecutors, judges, jurors, witnesses, victims, journalists, academics, activists, whistleblowers, and/or others) for execution, destruction, purging, throat slitting, termination, prosecution, litigation, imprisonment, and/or deportation for trying to hold him accountable for only some of his decades of crimes – it is of paramount importance to the defense of U.S. national security to revisit the constitutional definitions, oaths, qualifications, disqualifications, eligibility, ineligibility, false claims, concealments, obstructions, criminal misconduct, and scope of duties of a president, Trump, SCOTUS judges, other judges, members of Congress, and others, to determine if key individuals within the U.S. government are impersonating officers or employees of the United States in order to give aid, comfort, and adhere to enemies of the United States.
As this is the case, this article explores building the case for removal by impersonation and other avenues, using the elements of law, their sources, and their authorities to identify the impersonators, and ongoing conspiracies by impersonators, in order to immediately remove them from office and to begin their prosecution, to mitigate the carnage they can do to our country and to our people, followed by the application of U.S. voiding laws, to not allow any impersonator, much less an organized crime syndicate of impersonator conspirators giving aid, comfort, and adhering to enemies of the United States to change even one thing about how the government operates, to protect our government and our people from enemies and organized crime networks within and without the U.S. from securing any advantage to continue their crimes and to continue to evade their crimes against us all.
But for RICO corruption and obstruction – the strongest argument is the winning argument that employs the most facts and avoids the least number of fallacies – and the contrary to the same is the frivolous argument based on little to no facts nor the application of the relevant laws meant to protect the strongest argument to protect the country from RICO and treasonous organized crime – employing the greatest number or most severe fallacies to argue that the stronger argument and the evidence and laws pertaining to the same should never be heard, and/or if heard should only be heard and/or ultimately decided by those affiliated with the RICO organized crime syndicate in question, which again would be further evidence of RICO corruption and obstruction.
Accordingly, only overt furtherance of organized crime, RICO, obstruction of justice, and corruption interfering with cases, the introduction of evidence, the introduction of witnesses, and the applications of laws, logic, reasoning, and critical thinking can defeat the same, to prevent the removal, barring from public office, voiding, and prosecution of the RICO organized crime syndicate, and thus is to be expected as a result, as their only remaining defense. More simply, only more illegitimacy and more organized crime can be used as a defense for the same.
TREASON, INSURRECTION, ELECTIONS FRAUD, CONCEALMENT OF EVIDENCE, VIOLATIONS OF OATHS OF OFFICE, VIOLATION AND/OR SIGNIFICANT ABERRATION OF THE SCOPE OF DUTIES, FALLACIES OF LEGAL ARGUMENTS, AND/OR RICO OBSTRUCTION, TO GIVE AID, COMFORT, AND/OR TO ADHERE TO ENEMIES OF THE UNITED STATES AND ORGANIZED CRIME IN AN ONGOING CONSPIRACY AS THE BASIS FOR IMPERSONATING OFFICERS, OFFICES, AND EMPLOYEES OF THE UNITED STATES IN A MANNER THAT THE CONSTITUTION DEMANDS THE IMPERSONATING OFFICERS, OFFICES, AND EMPLOYEES OF THE UNITED STATES BE REMOVES AND ALL OF THEIR ILLEGITIMATE AND/OR HARMFUL CHANGES TO THE GOVERNMENT BE REMOVED VIA U.S. VOIDING LAWS
Beginning with the elements of law for impersonation – because if those abusing public offices aren’t meeting or haven’t met the constitutional definitions, oaths, qualifications, disqualifications, and scopes of duties of a president, SCOTUS judge, any other judge, member of Congress, and/or other officers and employees of the government, then it can be reasonably-argued that by default they are impersonating officers and/or employees of the government, and thus may be removed from false and pretended offices by U.S. law enforcement for prosecution for their impersonation, regardless of their frivolous objections, illegitimate rulings or opinions, and/or RICO conspiracy.
More simply, those who have repeatedly violated the oaths of their public office/employment, which define their duties, and those who have repeated behaved outside of the scope of the duties of their offices as defined by the Constitution or otherwise, and/or outside of the scope/support of law/Constitution, and/or outside the scope of the employment protections conferred to those not violating the same, can reasonably be argued to have impersonated officers, offices, and/or government employees/employment, have repeatedly acted outside of the legal obligations of the same.
In the same manner, a banana (someone not eligible for public office, someone who has disqualified themselves from public office, someone who has forfeited their public office, someone who has violated the oath of their office, someone who has violated the duties of their public office or refused to perform them in support of the law/Constitution) – can’t be treated like an orange (someone who is eligible for public office, someone who hasn’t disqualified themselves from public office, someone who hasn’t forfeited their public office, someone who hasn’t violated their oath of office, someone who hasn’t violated the duties of their office, someone who is acting in alignment/support with the law/Constitution) just because both are fruits (occupying and wielding the power and authority of public office) – nor can a banana be argued to be an orange, even if those fallaciously-arguing the same really need everyone to believe that a banana can be treated like an orange and/or is an orange – because a banana is not an orange, even if both are fruits, because only an orange is an orange.
Said differently, if the Constitution defines “whoever” and/or specific offices and/or employees of the government as having to be qualified and/or not disqualified from holding public office – and they aren’t or weren’t qualified and/or were and/or are disqualified from holding public office, and/or concealed the same to deceive the government to obtain money and/or something of value – and/or if the Constitution defines specific behaviors or duties for specific offices and/or employees – and those offices and/or employees don’t/didn’t behave in that manner, and/or concealed the same to deceive the government to obtain money and/or something of value – and/or if the Constitution requires that an oath to those specific behaviors be taken – and that oath to support the Constitution and/or rule of law is repeatedly violated, and/or this is concealed to deceive the government to obtain money and/or something of value – and/or in a manner that gives aid, comfort, and/or to adhere to enemies of the United States and/or an ongoing organized crime syndicate, and/or this is concealed to deceive the government to obtain money and/or something of value – then “whoever” that/those individual(s), they are only impersonating or pretending to be an officer, hold an office, and/or an employee of the United States under the authority of the United States, when their behavior, claims, the Constitution, other laws, and/or circumstances prove they are not, and thus proves instead that these violators of public trust must instead be treated like impersonators (bananas).
Accordingly, some of the fruits (occupiers of public offices and/or government employment) in the fruit bowl (the government) meant for oranges alone are bananas (illegitimately-occupying and/or illegitimately occupied public offices), and some are more well-rounded oranges (legitimately-occupying and/or legitimately occupied public offices), and the bananas and their illegitimate conduct need to be removed and voided, to not allow those not legitimately in government to make any change to the government towards a kleptocracy or overthrow by our enemies and organized crime, as fruits from the poisonous tree of illegitimacy (Trump, the GOP, the GOP SCOTUS majority, Aileen Cannon, and/or others) have been doing.
IMPERSONATION 18 U.S. Code § 912
According to Cornell Law, 18 U.S. Code § 912 - Impersonating an Officer or employee of the United States, “Whoever falsely assumes or pretends to be an officer or employee acting under the authority of the United States or any department, agency or officer thereof, and acts as such, or in such pretended character demands or obtains any money, paper, document, or thing of value, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.”
(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 742; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(1)(H), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2147.)
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/912
Breaking the same into the elements of law, impersonation first specifies “whoever”, which is what is known as absolute language or language without exception, and includes any and every living person in any role inside or outside of the government within or outside of the United States, including but not limited to any person claiming to be or have been a president, SCOTUS judge, any other judge, member of Congress, and/or other officers and employees of the government, but not limited to the same.
The next element of law is concerned with whoever “falsely assumes or pretends to be an officer or employee acting under the authority of the United States or any department, agency or officer thereof, and acts as such”.
This is where using the Constitution to define the definitions, oaths, qualifications, disqualifications, forfeiture, and scopes of duties of a president, SCOTUS judge, any other judge, member of Congress, and/or other officers and employees of the government is useful and important in building a constitutional case for the removal of officers and employees of the government who “falsely assume or pretend to be an officer or employee acting under the authority of the United States or any department, agency or officer thereof, and acts as such”, because if individuals aren’t or weren’t eligible for public office and concealed the same, disqualified themselves from public office and concealed the same, forfeited their public offices and concealed the same, violated their oaths or scope of office in any grave manner to help organized crime and/or enemies of the United States, failed to support the Constitution of the United States (which includes the rights of others) to give aid, comfort, or to adhere to enemies of the United States and/or organized crime, failed in any grave manner to perform required and not optional duties in service to the United States and its people in order to help give aid, comfort, or to adhere to enemies of the United States and/or organized crimes – then it can be very reasonably argued that these individuals are not defined by the Constitution as truly, truthfully, nor legitimately being the officers and employees they falsely claim or pretend to be, and thus by default they are “falsely” impersonating officers.
The “acting as such” language is also important, in that it establishes that those falsely claiming and pretending to be officers and employees of the United States may have “acted” as officers and employees of the United States as defined by the Constitution to further their false claims and pretending or impersonation, in the same manner that they may have “acted” in such a manner as to disqualify them, others, forfeit offices/employment, making them “false” officers and/or employees.
Additional important “whoever” language here is “under the authority of the United States or any department, agency or officer thereof”, which thus includes POTUS, SCOTUS, Congress, and all officers and employees, and/or others under the authority of the United States, where “whoever” may be found impersonating an officer or employee of the government, based on their conduct and claims when compared to constitutional definitions, the scope of their taken oaths, the nature of their qualifications, the nature of their disqualifications, their concealment of the same, the nature of the disqualifications of those appointing, nominating, and/or confirming them, their concealment of the same, the scope of their defined duties per the Constitution, any aid, comfort, or adhering they have made to enemies of the United States, and/or organized crime harming the United States. Said differently, “whoever” doesn’t specifically exclude nor frame POTUS, SCOTUS, nor Congress, nor anyone else “falsely acting” outside of the scope of their duties, oaths, the law/Constitution, qualification/forfeiture of office as exempt from impersonation, but rather places emphasis on “falsely acting”.
The last element of law for impersonation, the “pretended character demands or obtains any money, paper, document, or thing of value”, and where most to all officers and government employees obtain money or a thing of value, and so those falsely claiming or pretending to be officers and government employees who obtained money or a thing of value may include “whoever” pretended or are pretending to be POTUS, SCOTUS, other judges, members of Congress, and/or other officers or employees, and where again a comparison of the oaths of office for each, and the constitutional definition for the roles of each when compared to the actual claims and behavior of each, determines if what is expected (as defined by the oaths of office and the Constitution and other laws) from an officer or employee is what is delivered or actualized, and if the two are not the same, then they are different, and so it is the actual behavior and claims of an individual, when compared to the Constitutionally-defined and expected behavior and claims of an individual, which determines whether or not that individual is falsely claiming or pretending to be an officer or employee, or whether or not they are actually behaving and making claims a Constitutionally-defined officer or employee would make.
Here it is important to note that there are some discrepancies and debates as to who may or may not be considered an officer, but this doesn’t change the spirit of the law, in that what makes a claim false is the evidence that the claim is false, and/or no evidence that the claim can be true, and what constitutes pretending is deception meant to deceive others into believing one or more things, situations, or set of facts is/are true, when the evidence proves the same false.
Accordingly, given the ongoing organized crimes by Trump, the GOP, the GOP SCOTUS majority, Judge Cannon, and/or others, in this article we explore their eligibility or ineligibility for office, their disqualifications for office, their forfeiture of office, the disqualification of those appointing, nominating, and/or confirming them from office, their false claims in order to obtain money or a benefit from office, their violations of the Constitution and/or failure to support, and/or uphold the same in a manner that benefits enemies of the United States and/or organized crime, the violations of their Constitution-defined duties, their violations of their oaths of office, which collectively prove that they pretended and pretend to be, and/or falsely claimed and/or are claiming to be officers and/or employees of the United States, when they were and/or are not, resulting in their impersonation. We also explore the many different paths to remove these impersonators from the positions of trust they have repeatedly violated in a decision tree manner, which ultimately revealed they were impersonating officers and employees of the government prima facie.
The proverbial elephant in the room is that it has been well-established that Trump, the GOP, their SCOTUS majority, Judge Cannon, and/or others have been furthering all sorts of crimes and/or harm against the United States, our Constitution, and our people, and that they have been conspiring to RICO obstruct the same to give aid, comfort, and to adhere to enemies of the United States and/or to organized crime, and where a minority of the population supports the same, are ignorant of the same, have been deceived by the same, have been exploited by the same, have been defrauded by the same, have been stalked and threatened due to the same, and/or have been criminally and/or civilly-harmed by the same.
THE ONGOING UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND CRIMINAL CONDUCT AND FALSE CLAIMS OF DONALD TRUMP, THE GOP IN CONGRESS, THE GOP SCOTUS MAJORITY, JUDGE CANNON, AND/OR OTHERS IN SERVICE, AID, COMFORT, AND/OR ADHERENCE TO ENEMIES OF THE UNITED STATES AND/OR ONGOING ORGANIZED CRIME IS NOT THE SAME NOR SIMILAR WITH HOW THE CONSTITUTION DEFINES WHAT IS REQUIRED TO BECOME AND REMAIN POTUS, SCOTUS, ANY OTHER JUDGE, MEMBER OF CONGRESS, AND/OR OTHER OFFICERS AND/OR EMPLOYEES OF THE UNITED STATES, MAKING THEM CHARGEABLE IMPERSONATORS
By exploring the former and current self-dealing, corruption, and criminal conduct of some of these individuals is also important in establishing that they have failed to meet the constitutional and legal definitions of the nature of their offices and oaths to such an extent as to fail to argue that they are operating within the scope of their duties and oaths, and thus by default are operating outside of any employment or office protections otherwise afforded by the Constitution by those who actually support and subscribe to the same, making them impersonators.
More simply, they have violated the Constitution and even attacked, dismantled, eroded, perverted, and/or mischaracterized the nature and/or spirit of the same (meant to protect the greatest amount of people from being oppressed by a small group of self-serving dark triad personality types), and yet they are using the Constitution to prevent their removal, and where herein this article we argue that if they aren’t meeting the definition of their roles or qualifications required by the Constitution, then they are operating outside of those roles, and can’t be protected by the Constitution for operating outside of those roles, to not just protect those roles, but to protect the country and our people.
Using an analogy, if the Constitution-defined the roles, scope, duties, oaths, eligibility and qualifications of POTUS, SCOTUS, other judges, and Congress in the same manner as it describes the nature of a bowl of fruit (office holders), then an orange (an office holder) in that fruit bowl would largely be described in the Constitution as round, obliged to role downward on a gentle slope, orange in color, with a minimum and maximum circumference, with a white-yellow pith, and yellow-gray seeds or pits, with a sweet juicy and pulpy consistency, in such a manner that any reasonable person could read the constitution and immediately confirm the nature and existence of an orange in a fruit bowl.
No broccoli (impersonator of an orange) found in the fruit bowl would be able to convince anyone reading such a Constitution that the broccoli qualifies, is eligible to be, may serve as, resembles, is shaped like, is colored like, rolls like, tastes like, is defined by, and/or behaves like the Constitutional definition of an orange, because they are not one in the same, and if they are not one in the same, then they are different, and if they are different, the broccoli impersonating the orange would need to be removed from the bowl of fruits.
Similarly, anyone should be able to compare the Constitution-defined roles, scope, duties, oaths, eligibility and qualifications of POTUS, SCOTUS, other judges, Congress, and others to be able to readily and reasonably determine if they are one in the same, because if they are not the same, then they are different, are thus are something other than POTUS, SCOTUS, other judges, Congress, and others, and thus should be removed by law enforcement for impersonating POTUS, SCOTUS, other judges, Congress, and/or other officers and/or employees.
This of course differentiates the offices and employment positions from those acting in those offices, as officers, and/or as employees, and where the offices are defined by the Constitution and specify required conduct, and oaths regarding conduct, as a precursor to the offices, and/or employment, in what forms oral and/or written agreements, which if breached or subject of fraud, then there is no binding requirement by the government to continue with the oral and/or written agreement, which may be revoked by the government under contract law, and where the government may also sue for government fraud for false claims.
Similarly, by revisiting the constitutional eligibility qualifications, disqualifications, definitions, duties, scope, and oaths of POTUS, SCOTUS, and Congress and comparing the same to the behaviors and eligibility of Donald Trump, SCOTUS, other judges, and Congress, what becomes clear in an excessive manner is that many former and some current POTUS, SCOTUS, other judges, and/or members of Congress haven’t and don’t meet the constitutionally-defined eligibility qualifications, definitions, duties, scope, and oaths of POTUS, SCOTUS, other judges, and/or Congress, and in such an apparent and provable manner as to make the prima facie argument that these individuals simply weren’t and/or aren’t POTUS, SCOTUS, other judges, and/or Congress, based on their conduct before and/or during their occupation of office.
By revisiting the constitutional eligibility qualifications, disqualifications, definitions, duties, scope, and oath of POTUS, SCOTUS, and Congress and comparing the same to the behaviors and eligibility of Donald Trump, SCOTUS, and Congress, what becomes clear in an excessive manner beyond a reasonable doubt is that Trump, the GOP SCOTUS majority, and the bulk of the GOP in Congress have in an ongoing manner failed to meet eligibility qualifications, have engaged in disqualifying behavior, forfeiting behavior, before and after “taking” office, and they have failed to honor their oaths of office, and they have failed to perform duties they were mandated by the constitution to perform, and in such an excessive pattern of abuse to the American people and government as to call into honest question whether or not they can properly be defined by the Constitution as POTUS, SCOTUS, and members of Congress, versus individuals engaged in ongoing organized criminal behavior, well outside the scope of the constitutional definitions and thus well outside protections of their offices.
More simply, exploring how the constitution defines these roles and comparing the eligibility, ineligibility, and conduct of individuals will prove their conduct not to be consistent with supporting the constitution but more consistent with them being enemies of the United States seeking to erode, destroy, dismantle, distort, pervert, and mischaracterize the Constitution, the United States government, and our people, in order to serve other enemies of the United States and an ongoing organized crime syndicate, defining them more as impersonators of officers and employees of the United States than actual ones.
The reason this is important is that there is evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that Donald Trump and the GOP were not eligible for public office by the 2016 elections, and their conduct thereafter further disqualified them from public office due to their treason with U.S. enemy Russia, elections fraud with U.S. enemy Russia, concealment of government documents to give aid, comfort, and adhere to U.S. enemy Russia, 14th Amendment violations, and where some of the fruits of the poisonous tree of their illegitimacy included appointing, nominating, and confirming a GOP SCOTUS majority, and other judges, like Judge Aileen Cannon, who have since repeatedly RICO-corrupted their public offices, including but not limited to adhering, comforting, and aiding U.S. enemies, specifically but not limited to Russia, and agents of Russia, Donald Trump, the Republican Party, GOP, RNC, and/or their tributaries. As specified later herein this article, this does not create a constitutional crisis because there are more ways than impeachment to remove those corrupting and usurping public offices, as specified by the constitution and U.S. laws.
Career criminal, Donald Trump, has asked the SCOTUS majority and Judge Aileen Cannon – who Trump and the GOP weren’t lawfully allowed to appoint, nominate, nor confirm due to their treason and elections fraud conspiracy with Russia before the 2016 elections – to grant Trump delays from prosecution, unreasonable accommodations, and/or immunity from crimes that otherwise would made him or anyone else ineligible for public office – and thus ineligible to create a SCOTUS majority – in what is known in logic, reasoning, and critical thinking as the fallacy of a circular argument.
More simply, Trump is asking SCOTUS and Judge Aileen Cannon to act as his personal criminal defense attorneys, and they have, for the purpose of allowing him to evade criminal prosecution for the crimes that made him and the GOP ineligible to create a SCOTUS majority and to appoint Aileen Cannon (but not limited to the same), and in violation of the established “first principle” of constitutional law, or Nemo judex in causa sua, no person may be their own judge.
Given that Trump, the GOP, and their allies have threatened to “come after”, “prosecute”, “sue”, remove “birthrights” for, “destroy”, “execute”, “slit throats”, and/or other harm U.S. law enforcement, U.S. military personnel, journalists, academics, whistleblowers, and others that can hold them accountable with facts and law – then examining the legitimacy, interests, conflicts of interest, and history of unlawful conduct in conspiracy with others for anyone who can rule on a Trump case, or who has the ability to impeach (or recall) government officials who have violated the scope of their offices, oaths, and employment protections – in turn protects the government of the United States and our people, from being overthrow by enemies of the United States furthering an ongoing organized crime syndicate on behalf of enemies of the United States.
FRIVOLOUS VERSUS LEGAL CONSPIRACIES
Here is a good place to introduce the difference between frivolous and legal conspiracies.
Legal conspiracies, for example civil conspiracies, and criminal conspiracies, depend on facts and on what are known as the elements of law, which are based on legal precedents, known as stare decisis, a fortiori, and a priori.
In fact, legal conspiracies require thresholds of evidence or facts, where a civil conspiracy requires a preponderance of evidence, and a criminal conspiracy requires evidence beyond a reasonable doubt, and where defrauding the government requires much less evidence, facts or evidence which must be compared to the elements of law, their sources, and their authorities in order to come to reasonable, standardized, and predictable conclusions.
Conversely, frivolous conspiracies are often void or weak on facts and/or not supported by law, and where often frivolous conspiracies are used by legal conspirators to obstruct justice for the victims of their crimes, a type of last resort defense, along with attempts to attack the credibility of the person presenting the evidence, again due to the weak or absent facts and the law supporting the conspirators didn’t commit the crimes – a way to manufacture, even if fictitiously, a weak or frivolous defense, which is readily debunked with actual evidence and law – provided that no RICO obstruction agents are involved in the process.
Very unfortunately, the two are often confounded or confused, where legal conspiracies are often harmed by claims of frivolous conspiracy, and where frivolous conspirators are often those accused of crimes and/or their proxies, who with little to no fact nor legal basis dismiss accusations of criminal and civil conspiracies by labeling frivolous.
An excellent example of this occurred before and after the 2020 elections within the United States, when Jeffrey Epstein’s and Russia’s Donald Trump and GOP conspired to a criminal conspiracy to overthrow the United States by employing a frivolous conspiracy that the elections had been stolen from them, while trying to steal the elections themselves.
Their frivolous conspiracy regarding a criminal conspiracy, which was not based in fact nor law, was debunked by over 60 different courts, judges, juries, sets of attorneys, evidence, and law.
Since then, Donald Trump, the GOP, and others have been charged with criminal conspiracies and have been sued for civil conspiracies, based on fact and law, for which they don’t seem to have any evidence or law that can help prove they didn’t further criminal and civil conspiracies.
This has left them with two defenses, (1) RICO obstruction and corruption of SCOTUS, in overt furtherance of the criminal conspiracy by U.S. enemy Russia, which started by at least 11/02/2015 per the emails from Felix Sater to Michael Cohen and (2) the employment of widespread frivolous conspiracies that the legal system is being weaponized against them in witch-hunts or frivolous conspiracies, without presenting any substantive evidence supporting their false claims, in a bid to deceive others into voting for Trump to renew the carnage against the American government and our people, as an agent of Russia.
Now that much of the evidence and testimony that would otherwise convict them and hold them liable has been made public, they are really left with only one defense, and that is to ask the GOP SCOTUS majority Trump and the GOP installed, to violate stare decisis, a priori, a fortiori, precedents, precedences, the fact pattern, and the law, to help these enemies of the United States not only evade accountability for their crimes against America and Americans, but to allow them to run for office so that they can do more of the same or worse, specifying they are going to kill, purge, deport, arrest, and sue anyone they perceive as having tried to hold their ongoing organized crime syndicate accountable.
Accordingly, it is exceedingly important to examine the legitimacy of the current leaders of the United States government, specifically the legitimacy of SCOTUS, other judges involved in the criminal and civil cases of Donald Trump, and the legitimacy of Congress, to ensure that the laws of the United States are upheld and faithfully executed, to protect the rights of the United States, Americans, and the due process rights of Donald Trump, the GOP, and their criminal and civil conspirators.
Because there is evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that a large part of Congress, SCOTUS, and the judiciary have not legitimately been elected, appointed, nominated, and/or confirmed, then now is the time to address any evidence of illegitimacy of SCOTUS, POTUS, Congress, and the judiciary, to not overtly further a conspiracy to keep illegitimate leaders in the government, to not allow them to illegitimately make any changes to the government, in order to move forward with as legitimate a government as possible, and where the same is both a very reasonable and very important national security academic and legal exercise, because of how radical Jeffrey Epstein’s Donald Trump and Russia’s Republican Party have become, to the extent that they have advocated for the destruction and execution of U.S. law enforcement and U.S. military personnel, and the arrest and lawsuits against journalists, and the ending of birthright and deporting of their perceived enemies, and where the public record proves beyond a reasonable doubt that Russian, Saudi, Iranian, North Korean, ISIS, Hamas, Hezbollah, Syrian, Chinese, and/or enemy agents – Donald Trump and the GOP – have been operating an ongoing criminal conspiracy to overtly further treason, sedition, insurrection, terrorism, elections fraud, RICO, obstruction of justice, and the stalking and intimidation of witnesses, prosecutors, judges, leaders of government, former leaders of government, in a manner that now threatens existence, integrity, reputation, and safety of the United States and its people – as agents of Russian, Saudi, Iranian, North Korean, ISIS, Hamas, Hezbollah, Syrian, Chinese, and/or enemy agents would do.
Accordingly, the only two defenses these career criminals have is either the employment of frivolous conspiracies to coverup their criminal and civil conspiracies and evade accountability for the same, and second, to overtly further or engage in new or ongoing criminal and civil conspiracies to coverup their former criminal and civil conspiracies.
Accordingly, to prove their criminal and civil conspiracies, it is important to address the frivolous conspiracies they have used to get to this point, and to obstruct justice for the same, and it is important to examine the legitimacy of SCOTUS, POTUS, Congress, and the judiciary, to determine if Trump’s request to judges, including SCOTUS, are legitimate or not, and to determine if Trump may use certain defenses, or not.
For example, Trump isn’t legitimately asking SCOTUS to defend the immunity of POTUS (and this Trump) for his conduct, if he was never legitimately eligible to be POTUS, and where at least some of SCOTUS can’t legitimately determine the same, because doing so is the same as them determining whether or not their own appointments by Trump (and others) were legitimate, and where the 14th Amendment Section 1 prohibits them from unlawfully defending themselves and Trump, because they all need to be treated in an equal manner under the law as anyone else, and SCOTUS can’t destroy the rule of law they swore to uphold, in order to disregard the laws that would find them ineligible to rule on their own ineligibility, and the eligibility of those who appointed, nominated, and/or confirmed them, because doing so would in a circular or illogical and unreasonable legal argument make the GOP’s SCOTUS majority the judges of their own legitimacy, in violation of Nema judex in causa sua, where no person may serve as their own judge, which is precisely what Trump is asking SCOTUS to violate, in further violation of stare decisis, a priori, and a fortiori, or legal precedent.
More simply, Trump is asking SCOTUS to violate legal precedent by RICO obstructing like getaway drivers of a bank/elections heist so that Trump won’t be prosecuted for some of the most serious crimes in United States history, and his bait is that by violating all sorts of RICO obstruction and other laws and precedence, SCOTUS has the opportunity to make legitimate their illegitimate appointments, nominations, and confirmations post-ongoing GOP treason conspiracies some of these judges advanced, by violating the law, legal precedent to use the law unlawfully to do so.
It would be unlawlul, illegitimate, and unreasonable to allow those not eligible for office to determine who may or may not be eligible for office and who may or may not be held accountable by the laws they are violating to do the same.
Res ipsa loquitur malum in se, this naturally-evil situation speaks for itself.
VIOLATION OF SCOTUS’ AND COMMON LAW’S NEMO JUDEX IN CAUSA SUA – “NO PERSON MAY BE THEIR OWN JUDGE” – NOT POTUS, NOR ANY MEMBER OF SCOTUS, NOR ANY OTHER JUDGE, NOR ANY MEMBER OF CONGRESS – EACH OF WHOM REGARDLESS OF OTHER AVENUES TO REMOVE THEM FROM OFFICE MAY NOT COMMIT CRIMES AGAINST THE UNITED STATES AND OUR PEOPLE, EVEN IF THEY SAY THEY CAN, EVEN IF THEY GRANT THEMSELVES OR THEIR CONSPIRATORS, FINANCIERS, CLIENTS, AND/OR ASSOCIATES IMMUNITY, BECAUSE THE SAME VIOLATES THE 14TH AMENDMENT SECTION 1 AND MORE
Even more simply, without the evidence required beyond a reasonable doubt of his innocence – in the face of evidence beyond a reasonable doubt of his guilt and the guilt of his coconspirators, and having provable violated many different elements of law that would both bar Trump from immunity and from office – Trump’s criminal defense depends on an ongoing qui pro quo, RICO, bribery, extortion, obstruction of justice, and/or blackmail conspiracy, where the judges he and the GOP weren’t legitimately allowed to install into public offices, are now using those offices to legitimize themselves, in a manner that makes them their own judges as to whether or not they were legitimately appointed, nominated, and/or confirmed, in violation of “Nemo judex in causa sua (also written as nemo [est] judex in sua causa, in propria causa, in re sua or in parte sua) is a Latin brocard that translates as "no one is judge in their own case".
Originating from Roman law, it was crystallized into a phrase by Edward Coke in the 17th century and is now widely regarded as a fundamental tenet of natural justice and constitutionalism.[1]
It states that no one can judge a case in which they have an interest. In some jurisdictions, the principle is strictly enforced to avoid any appearance of bias, even when there is none: as Lord Chief Justice Hewart laid down in Rex v. Sussex Justices, "Justice must not only be done, but must also be seen to be done".[2][3]
The Latin brocard nemo judex in causa sua has its origins in the Roman legal tradition and is codified within the Corpus Juris Civilis. In 376 AD, an imperial decree established the principle that "no one shall decide his own case or interpret the law for himself" (neminem sibi esse iudicem vel ius sibi dicere debere) (Code 3.5.1).
Additionally, the Digest records Julianus's statement that "it is unfair for someone to be the judge of their own affairs" (iniquum est aliquem suae rei iudicem fieri) (Digest 5.1.15-17).[4]
From these Roman sources, the principle has endured into modern times and can be traced in Martin Luther's 1526 work Whether Soldiers, Too, Can Be Saved (Niemand sol sein selbs Richter seyn, meaning "no one should be their own judge"),[5] in Ulrich Zwingli's In Exodum (1527)[6] in Jean Bodin's The Six Books of the Republic (1576)[7] and in Hobbes's Leviathan (1651) ("And seeing every man is presumed to do all things in order to his own benefit, no man is a fit Arbitrator in his own cause").[4]
In the 17th century, the English jurist Edward Coke turned the idea into a phrase when he wrote that "it is a maxim in law aliquis non debet esse iudex in propria causa".[4] Coke used the principle to instruct the king that he could not personally judge a dispute between himself and his subject.[8]
Moreover, In the famous Bonham's Case of 1610 Coke ruled that the College of Physicians could not sit as judges in a case to which they were a party,[9][10] and he was understood also to have affirmed that that the principle could not be overridden by statutory provision.[8]
Since then, the rule against bias has been recognised as a fundamental tenet of natural justice in the common law tradition and a cornerstone of constitutionalism.[1]The maxim has been invoked by the United States Supreme Court in various cases, such as the 1798 case Calder v. Bull ("a law that makes a man a Judge in his own cause [...] is against all reason and justice") and the 1974 case Arnett v. Kennedy ("we might start with a first principle: 'No man shall be a judge in his own cause.' Bonham's Case, 8 Co. 114a, 118a, 77 Eng. Rep. 646, 652 (1610)").”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nemo_iudex_in_causa_sua
Accordingly, per Common Law, and per earlier SCOTUS rulings, it is an established “first principle” that “no one shall be a judge in their own cause”, and that this “ rule against bias has been recognised as a fundamental tenet of natural justice in the common law tradition and a cornerstone of constitutionalism.”
Accordingly, anyone seeking to violate this “first principle”, would be waging war against the United States, its rule of law, the Constitution, and/or natural justice.
Here it is important to note that SCOTUS and Judge Cannon could also rule against Trump – in this matter where they have a person interest – and that this would also be a violation of Nemo iudex in causa sua.
Accordingly, it is a perversion of justice and the perversion of “the first principle” in constitutional law, for any judge or member of congress with an interest in the outcome of any case or impeachment to rule or vote on the same, as they would in effect be ruling on their own interests, serving as their own judge to advance their own interests – as a judge or member of congress seeking to use the law unlawfully to legitimize themselves as judges or members of congress (their own interest) would, if they were unlawfully-elected by not being qualified for public office, and/or if they were not qualified to hold public office, and/or if they were not qualified for but instead required to forfeit public office – but where they acted as their own judges to conceal government documents proving the same from entering the body of evidence, in order to rule in favor of their own interests, and especially a perversion of the law if they co-conspired with those they were charged with judging, which would in effect make them the judges of their own misconduct.
By Trump asking SCOTUS to rule on Trump’s immunity for his crimes within office or within “the outer limits of his office”, and by Trump asking SCOTUS to allow Trump to remain eligible despite having violated at least three bodies of law (insurrection, treason, and concealment of documents) that made Trump ineligible, and which required Trump, the GOP, and/or SCOTUS to forfeit their offices, Trump is asking the SCOTUS majority that he and the GOP were not lawfully allowed to appoint, nominate, and/or confirm to legitimize their own illegitimacy, in violation of Nemo iudex in causa sua, and thus in violation of “the first principle” of constitutional law, which if they rule on either way, and they have already committed to ruling on the same in April 2024, would be SCOTUS acting outside the scope of their offices, outside the scope of “the first principle” of constitutional law, outside the scope of their employment protections, immunity, and/or other benefits, which are already fruits from the poisonous tree of illegitimacy.
With respect to Trump asking for SCOTUS to provide him immunity from some of the most serious crimes ever committed against the United States, including for crimes on the outer limit of being in office – it is important to note that Trump Organization led by Trump and Trump Tower tenants had furthered a conspiracy with U.S. enemy Russia BEFORE Trump ran for office, so well beyond the outer limit of the immunity of a POTUS.
More specifically, on March 3, 2023, Trump specified that he knew of an investigation into him, the GOP, Russia, and/or others BEFORE he ran for POTUS office, which he specified was a “witch-hunt”, and which www.uprightsnews.com has since elucidated (in the Crossfire Hurricane Origins section) to the government and public was the truer origins of Crossfire Hurricane – a 2013-2014 CA/Sacramento GOP/RNC and Russian conspiracy to stalk, cyberstalk, cyberattack, unlawfully seize, lynch, RICO obstruct, and distribute a pro se relator’s qui tam civil complaint investigation into Russia, the GOP, oligarchs operating in Russia, Trump Organization, and Trump Tower tenant families (in the context that Trump Tower’s Trump family, Paul Manafort, Michael Cohen, Kellyann Conway, and others are who conspired with Russia and agents of Russia before the 2016 elections to “engineer” Trump and the GOP into power).
“This is Political Persecution and Election Interference at the highest level in history. From the time I came down the golden escalator at Trump Tower, and even before I was sworn in as your President of the United States, the Radical Left Democrats - the enemy of the hard-working men and women of this Country - have been engaged in a Witch-Hunt”.
usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2023-03-30/read-trump-statement-on-grand-jury-indictment
But as https://www.uprightsnews.com/crossfire-hurricane-origins can and does prove, the “witch-hunt” could not have been Crossfire Hurricane, as that only began in May to July 2016, whereas when Trump came down the escalator at Trump Tower, during which time he was aware of an investigation or “witch-hunt”, this was a full year earlier 06/16/2015, and thus it was impossible for Trump to know of an investigation into him a year in advance, and so Trump knew of some other investigation into him, which UpRights News clearly elucidates is the CA/Sacramento GOP/RNC and Russian stalked and lynched qui tam investigation by a pro se relator acting on behalf of the government investigating the GOP, Russia, oligarchs operating in Russia, Trump Organization, and Trump Tower Tenants between at least January 2013 and June 16, 2015, and where Trump organization had furthered that conspiracy by circa June 22, 2007, and Russia had furthered the same by at least October 20, 2013, so again well before Trump ran for office, and thus well beyond and well outside the outer limits of Presidential immunity.
Though the official Crossfire Hurricane origins narrative is that the same begins as early as May 2016 through the end of July 2016, and though Christopher Steele had started working with the FBI by October 30, 2013, the pro se relator’s qui tam civil complaint investigation into Russia, the GOP, oligarchs operating in Russia, Trump Organization, and Trump Tower tenant families, but not limited to the same, was well on its way by January 2013, and where the Russian Federation cyberstalked and cyberattacked that investigation on behalf of the government by October 20, 2013.
Furthermore, and now considering things in retrospect, sometime between 2012 and 2014, the broadest time period for this consideration, the author of the pro se relator’s qui tam civil complaint investigation into Russia, the GOP, oligarchs operating in Russia, Trump Organization, and Trump Tower tenant families, but not limited to the same, had contacted a federal judge in Sacramento who was an acquaintance, via a mutual friend who was in law enforcement and had intelligence community, with a “hypothetical” and as a former Fortune 500 research management professional, who was a law school student, at the same time he was a graduate business professor researching organized crime and public corruption, but what he communicated to the federal judge wasn’t a hypothetical, and no real names were used in the hypothetical, and the author of the same signed off the same as “Brother Q (Anonymous)”, many years before the rise of Qanon, which was born out of child porn chat sites 4chan, 8chan, and 8kun, which 2015-2017 and 2020-2021 traitor and/or insurrectionist Mike Flynn then became the spokesperson for in tandem with the 2016 and 2020 Trump campaigns, and where per www.epsteinsblackbook.com and the 2016 lawsuit by Katie Johnson, Trump and his family were significantly named as clients, financiers, associates, and VIP in the two operations contact books of Jeffrey Epstein available to the public.
The hypothetical channeled to the judge largely mirrored the core messaging of Qanon many years earlier, with significant deviations.
The hypothetical was concerned with how to move a pro se qui tam investigation forward and to whom, and specified the same revolved around a cabal of global elites (who the author and his family were “insiders” and victims to), who had been involved in the murder and endangerment of children in California in illegal medical experiments (and where as an insider and silenced and retaliated against whistlerblower for the same against a government contractor, the author knew the experiments were illegal due to his lawsuit studies, and because he was certified in human medical research at Stanford University and University of California Schools of Medicine and was certified as a Principle Investigator for Behavioral Research at the University of Miami), and where Cal-OSHA in part verified the unlawfulness of the operations, specifying that there was a reasonable probability that the operations (managing the illegal medical experiments murdering and endangering children) could foreseeably result in serious injury or death in a for cause investigation initiated by the author, whose own life was also threatened.
The illegal medical experiments used children from one of the poorest regions of California as human blood mines, bleeding out the children much, much more than their own phlebotomy protocols were known to be “safe”, and that blood was used by the company the author worked for, who the DOJ had specified three years earlier was “the most corrupt company in U.S. history”, to test six different medical devices, which per FDA regulations made the same medical research requiring human protections protocols that were not implemented, and as a result at least one child was killed.
The facility the author worked for, a Fortune 500 company and government contractor, was one that was largely privately owned and/or controlled but publicly traded, and was largely owned and/or controlled by foreign and domestic swiss and European oligarchs operating in Russia and across the United States, who were business partners with a Trump Tower tenant family, and in the context that Trump’s family was heavily named and associated with Jeffrey Epstein, which will become important in the next few paragraphs.
The lethal facility largely owned and/or controlled by the small families of foreign and domestic billionaires was financed by the administrations of the GOP, G.W. Bush, and Robert Mueller, and yet when the author made some 30-40 estimated whistleblower disclosures to the government to protect even more children and employees from being murdered and endangered, and made evidence available to them for criminal prosecutions, almost none of those whistleblower complaints were addressed, with a few exceptions, and this makes sense in retrospect, because the (GOP’s unconstitutionally-stolen 2000 elections) administration of the GOP, G.W. Bush, and Robert Mueller had financed the illegal medical experiments of foreign billionaires murdering and endangering poor children in California, and they wanted no light on that situation, in violation of their oaths to support the Constitution and in violation of the scope of their offices, nor did they want much light on Jeffrey Epstein’s clients, financiers, and associates, which included Trump, resulting in the RICO obstruction of those child victims also, within 2-4 years of the RICO obstruction of the illegal medical experiments, in violation of their oaths to support the Constitution and in violation of the scope of their offices, and so forming a pattern or nature of RICO obstructing serious harm to children to RICO obstruct for the kidnappers, rapists, sex traffickers, experimenters, exploiters, and murderers of children in order to protect billionaire, and where both these RICO obstruction conspiracies were linked to Trump Tower tenants and their families, and both Trump and the Swiss oligarchs operating in Russia had established ties to Russia.
As a result of trying to protect murdered and endangered children, himself, and others from being killed by foreign billionaires being funded by the administrations of GOP, G.W. Bush, and Robert Mueller, the author of the 2013 and 2014 Russian Federation and Sacramento/CA GOP/RNC stalked and lynched qui tam, became the ongoing target of preemptive defamation, witness intimidation, victim intimidation, government informant intimidation, and where this was magnified by no fewer than three California tech companies operated and/or owned by three of Jeffrey Epstein’s known clients, financiers, and/or associates who owned and operated search engines, who conspired with East Bay Express to preemptivelt defame the author of the qui tam, a protected whistleblower, in print, online (for over a decade), and privately through employement network intel sharing, to functionally end and/or irreparably harm the gainful employment of someone who tried to protect American children, others, and himself from being murdered and/or serious harmed due to lethal operations of foreign billionaires, operating the most corrupt company in U.S. history per the DOJ. Jeffrey Epstein’s clients, financiers, and/or associates, the Trump family’s Trump Organization were among those who retaliated against the protected whistleblower, the author of the qui tam, by circa June 22, 2007, but in retrospect that’s perfectly explained, because Trump literally lived in Trump Tower with a family that was business partners with the Swiss billionaires that were funded by the administrations of the GOP, G.W. Bush, and Robert Mueller.
Returning to the Sacramento federal judge Brother “Q” (Anonymous) – the author of the qui tam – had contacted for help bring justice to murdered and endangered children, a seriously defrauded U.S. government (about $40 billion), the author, and others – the author did not know that this judge was installed by the GOP, and due to their acquaintance, and his role as a federal judge, the author “trusted” the judge and former intelligence officer to help him bring justice to these murdered and endangered children by this cabal of global elites stealing blood from children in illegal medical experiments.
The very similar Qanon narrative born out of pedophile chat and share sites 4chan, 8chan, and 8kun many years later was that a cabal of global elites (true), linked to child sex traffickers (true), had taken the blood of children (true), were democrats (false from the perspective of the author of the qui tam, who is a swing voter, but who in his Jeffrey Epstein research project since then did find that Epstein had both Democrats and Republicans listed as clients, financiers, and/or associates in his books of contacts), and were eating children or drinking their blood (unconfirmed). Another similarly, is that “Q” from Qanon many years later was allegedly part of the intelligence community, in the context that both the author of the qui tam and his father had once worked for national defense in different capacities, including for FIVE EYES community.
In retrospect, the Russian and GOP stalked, lynched, RICO obstructed, intimidated, tampered with, and ongoing investigation of the author of the qui tam by September 21, 2014 (Lev Parnas’s attorney threatened Pence, Trump, and the GOP with this date after Parnas was arrested employing the lyrics, “do you remember, the 21st night of September” using a cryptic music video excerpt that all specified that the “stars” had “stolen” their darkness away, which is the night Sacramento/CA GOP lynched the author of the qui tam and seize a copy of his evolving investigation into Trump Organization, Trump Tower tenant families, the GOP, Russia, Russian oligarchs operating in Russia, and/or others), and thereafter, reinforces the Steele Dossier, which is likely why Trump, Barr, Durham, the GOP, and/or others needed to discredit Steele, and also pairs well with the reporting of attorney and journalist Dr. Seth Abramson, as well as Dr. Marcy Wheeler (journalist), as well as with the findings of former federal prosecutor Glen Kirschner’s public assessments, as well as with statements made by both CIA Directors Brennan and Hayden, as with the investigation of Robert Mueller.
Robert Mueller, who should have never been hand-picked to be the one to investigate Trump, Russia, and the GOP, if the lynched investigation of the author of the qui tam is the truer origins of Crossfire Hurricane, given his administration is who funded the illegal medical experiments killing children linked to Trump Tower tenants and oligarchs operating in Russia, issued a heavily redacted report, amassed an alleged 18 billion pages of evidence (obstructive for any single investigator), which was already limited in scope by the Trump-GOP-Russia Mayflower Hotel (April 27, 2016, the birthday of the author of the qui tam) meeting’s Jeff Session’s Rod Rosenstein (who hand-picked Mueller), and Mueller report was mischaracterized and heavily obstructed by Rosenstein and Barr, acting as the personal defense attorneys for enemies of the United States (per John Durham hand-picked by Barr) and Jeffrey Epstein’s organized crime syndicate.
Mueller’s investigation was limited in scope by Barr and/or Rosenstein, and obfuscated by Barr and Durham (who eventually affirmed Trump and the GOP did conspire with the enemy of the United States Russia in a treason and elections fraud conspiracy). Mueller’s investigation has two parts, Part I and Part II, and where the lynched and evolving investigation of the author of the qui tam would make for an excellent baker’s dozen cooking tray to hold the same, within which to hold the investigations of Crossfire Hurricane, the Mueller Investigation, the Steele Dossier, many government investigations and prosectutions, and Special Counsel Jack Smith’s investigation, the SDNY investigations, but not limited to the same.
Accordingly, again, only RICO organized crime, corruption, and obstruction of justice by an illegitimately-installed SCOTUS majority, the fruit of a treason and elections fraud conspiracy with U.S. enemy, and frivolous conspiracies or unhinged lethal theories not based in precedent can prevent Trump from being prosecuted and allow him to steal another election, and where as discussed herein this article, that scenario is more likely than not given the low moral fiber and criminal proclivity of a majority of SCOTUS justices, also specified herein this article.
More simply, Trump, the GOP, SCOTUS, and Judge Cannon are going to fail if they argue that Trump’s immunity goes beyond the time he was unlawfully in office – and that immunity is a Presidential immunity only, and within the scope of POTUS, which doesn’t include committing crimes to coverup illegitimacy of POTUS, SCOTUS, other judges, and/or congress – and where Trump and the GOP weren’t qualified due to their concealment of government documents (the lynched qui tam), elections fraud, and treason with U.S. enemy Russia, but not limited to the same.
Here it is important to note that the SCOTUS majority installed by enemies of the United States could have chosen to avoid being their own judges, but instead chose to aid, comfort, and adhere to enemies of the United States, specifically, Russia, Trump, the GOP, insurrectionists, and/or fake electors, in order to unlawfully legitimize the SCOTUS majority, and to help other members of organized crime and enemies of the United States evade prosecution, and where their intent for this RICO, obstruction, insurrection, treason, sedition, and/or elections fraud crime is already proven, because they could have chosen to stay lower court rulings, which found that Trump had committed insurrection, and thus disqualified himself, but instead of staying the same, they chose to take up the same in order to RICO obstruct for Trump and other members of organized crime is thus a reasonable inference, due to a failure not to hear cases where states have in more than one case disqualified Trump from the ballot.
The Supreme Court of Colorado ruled ““A majority of the court holds that Trump is disqualified from holding the office of president under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment,” the court wrote in its 4-3 decision …
“We do not reach these conclusions lightly,” wrote the court’s majority. “We are mindful of the magnitude and weight of the questions now before us. We are likewise mindful of our solemn duty to apply the law, without fear or favor, and without being swayed by public reaction to the decisions that the law mandates we reach.””
Accordingly, the intent of the GOP SCOTUS majority unlawfully-installed by Trump is proven by their intent to hear the challenge to the Supreme Court of Colorado, instead of refusing to rule on the same, to give aid, comfort, and to adhere to enemies of the United States, and yet established constitutional law prohibits Trump from holding office, as found by the Supreme Court of Colorado, and the GOP SCOTUS majority and Aileen Cannon have furthered Felix Sater’s, Putin’s, Russia’s, and the GOP’s ongoing treason, elections fraud, RICO, and obstruction of justice conspiracy to “engineer” Trump and the GOP into power, in a manner that violates Section 1 of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution by not holding Trump, the GOP, and many others (including but not limited to Bill Barr, John Durham, and Rod Rosenstein) accountable in an equal manner under the law, “nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. Equal protection is equivalent to, or implies, the principle that no one is above the law.”
Similarly, it is an established fact that Trump stole top secret documents from the government, against the advice of counsel who told him the same would result in legal troubles and so he knew it was a crime, and he leaked some of that top secret information to others, specifically to Anthony Pratt, who then shared the same with former heads of a foreign state, and Trump conspired with others to conceal and destroy government documents, which Trump is asking the GOP SCOTUS majority he wasn’t allowed to installed, to wish away by using the law unlawfully – because concealing and/or destroying government documents disqualifies individuals from office, which is why Trump’s Judge Cannon is delaying the stolen documents trial in a bid to delay the same into another stolen election, followed by a self-pardon per Trump, making him his own judge of his own crimes.
Trump and the GOP also conspired to a treason and elections fraud conspiracy with Russia, before the 2016 elections, and after, which further disqualified Trump and the GOP from being able to hold the offices they used to appoint the SCOTUS majority and Judge Cannon.
Accordingly, not only are the GOP SCOTUS majority and Judge Cannon (but not limited to the same) illegitimately installed – by the criminal and disqualifying fruits by enemies of the United States, who were not eligible to hold public office as a result – but now SCOTUS and Judge Cannon have conspired with, adhered to, comforted, and/or aided enemies of the United States to allow enemies of the United States to evade criminal prosecution, in a bid to use the law unlawfully to legitimize their own illegitimate public offices, and those office who illegitimately installed them.
Res ipsa loquitur malum in se, this natural evil speaks for itself.
For these reasons, but not limited to the same, it is of paramount importance to revisit the legitimacy of Trump, the legitimacy of SCOTUS, and the legitimacy of Congress, to prevent an illegitimate government “engineered”, appointed, nominated, and/or confirmed by enemies of the United States from unlawfully using the law to confer their own legitimacy, which was probably born out of illegitimacy.
HARVARD UNIVERSITY LAW AND OTHERS SUMMARIZE AND QUESTION THE LEGITIMACY OF SCOTUS, AND WITH JUST CAUSE
“When asked at his 2005 Senate confirmation hearings about the legal doctrine of stare decisis, or adherence to the Supreme Court’s prior rulings, then-Judge John Roberts responded: “[p]recedent plays an important role in promoting stability and evenhandedness.” He also explained that, when weighing whether to overturn an important decision like Roe v. Wade, justices need to consider many factors, before adding that “I do think the considerations about the Court’s legitimacy are critically important.”
Seventeen years later, in the wake of a series of controversial rulings overturning longstanding precedents related to abortion rights, environmental protection, the separation between church and state, and more, Roberts seemed to strike a slightly different tone. Appearing at a conference in September, he argued that while the high court’s “decisions have always been subject to intense criticism,” often by its own members, disagreement with an opinion “is not a basis for questioning the legitimacy of the Supreme Court.”
https://hls.harvard.edu/today/does-overturning-precedent-undermine-the-supreme-courts-legitimacy/
The different between now and 17 years ago, is that 17 years ago the internet was barely out of the cradle, and so much more information has been added to the same in an exponential manner, and so much more redacted and classified documents have been released, and so many more investigative journalism and government investigations have elucidated an obstructive volume of information for any single investigator.
And where since the GOP SCOTUS majority was appointed, nominated, and confirmed, and pledged, affirmed, and/or subscribed to legal precedent, there have been rampant or ongoing accounts of GOP SCOTUS justices and/or their family members having furthered high crimes and/or misdemeanors which require as a matter of constitutional law their removal from office.
For example, Justice Roberts’ wife profited off more than $10 million dollars with others bringing cases before SCOTUS, “Jane Roberts, the wife of Chief Justice John Roberts, made more than $10 million in commissions over an eight-year stretch where she matched top lawyers with elite law firms—including some that had cases before the Supreme Court—according to documents obtained by Insider, as concerns grow about justices possibly having unreported conflicts of interest.”.
Similarly, Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas, have each received bribes from billionaires after SCOTUS unlawfully legalized bribery of government officials before, during, and/or after every election cycle, and thus SCOTUS acted as their serve as their own judges to decriminal their high crimes and misdemeanors of bribery thereafter, but not limited to the same.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2023/06/22/supreme-court-corruption-alito/
Furthermore, Alito was installed after (1) Iran Contras’ Reagan and G.H.W. Bush’s GOP’S SCOTUS stole the 2000 elections (which Roberts, Kavanaugh, and Barret helped unlawfully overthrow with Thomas, and have seen been rewarded with SCOTUS positions, and have been using the same to obstruct justice for ongoing treasonous organized crime, but not limited to the same), and (2) Alito was installed after the 9/11 treason conspiracy against the United States, where shortly after the stolen 2000 election under the GOP, the GOP’s Bush and Cheney administrations called off the air guard protecting the United States from the likes of 9/11, overtly furthering the Saudi conspiracy to attack America.
Not surprisingly, other 9/11 conspirators included Trump and Kushner family Saudi business partners, and Russia. Anyone researching this bunch, soon comes to the conclusion that the same people, families, organizations, and countries are repeatedly implicated in the worst crimes against America and our people, with little exception and plenty of overlap, and where on 9/11 Trump bragged that now his building was the “tallest” in the area, which was also false or another big lie. Trump and the Bush administration would then take turns RICO obstructing justice for the victims on 9/11, many of whom were first responders, and their families. Trump and Kushner families have since received between $2 and $3 billion by the architects of 9/11 after RICO obstructing the release of documents implicating the Saudis, released by President Biden and Vice President Harris (who separately championed anti-lynching laws in California), and where RICO obstructing for enemies of the United States funding global terrorism against America and its allies is like a getaway driver for those crimes, in such a manner that makes them as guilty as the terrorists and U.S. enemies they aided, comforted, and adhered to by RICO obstructing justice for American victims of enemy terrorism at home.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._military_response_during_the_September_11_attacks
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11_attacks
https://people.com/politics/trump-911-interview-building-tallest-lower-manhattan/
Not surprising then Bill Barr, whose father was the mentor of Jeffrey Epstein (Donald Barr), (Barr) both RICO obstructed the Iran Contra treason conspiracy for G.H.W. Bush and Reagan and RICO obstructed the Russia, Trump, GOP conspiracy thereafter, in a conspiracy with Rod Rosenstein, and/or others, in the context Rosenstein was the subordinate of Jeff Sessions, who was with Trump, the GOP, and Russia’s Kislyak at the Mayflower Hotel, and so in that context Rod Rosenstein limited the scope of the Mueller and related investigations to not include Trump and/or others, like the getaway driver of bank/elections heist is just as guilty as those robbing the bank/elections to give aid, comfort, and to adhere to Russia, and enemy of the United States. Barr’s obstruction in the Iran Contra treason conspiracy literally resulted in the GOP stealing the 2000 elections, and thereafter resulted in Trump not being held accountable for stealing the 2016 elections, and is on course to result in GOP’s SCOTUS majority born out of the same, allowing Trump to steal the 2024 elections, and to get away with some of the most serious crimes against the United States in its history – as an ongoing organized crime syndicate installed by enemies of the United States would.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Relations
In a similar manner, Neil Gorsuch has been implicated in self-dealing with others, and where these others brought no fewer than 22 cases to SCOTUS.
“A 40-acre property in Colorado owned by Gorsuch and two other individuals was put under contract for sale on April 16, 2017, six days after Gorsuch began serving as a Supreme Court justice, Politico reported, citing real estate records.
The sale closed a month later, and the buyer was reportedly Brian Duffy, who has served as CEO of the Miami-based law firm giant Greenberg Traurig since 2016.
Duffy and his wife paid $1.83 million for the property—a 3,000-square-foot house along the Colorado River in Granby—and Gorsuch reported on a disclosure form he made between $250,000 and $500,000 from the sale because he held a 20% stake in the property.
The space where Gorsuch would have disclosed the purchaser’s identity was left blank.
During Gorsuch’s time on the Supreme Court, Greenberg Traurig has been involved in at least 22 cases before the court, including cases in which it filed amicus briefs, and Gorsuch has sided with the law firm in eight out of 12 cases where his opinion was recorded, according to Politico.”
Similarly, Amy Barrett has been called out for her questionable deals, deemed as “shady” and “corrupt”.
“Just months after she was sworn in at the Supreme Court in 2020, Barrett, who had left her judgeship and job as a Notre Dame law professor, sold her private home in South Bend, Indiana, to a recently hired Notre Dame professor who was assuming a leadership role at the Religious Liberty Initiative, according to records discovered by the left-leaning non-profit watchdog group Accountable US.
The initiative's legal clinic has curried favor with the Supreme Court since its founding in 2020 and filed at least nine "friend-of-the-court" amicus briefs in religious liberty cases before the Court. Alito joined the majority in deciding in favor of the initiative's conservative positions in several of those cases, including the one that reversed Roe v. Wade, and others on issues of school prayer and COVID-19 restrictions on churches."The endless drip of shady and corrupt Supreme Court dealings just further underscores the need for reform." Accountable US President Kyle Herrig said in a statement. "Every federal judge is bound to an ethics code requiring them to avoid behavior that so much as looks improper, except for Supreme Court justices. Chief Justice (John) Roberts has the power to change that, but so far he hasn't shown the courage. If he fails to do his job, Congress must do theirs."”
Which returns us to the fact that Russia, Trump, and the GOP conspired to engineer Trump and the GOP into power in 2016, whereafter Russia’s GOP turned a blind eye to the corruption of SCOTUS and Trump, and did so in violation of their oaths of office and the scope of their duties to hold Trump, SCOTUS, and themselves accountable, which they have largely struggled to do, leaving them collectively above the law and the judges of their own crimes and/or their fellow conspirators, organized crime begetting organized crime, in a creeping manner attacking the rights of Americans as agents of Russia, U.S. enemies, and organized crime would.
Accordingly, it is not a shocker, nor frivolous conspiracy, but a pattern that at least 5 out of 9 GOP SCOTUS committed perjury in Congress to deceive the United States by affirming stare decisis or precedent to deceive the United States into providing them financial and/or other benefits, which is also government fraud.
And where stare decisis also means fulfilling their duties to protect and unhold the rule of law and not destroy it to the benefit our enemies and organized crime syndicates at least a majority of SCOTUS have overtly furthered in an ongoing criminal RICO and obstruction conspiracy.
Fortunately, there is no constitutional crises here, because the constitution very clearly specifies the remedy to such sprawling organized crimes from public offices, which is the removal, forfeit, voiding, and/or barring from public office.
This is the basis for Trump’s deceiving howl that radicals (U.S. law enforcement) are trying to steal the elections from the American people via a witch-hunt, which is actually a series of overlapping criminal investigation and lawsuit investigations revealing their collective illegitimacy for public offices, and mandating their removal by any means, and the application of U.S. voiding laws to remedy the same, to stop them from operating “above the law” as their respective and/or collective “own judges for their crimes” and those of their conspirators.
Accordingly, it would be a frivolous conspiracy to claim that SCOTUS doesn’t have a major legitimacy problem, when the facts and law prove otherwise, also specified herein this article.
THE GOP SCOTUS’ STARE DECISIS AFFIRMATIONS WERE LARGELY PERJURY AND GOVERNMENT FRAUD AFTER THEY SIGNIFICANTLY VIOLATED STARE DECISIS AND CRIMINAL LAWS, TO DECEIVE THE GOVERNMENT INTO FINANCIAL AND OTHER BENEFITS, AND SEPARATE FROM THEIR APPOINTMENTS BEING MADE AFTER THE GOP’S, JFK ASSASSINATION, IRAN CONTRA, ELECTIONS 2000, 9/11, AND/OR TRUMP-RUSSIA TREASON, ELECTIONS FRAUD, AND/OR OTHER DISQUALIFYING CONSPIRACIES
It is a matter of public record that eight of the nine SCOTUS judges affirmed and/or stated in some respect that they would adhere to and/or enforce stare decisis, with the exception of Anita Hill’s sexual harasser, Clarence Thomas, who did not seeming affirm nor adhere to the same, but whose own legitimacy of appointment, nomination, and/or confirmation may ironically be defeated by stare decisis because of the now known treason conspiracy of the Republican Party, Ronald Reagan, and G.H.W. Bush with enemies of the United States, specifically Iran and the Contras, before and after Reagan and G.H.W. Bush “took” POTUS and VPOTUS, which immediately disqualified Bush and Reagan from public office before and after they “took” office, and thus made the appointment of Clarence Thomas illegitimate, and thus all of his rulings and opinions thereafter also illegitimate.
Now this may seem like a frivolous conspiracy, but in fact the facts and the law are what allow for this reasonable inference of a criminal conspiracy, and only by unreasonably omitting facts and law can one legitimately come to the conclusion that this is a frivolous conspiracy, instead of a criminal one.
Briefly, before becoming POTUS, Reagan conspired with the enemy of the United States, specifically the leader of Iran, in a bid to “engineer” the GOP, Reagan, and G.W.H. Bush into power, in an October Suprise, or event meant to influence the outcome of an election.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1980_October_Surprise_theory
Then before Clarence Thomas was appointed, Reagan and Bush had overtly furthered the treason conspiracy with America’s enemy, in what became known as the Iran Contra Affair, a spin on what it actually was, the Iran Contra Ongoing Treason Conspiracy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93Contra_affair
Separately, as specified by John Hankey in the documentary Dark Legacy, it was G.H.W. Bush’s CIA unit who had President Kennedy assassinated, and where this documentary does a fantastic job resolving frivolous conspiracy from criminal conspiracy, because the documentary literally presents the documents which prove what happened, and where the actual murderers of President Kennedy didn’t just admit to the same, but did so to the press, who published the same, and the same resulted in a lawsuit for defamation, which the Bush unit CIA agents who bragged to the press lost, and which included testimony from the Director of the CIA in that loss, and involved CIA’s Frank Sturgis and E. Howard Hunt (who admitted to the press that he killed JFK, and then sued for defamation, and lost), under the direction of G.H.W. Bush, who was operating an oil company near Cuba, Zapata Oil, in the context that JFK sought to dissolve the CIA, which would have affected the profits of Bush’s Zapata oil company, which is why JFK was killed, and where Lee Harvey Oswald was falsely blamed for the same, because he was an FBI agent who had infiltrated the CIA and was helping the FBI dismantle the CIA.
Accordingly, what the facts and the law require here is the disqualification of Clarence Thomas, and not by Congressional impeachment, nor self-policing, but by reasonable, logical, and critical application of the facts and the law that support each and both G.H.W. Bush and Reagan did commit treason at least once, but in truth the facts prove they conspired each and both to commit treason with enemies of the United States more than once (as did the father of G.H.W. Bush, Prescott Bush, in a conspiracy with the Nazi enemies of the United States) – and as such, the fruits of those treason plots resulted in the likes of Clarence Thomas as SCOTUS, G.W. Bush as POTUS, but not limited to the same, infra.
Accordingly, it is a frivolous conspiracy that Clarence Thomas was legitimately appointed, nominated, and/or confirmed, because the facts and the law clearly prove he was not legitimately installed as a SCOTUS justice, because of the treason conspiracies of Reagan and Bush Sr., which disqualified them from office, and thus which disqualifies any judge they appointed, because those who are not eligible to hold office, can’t legitimately make judicial appointments.
Any evidence to the contrary of the facts and law are frivolous conspiracy fruits from the poisonous tree of ineligibility, treason, elections fraud, RICO, obstruction of justice, but not limited to the same. To argue the contrary would be unreasonable, illogical, untruthful, unlawful, and/or criminal.
Of course many others will want to argue they don’t want to agree with the same, but not wanting to change history and not wanting to be removed from power is not enough to not change history, and not enough to not be removed from illegitimate acquisition or usurping of power, stare decisis.
Fortunately, Clarence Thomas agrees with this reasoning. “"I think a lot of people lack courage. They know what is right, and they're scared to death of doing it. And then they come up with all these excuses for not doing it," Justice Clarence Thomas, who joined Alito's opinion in Janus, said last month about overturning cases he believes to be fundamentally wrong.”
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/roe-ruling-stare-decisis-dead-supreme-court-view/story?id=84997047
And so not lacking courage, and knowing what is right, despite being scared to death, we won’t corroborate excuses for not making these arguments against the legitimacy of a majority of SCOTUS and other “justices” herein this article, which we believe to be fundamentally wrong, and so we’ll hold Clarence Thomas and all of the other illegitimately installed judges to the same standard here, because fact and law can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Thomas and many of the other SCOTUS justices and judges have been illegitimately installed by those not qualified to install them.
And where only an illogical argument ripe with fallacy or a lack of reasoning, logic, and critical thinking would in a frivolous conspiracy posit that Clarence Thomas and these others may legitimately rule or opine on the legitimacy of those who appointed them – in a bid to make their illegitimate appointments by those who were not qualified to be able to self-serve themselves – to unlawfully act as their own judges, and to unlawfully act above the law, after pledging an oath to defend the rule of law and the Constitution, and after affirming or stating they would not violate established laws, only to do the same thereafter, defrauding Congress and the U.S. government by way of perjury and false claims, in order to unlawfully usurp and them abuse power in overt furtherance of ongoing treason conspiracies, as the drivers of a bank or elections heist would make them conspirators of all the crimes of the conspiracy.
Instead, in Western societies, the law, the facts, logic, reasoning, and critical thinking are what determine if someone may or may not be truthfully or legitimately placed into a position of power or authority over other people, and also determined if someone may or may not be truthfully or legitimately removed from a position of power or authority over other people.
The very nature of democratic law is stare decisis or precedence.
“Stare decisis is the doctrine that courts will adhere to precedent in making their decisions. Stare decisis means “to stand by things decided” in Latin.
When a court faces a legal argument, if a previous court has ruled on the same or a closely related issue, then the court will make their decision in alignment with the previous court’s decision.
The previous deciding-court must have binding authority over the court; otherwise, the previous decision is merely persuasive authority.
In Kimble v. Marvel Enterprises, the U.S. Supreme Court described the rationale behind stare decisis as “promot[ing] the evenhanded, predictable, and consistent development of legal principles, foster[ing] reliance on judicial decisions, and contribut[ing] to the actual and perceived integrity of the judicial process.”
The doctrine operates both horizontally and vertically. Horizontal stare decisis refers to a court adhering to its own precedent.
For example, if the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals adhered to the ruling of a previous Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals case, that would be horizontal stare decisis. A court engages in vertical stare decisis when it applies precedent from a higher court.
For example, if the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals adhered to a previous ruling from the U.S. Supreme Court, that would be vertical stare decisis. Or, additionally, if the Federal District Court for the Southern District of New York adhered to a previous ruling by the Second Circuit, that would be vertical stare decisis.
Although courts seldom overrule precedent, the [treason GOP’s] U.S. Supreme Court in Seminole Tribe of Florida v. Florida explained that stare decisis is not an “inexorable command.”
When prior decisions are “unworkable or are badly reasoned,” then the Supreme Court may not follow precedent, and this is “particularly true in constitutional cases.”
For example, in deciding Brown v. Board of Education, the U.S. Supreme Court explicitly renounced Plessy v. Ferguson, thereby refusing to apply the doctrine of stare decisis.”
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/stare_decisis
Accordingly, a few things are clear here with respect to judicial precedent.
- Per Brown v. Board of Education, SCOTUS judges in the United States must abide to existing laws, for which the Constitution of the United States is the highest law, unless previous laws are “unworkable or are badly reasoned,” then the Supreme Court may not follow precedent, and this is “particularly true in constitutional cases”, and where RICO obstructing for organized crime and enemies of the United States by using fringe legal theories to confer self-legitimacy and the legitimacy of others who are otherwise per the U.S. Constitution disqualified from public office would be unworkable or badly reasoned on its face;
- Otherwise, per Kimble v. Marvel Enterprises, the U.S. Supreme Court described the rationale behind stare decisis as “promot[ing] the evenhanded, predictable, and consistent development of legal principles, foster[ing] reliance on judicial decisions, and contribut[ing] to the actual and perceived integrity of the judicial process”, and where RICO obstructing for organized crime and enemies of the United States by using fringe legal theories to confer self-legitimacy and the legitimacy of others who are otherwise per the U.S. Constitution disqualified from public office would not be promot[ing] the evenhanded, predictable, and consistent development of legal principles, foster[ing] reliance on judicial decisions, and contribut[ing] to the actual and perceived integrity of the judicial process”, but the contrary of all of the same; and
- The Supreme Court justices have to be properly appointed, nominated, and confirmed, in order to be legitimately defined as SCOTUS justices – because otherwise they aren’t legitimately defined as SCOTUS justices – and thus they aren’t legitimate SCOTUS justices, and thus it doesn’t matter what they say, how they rule, how they posture – no one who isn’t legitimately appointed, nominated, and/or confirmed, can’t legitimately be defined as a SCOTUS justice.
The same is also true for all other justices, members of Congress, and the Presidency, because one has to be legitimately elected, appointed, nominated, and/or confirmed to be a legitimate President, to be a legitimate member of Congress, and to be a legitimate judge.
This is why exploring the legitimacy of Trump, SCOTUS, other judges, members of Congress, is important, because if they were illegitimately-elected, appointed, nominated, and/or confirmed, then they can’t legitimately use protections otherwise afforded by their usurped public offices.
More simply, if not legitimately-elected, appointed, nominated, and/or confirmed, and/or if having violated constitutional and/or other laws that disqualified them, or those who installed them, Trump was never legitimately POTUS, and individuals in Congress, were never legitimately members of Congress, and specific SCOTUS judges and other judges like Judge Cannon were never legitimately SCOTUS or other judges, and thus they can’t use applications or conventions of law to legitimately defend the rights of POTUS, Congress, SCOTUS, judges, or others who were legitimately installed into the U.S. government, even if they or others really want them to.
There is no fruit of legitimacy from a poisonous tree of illegitimacy, even if the illegitimate fruits say so.
If any part of the legitimacy process for installing our most powerful leaders of the government is corrupted, this delegitimizes those leaders and all of their changes to the government, because legitimacy is binomial in nature – either you are legitimately installed as a leader of the government, or you are not, either you are qualified for public office or you are not, either you disqualified yourself from pubic office, or you did not, and where it is the Constitution of the United States which defines the process for legitimacy, and if violated, by default makes an individual illegitimately-installed into power, whereafter any change they make to the government will also be illegitimate, no matter how much the illegitimate individual postures or argues otherwise.
Them or others wanting them or others to be in legitimate power is not what makes them legitimate, it is the law or Constitution which makes them legitimate, or not, and where significant deviations from the same are arguably criminal misconduct meant to “engineer” organized crime and enemies of the United States into power over the justice system, as treasonous organized crime would do.
Presenting an additional challenged, both Brown and Kimble were in part decided by “justices” who were fruits of treason conspiracies and/or who directly participated in treason conspiracies, and/or the getaway driver RICO obstruction of the same (for example but not limited to SCOTUS Warren), thus disqualifying them from public office.
More simply, within democracies, laws or precedent exist for a reason, and the reason is to have a standard code of conduct that everyone must follow, including Presidents, Congress, judges, prosecutors, law enforcement, and the military, to protect the legal doctrines that no one is above the law, and that no one may be their own judge, otherwise we would be living in a monarchy/dictatorship or oligarchy/kleptocracy on its way to a monarchy/dictatorship, where the law is whatever the monarchs/dictators and/or oligarchy/kleptocracy feel like the law is that day, week, or year, and thus not based on precedent but on emotional tantrum whims of a criminal ruling class oppressing the third largest country and arguably one of the most heavily armed country in the world.
THE OATHS OF OFFICE BY THE U.S. SUPREME COURT
The following are the two oaths of office by SCOTUS (judicial and constitutional oath), which may also be taken in the third oath below or in the combined form, but where in order to take these oaths – and per the decision tree of legitimate or constitutional government – one must first be properly appointed, nominated, and/or confirmed by a lawful, legitimate, and not impersonating nor RICO obstructing POTUS and Congress seeking to install organized crime to serve as the personal criminal defense attorney for enemies of the United States and/or organized crime – as defined by the Constitution. The Constitution also defines who is disqualified from public office, and who is impersonating an officer and/or government employee, seeking to deceive and conceal their deceit and/or the deceit of others who were not eligible for office who installed them, in order to obtain money and things of value. The fourth oath of office below for state attorneys is similar in that attorneys for states swear to support the Constitution, and where SCOTUS justices and other judges were required to swear to support the Constitution of the United States before becoming judges in order to become attorneys.
CONSTITUTIONAL OATH
“I, _________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.”
JUDICIAL OATH
In December 1990, the Judicial Improvements Act of 1990 replaced the phrase “according to the best of my abilities and understanding, agreeably to the Constitution" with "under the Constitution.” The revised Judicial Oath, found at 28 U. S. C. § 453, reads:
“I, _________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as _________ under the Constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God.”
COMBINED OATH
Upon occasion, appointees to the Supreme Court have taken a combined version of the two oaths, which reads:
“I, _________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as _________ under the Constitution and laws of the United States; and that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.”
https://www.supremecourt.gov/about/oath/oathsofoffice.aspx
OATH OF OFFICE FOR ATTORNEYS (CA, AND GENERALLY)
The following is the oath of office for attorneys in California, and it is comparable to the oaths of office for attorneys in other states, swearing to support the Constitution of the United States and the state in which the attorney takes the oath, and so all of the GOP SCOTUS majority judges would have had to take a similar oath to support the Constitution.
OATH (to be taken before a Notary or other authorized administering officer): I, (licensee name) solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California, and that I will faithfully discharge the duties of an attorney and counselor at law to the best of my knowledge and ability. As an officer of the court, I will strive to conduct myself at all times with dignity, courtesy and integrity.
https://www.calbar.ca.gov/Admissions/Examinations/California-Bar-Examination/Attorneys-Oath
This means that when John Roberts, Clarence Thomas, Amy Barrett, and Brett Kavanaugh joined and furthered the conspiracy to steal the 2000 elections with the GOP SCOTUS majority then to “engineer” the GOP into power over the justice system, a GOP SCOTUS majority born from the illegitimate fruits of the treason conspiracy of G.H.W. Bush’s Anti-Castro Cuban CIA group’s E. Howard Hunt’s and Frank Sturgish’s confessed and litigated assassination of President Kennedy, and/or the treason conspiracy fruits of G.H.W. Bush’s and Reagan’s October Surprise and Iran Contra, that Roberts, Thomas, Barrett, Kavanaugh, and/or others knew, or it was reasonable that they should have known that they were conspiring to steal the 2000 elections in a conspiracy with others who were fruits of GOP treason plots, and yet each and all of them chose to join and further a conspiracy to violate and not support the Constitution in order to steal the 2000 elections, violating their oaths as attorneys.
Similarly, when each of them seemingly-corrupted their public offices, as specified above in a previous section, and doing so as SCOTUS justices – each of them knew or reasonably should have known, that they were violating their oaths to support the Constitution’s high crimes and misdemeanors for bribery, corruption, RICO, and/or other harm, just as the SCOTUS “justices” who sold out our country in a conspiracy with the GOP’s Mitch McConnell and Trump’s 2016 Campaign Manager David Bosie (who thus is necessarily implicated in the treason and elections fraud conspiracy with Russia as a result, and resulting in Trump, Russia, and the GOP installing the stolen 2000 elections’ Barrett and Kavanaugh SCOTUS as well as Neil Gorsuch), in the RICO corrupt 2010 Citizens United ruling to unlawfully-make lawfull using the law unlawfully the sanctioned bribery and RICO backchannel of the nation’s highest and lowest elected government officials (who nominate and confirm other officials), including SCOTUS “justices” by billionaires bringing their jump-how-high and honey-do lists to the court, to totally sell out the United States government and its people, exploited for their tax dollars, while the billionaires evaded paying taxes themselves, so they could shower their savings onto the politicians and SCOTUS justices doing their bidding for rewards, hidden, and unreported benefits or things of value with respect to impersonating officers and employees of the government, rather than functioning as officers and employees of the government as specified by the U.S. Constitution, as organized crime betraying their country would with enemies of the United States.
Similarly, when Barrett, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh were appointed by Russia’s, Jeffrey Epstein’s, and Katie Johnson’s Trump, and the GOP and hand-picked by the Federalist Society –- which is heavily-linked to clients, financiers, and/or associates of Jeffrey Epstein – specifically Chevron’s Standard Oil Rockefellers and Google’s founders, as well as the Mercer family (owned Cambridge Analytica who conspired with ICC child (sex) trafficker Putin’s Russia – these attorneys knew or should have known that they were not eligible to be installed by Trump, and that joining or furthering a conspiracy with enemies of the United States could result in their unlikely execution per the law and would certainly violate their oaths to support the Constitution – they chose accept the illegitimate appointments, but Barrett, Kavanaugh, Thomas, and Roberts had previously worked on stealing the 2000 elections together, and so abiding by and supporting the Constitution was not part of their skill set, but rather helping the GOP steal elections was what they were experts in, and thus the perfect SCOTUS picks for Trump who stole an election with America’s number one enemy, Russia. Res ipsa loquitur malum in se, this natural evil speaks for itself.
Similarly, Jeffrey Epstein-linked Federalist Society also hand-picked and/or were associated with John Roberts, Clarence Thomas, and Alito, and so ALL six of the GOP SCOTUS majority, four of whom had previously conspired to steal elections or “engineer” the GOP into power, were hand-picked and/or associated with Jeffrey Epstein’s crime syndicate and orbit, half of whom were installed by Trump, also named a conspirator in the gang rape and/or sodomy of 13 and/or 12 year old girl(s), specifically Katie Johnson and/or Marie Doe (likely Farmer) in a 2016 lawsuit by Johnson in California, who was so severely threatened not to come forward with the lawsuit that she allegedly did not, mirroring the experience of another victim of Jeffrey Epstein’s crime syndicate in California, the author of the lynched pro se qui tam stalked and lynched by the Russians and Sacramento/CA GOP/RNC, who has been threatened almost daily with deadly weapons and all sorts of other harassment, intimidation, and bullying, including by the crime syndicate and orbit of Jeffrey Epstein, and where again, reaching these folks tends to find so many different connections between them and some of the worst crimes in American history, over and over and over again, as to form a pattern, versus random observations or data points.
Well then who better to have on SCOTUS than Anita Hill’s accused sexual harasser Clarence Thomas and serial-college-girl-drug-then-gang-rape Brett Kavanaugh? All in the context that SCOTUS regularly and publicly wants America to believe in their legitimacy, and their very questionable Christian values, coupled to the parallel imperial cult and cult of personality propaganda that somehow Trump fits the bill for God (always will thus and doesn’t need to return) who has returned to Earth to save (but yet Trump needs everyone else to save him, because he can’t save himself).
Which brings this article full circle to Trump asking SCOTUS to save him from prosecution, but where they would have to further violate the Constitution and behave outside of the scope of their offices and their oaths of office to do the same, and thus would be pretending or impersonating officers versus operating as officer per their oaths and the Constitution and other specified laws herein in order to save Trump from prosecution.
And where Trump has also asked SCOTUS to let him run for office despite having forever been disqualified for office before the 2016 elections due to his established treason and elections fraud with Russia, established by Trump’s Barr’s Durham in front of Congress on 06/21/2023, supra, which proved that Trump and the GOP disqualified themselves from public office before the 2016 elections, and thus were not in a position to legitimately nominate and confirm the GOP SCOTUS majority Trump is asking to legitimize themselves and him, but again requiring them to violate their moot oaths of office for SCOTUS, their violated oaths of office as attorneys and judges, in what has become a very public and tragic comedy of forced and concealed errors, or ongoing organized crimes, and in a manner that at best leaves them impersonating officers, offices, and/or employment with the government to receive money, bribes, and other things of value (the ability to RICO obstruct treason, sedition, insurrection, terrorism, elections fraud, RICO, obstruction, witness and victim intimidation to give aid, comfort, and adhere to enemies of the United States and organized crime).
Accordingly, all of the same explains why SCOTUS wants to hear Trump’s immunity case and his ineligibility claim, in order to legitimize themselves as their own judges, and in doing so, RICO obstructing for their own crimes against the United States, which Trump and Russia furthered 2015-2024, with little to no relief towards American annihilation, as enemies of the United States and organized crime would.
THE HARTMANN REPORT AND UPRIGHTS NEWS SUMMARIZE THE FACTS AND LAW REGARDING THE GOP’S ONGOING (81 YEARS OF) TREASON CONSPIRACIES USED TO UNLAWFULLY USURP POTUS AND CONGRESS RESULTING IN ILLEGITIMATE POTUS, CONGRESS, SCOTUS, OTHER JUDGES, PARDONS, CLEMENCY, AND MORE
In a similar manner to Harvard Law’s serious concerns about the legitimacy and partisan nature of the GOP’s SCOTUS, both The Hartmann Report and UpRights News have summarized the facts concerning the legitimacy of no fewer than 6 out 9 of the SCOTUS justices, based on the illegitimacy of those appointing them and others based on ongoing treason conspiracies by the Republican Party, in order to unlawfully usurp power to illegitimately stack the judiciary with judges who would rule in favor of their ongoing organized crime syndicate, financiers of the same, and/or proxies which if illegitimately, corruptly, or unlawfully appointed, nominated, and/or confirmed would not increase their legitimacy nor justify their illegitimacy, as a matter of both fact and law, summarized by UpRights News in their news section, “Illegitimate Power”.
https://www.uprightsnews.com/illegitimate-power
Even the Chief Justice of SCOTUS has expressed concerns about the legitimacy of SCOTUS, trying to defend the same, without providing any evidence for the same.
.
https://www.cnn.com/2022/09/10/politics/john-roberts-supreme-court-colorado-speech/index.html
More simply, there would be no reason for Roberts or Harvard University to feel compelled to preemptively defend the legitimacy of SCOTUS – without evidence supporting the same – if SCOTUS did not have a legitimacy problem, because they have a major legitimacy problem, and there is no constitutional crisis here, because the Constitution simply calls for them not to hold the offices they are not qualified for, and where their qualifications have to as a necessity factor in the qualifications of POTUS and Congress, who if disqualified, could not have legitimately installed, appointed, nominated, nor confirmed any judge, nor passed any law, nor enforced any law, nor made an other legitimate nor qualified changes to how the government operates.
What the several links by UpRights News and The Hartmann Report above in this section collectively prove beyond a reasonable doubt – and based on the extensive research of many others who have concluded the same – SCOTUS has been significantly corrupted by the GOP, to the extent that no less than 6 SCOTUS justices have been unlawfully appointed, nominated, and confirmed, after the GOP and those President and others who violated treason, insurrection, terrorism, insurrection, and/or other laws illegitimately appointed decades (specifically 81 years) worth of GOP judges, who have conspired to attack, erode, and harm the U.S. Constitution, rule of law, the United States, and our people in an ongoing criminal conspiracy with many different spokes, which made decades worth of GOP SCOTUS justices ineligible for public office.
Briefly, the GOP’s Prescott Bush conspired with U.S. enemies Hitler and the Nazis and others to profit off the murder and plundering of the allied war effort.
This was folllowed by G.H.W. Bush being put in charge of a CIA group known as the Anti-Castro Cubans, that sought to make G.H.W. Bush the profitable owner of an oil company near Cuba, known as Zapata Oil.
J.F. Kennedy sought to shut down the Bush family’s CIA profiteering operation with the aid of the FBI’s Hoover and Lee Harvey Oswald, and so the CIA group that G.H.W. Bush led, known as the Anti-Castro Cubans – which included E. Howard Hunt and Frank Sturgis, conspired to kill Kennedy, and then did, but placed the blame of Lee Harvey Oswald who was trying to help JFK, the FBI, and Hoover shut down the CIA – and E. Howard Hunt bragged about the assassination to Spotlight Magazine, and to Sophia Lorenz, that G.H.W.’s CIA group is who killed JFK – resulting in a defamation lawsuit against Spotlight Magazine by E. Howard Hunt – which Bush’s CIA operatives lost, because the CIA Director personally-testified that Bush’s E.Howard Hunt was involved with the killing of JFK.
Accordingly, this treason conspiracy began before G.W.H. Bush’s and Reagan’s ongoing treason conspiracy with U.S. enemies Iran and the Contras, resulting in the illegitimate SCOTUS majority that helped the Bush brothers, GOP, and/or others steal the 2000 elections, followed by the 9/11 treason conspiracy.
It is important to note that not all conspirators to this ongoing treason conspiracy started by WWII were Republican – per balanced research and reporting – and where there is significant evidence that FDR, Truman, and/or Johnson also furthered the ongoing conspiracy spokes to commit treason and/or obstruction for the same, as did Nixon, Reagan, and/or others when Nixon conspired with U.S. enemy Iran in the October surprise events, Reagan and G.H.W. Bush with the follow-up Iran and Contra treason conspiracies, resulting in the theft of the 2000 elections in what was also treason, and where many of those involved are not SCOTUS justices, specifically Roberts, Kavanaugh, Barrett, and Thomas, followed by Trump and Russia, resulting in no fewer than 6 out of 9 GOP SCOTUS majority willingly, knowingly, and intentionally eager to violate stare decisis, a priori, and a fortiori, or precedent, in violation of their oaths of office, in violation of their confirmation and nomination hearings to like getaway drivers RICO obstruct justice for the primary bank/elections criminals – well outside of the legitimate scope of their duties (which specify the defense and/or upholding of the U.S. Constitution and not its total destruction to return enemies of the United States and the organized crime syndicate that unlawfully installed the GOP SCOTUS majority back into power over the justice system, to collectively keep themselves above the law as their own judges and/or judges of one another in conspiracy with the GOP in former and present Congresses).
SCOTUS and/or Judge Cannon have also been asked by Trump, and/or others for RICO obstruction, partisan consideration, unreasonable delays, unreasonable rulings, immunity (where there is none due to his immediate disqualification per the U.S. Constitution), and asked by Trump and/or others to legitimize Trump, which in turn legitimizes the unlawfully-installed SCOTUS, other judges like Cannon, and/or others, which again allows them to respectively and/or collectively RICO obstruct justice for themselves and/or each other in an unlawful and unconstitutional manner, remedied by SCOTUS and other judges, and others furthering a criminal conspiracy to keep enemies of the United States and organized organized crime linked to Jeffrey Epstein and enemies of the United States in power over the sabotaged and overthrown U.S. justice system, congressional oversight and impeachment process, and the judiciary, resulting in a significantly corrupted United States government, seeking to remain “above the law”, as the “judges of their own major crimes”, and/or the crimes of others they and/or their crime syndicate have conspired with, which rarely results in the equal application of law, relative to those not in their crime syndicate.
DEFINING POTUS ELIGIBILITY AS SELF-EXECUTING LAW
Self-executing laws are laws that require no court to hear, for example someone who is 17 can’t run for POTUS, because as a manner of constitutional process, only someone who is 35 is eligible to run for POTUS “According to Article II of the Constitution, there are three requirements in order for someone to qualify for the presidency:
Must be at least 35 years old
Be a natural-born citizen of the U.S.
Must have lived in the U.S. for at least 14 years”
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2023/02/07/us-president-requirements/8191172001/
The same requires the process of being born a natural-born citizen of the US, and the process of living in the U.S. for at least 14 years, and the process of having lived at least 35 years.
In fact, it would be pure fantasy, false, and unlawful for anyone who was a minor, not a natural-born citizen of the U.S., who hadn’t lived in the U.S. for at least 14 years to claim or to be lawfully-elected POTUS (even if they weren’t lawfully elected POTUS by popular or democratic vote), which would be a fruit of the poisonous tree of ineligibility.
Similarly, it would be pure fantasy, false, and unlawful for anyone who was a minor, not a natural-born citizen of the U.S., who hadn’t lived in the U.S. for at least 14 years to claim or lawfully be able to appoint SCOTUS judges, and/or other judges, and to change anything about how the US operates, because no one who isn’t eligible to be POTUS can lawfully behave as, have the benefits as, and/or have the protections of POTUS, which would be fruits of the poisonous tree of ineligibility.
INELIGIBILITY FOR PUBLIC OFFICE AS SELF-EXECUTING LAW - INSURRECTION
The 14th Amendment Section 3 imposes an additional requirement, specifically that someone seeking to hold the office for POTUS, Congress, SCOTUS, other judge, or other officer cannot have engaged in crimes, and/or other misconduct, which would disqualify them from holding public office.
“No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.”
https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/amendment-14/section-3/
In fact, it would be pure fantasy, false, and unlawful for anyone who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or who gave aid or comfort to the enemies thereof, to claim or to be eligible to be POTUS, a member of Congress, a SCOTUS judge, any other judge, and/or any other officer, which would be a fruit of the poisonous tree of ineligibility.
INELIGIBILITY FOR PUBLIC OFFICE AS SELF-EXECUTING LAW- TREASON
Similarly, treason laws are another example of self-executing laws that disqualify “whoever, owing allegiance to the United States” from “any” office, per 18 U.S. Code § 2381.
“Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.”
(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 807; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(2)(J), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2148.)
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2381
In fact, it would be pure fantasy, false, and unlawful for “whoever” owing allegiance to the United States, and who levied war against them or adhered to their enemies, gave them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, to claim or to be eligible to be POTUS, a member of Congress, a SCOTUS judge, any other judge, and/or any other officer, which would be fruits of the poisonous tree of ineligibility.
Similarly, it would be pure fantasy, false, and unlawful for “whoever” owing allegiance to the United States, and who levied war against them or adhered to their enemies, gave them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, to claim or to be eligible to be able to lawfully vote to impeach POTUS, a member of Congress, a SCOTUS judge, any other judge, and/or any other officer, which would be fruits of the poisonous tree of ineligibility.
INELIGIBILITY FOR PUBLIC OFFICE AS SELF-EXECUTING LAW - CONCEALMENT, REMOVAL, OR MUTILATION OF GOVERNMENT DOCUMENTS (WHICH INCLUDES STALKED, LYNCHED, AND RICO OBSTRUCTED PRO SE QUI TAM INVESTIGATIONED)
As summarized by CNN reporting, at the end of the alleged Trump presidency, a binder that was so secret that it had to be viewed at the CIA, disappeared and its contents housed the raw intel of the origins of the Crossfire Hurricane investigation championed by the FBI and Senator Feinstein of Sacramento and San Francisco California, as a geographical “tell” as to where Crossfire Hurricane originated – Sacramento, California.
“A binder containing highly classified information related to Russian election interference went missing at the end of Donald Trump’s presidency, raising alarms among intelligence officials that some of the most closely guarded national security secrets from the US and its allies could be exposed, sources familiar with the matter told CNN.
Its disappearance, which has not been previously reported, was so concerning that intelligence officials briefed Senate Intelligence Committee leaders last year about the missing materials and the government’s efforts to retrieve them, the sources said.
In the two-plus years since Trump left office, the missing intelligence does not appear to have been found.
The binder contained raw intelligence the US and its NATO allies collected on Russians and Russian agents, including sources and methods that informed the US government’s assessment that Russian President Vladimir Putin sought to help Trump win the 2016 election, sources tell CNN.
The intelligence was so sensitive that lawmakers and congressional aides with top secret security clearances were able to review the material only at CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia, where their work scrutinizing it was itself kept in a locked safe.
The binder was last seen at the White House during Trump’s final days in office. The former president had ordered it brought there so he could declassify a host of documents related to the FBI’s Russia investigation. Under the care of then-White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, the binder was scoured by Republican aides working to redact the most sensitive information so it could be declassified and released publicly.
The Russian intelligence was just a small part of the collection of documents in the binder, described as being 10 inches thick and containing reams of information about the FBI’s “Crossfire Hurricane” investigation into the 2016 Trump campaign and Russia. But the raw intelligence on Russia was among its most sensitive classified materials, and top Trump administration officials repeatedly tried to block the former president from releasing the documents.
The day before leaving office, Trump issued an order declassifying most of the binder’s contents, setting off a flurry of activity in the final 48 hours of his presidency. Multiple copies of the redacted binder were created inside the White House, with plans to distribute them across Washington to Republicans in Congress and right-wing journalists.
Instead, copies initially sent out were frantically retrieved at the direction of White House lawyers demanding additional redactions.
Just minutes before Joe Biden was inaugurated, Meadows rushed to the Justice Department to hand-deliver a redacted copy for a last review. Years later, the Justice Department has yet to release all of the documents, despite Trump’s declassification order. Additional copies with varying levels of redactions ended up at the National Archives.
But an unredacted version of the binder containing the classified raw intelligence went missing amid the chaotic final hours of the Trump White House. The circumstances surrounding its disappearance remain shrouded in mystery.
US officials repeatedly declined to discuss any government efforts to locate the binder or confirm that any intelligence was missing.
The binder was not among the classified items found in last year’s search of Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort, according to a US official familiar with the matter, who said the FBI was not looking specifically for intelligence related to Russia when it obtained a search warrant for the former president’s residence last year.
There’s also no reference to the binder or the missing Russian intelligence in the June indictment of Trump over the mishandling of classified documents at Mar-a-Lago.
One theory has emerged about the binder’s whereabouts.
Cassidy Hutchinson, one of Meadows’ top aides, testified to Congress and wrote in her memoir that she believes Meadows took home an unredacted version of the binder. She said it had been kept in Meadows’ safe and that she saw him leave with it from the White House.”
https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2023/12/politics/missing-russia-intelligence-trump-dg/
Here it is important to note that Russian agents the GOP, Trump, and/or Meadows gained access to the raw evidence concerning Crossfire Hurricane, and it is now being concealed from the government, from the public, in a manner that makes the GOP, Trump, and/or Meadows ineligible for public office.
Separately, it is important to note that they tried to submit a cherry-picked “last minute” declassification attempt regarding the same, in a manner that UpRights News has since elucidated is more likely than not an earlier version of the pro se qui tam, one that in a bipartisan or unbiased manner, investigated both the Democrats and the Republicans, but more research was able to largely rule out Democratic involvement with the Russian and GOP stalking, lynching, and RICO obstruction of justice for the same – and conversely more research proved beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump and the Republican Party conspired with Russia in a manner that made them ineligible for public office before the 2016 elections, and thus unable to lawfully nor legitimately appoint SCOTUS or other judges, and unable to lawfully nor legitimately exercise executive orders, pardons, clemency, and any other change to the government, perfectly explaining the radicalization of Trump and the GOP between at least 2017 through to the present day, but where research and Trump’s comments actually implicated them as early as 11/03/2015 if not by early 2004 in Sacramento, CA, in a treason conspiracy to give aid, comfort, and to adhere to enemies of the United States, specifically Russia, before Trump announced he was running for office, and before Russia “engineered” Trump into office.
Accordingly, based on the evidence, it is a reasonable inference that the cherrypicked version of the stalked and lynched qui tam was one of the earliest versions that explored both the Democrats and Republicans, with the Democrats again having been ruled out, unlike the Republicans, and where the author of this lynched investigation is a swing voter, and has been a registered Republican, Independent, and Democrat.
Accordingly, Trump, the GOP, Meadows, and others disappearing all of the raw data for the origins of Crossfire Hurricane, coupled with their last minute attempts to declassify the same may reasonable be inferred to include the truer and earlier origins of Crossfire Hurricane, largely reported at www.uprightsnews.com under the Crossfire Hurricane Origins section.
Accordingly, this concealment, removal, or mutilation of government documents laws are another example of self-executing laws that disqualify “whoever” from holding public office, but in addition require that anyone in public office engaged in this misconduct to forfeit their public office, and leave that public office, per 18 U.S. Code § 2071 - Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally.
- Whoever willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or destroys, or attempts to do so, or, with intent to do so takes and carries away any record, proceeding, map, book, paper, document, or other thing, filed or deposited with any clerk or officer of any court of the United States, or in any public office, or with any judicial or public officer of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
- Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States. As used in this subsection, the term “office” does not include the office held by any person as a retired officer of the Armed Forces of the United States.
(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 795; Pub. L. 101–510, div. A, title V, § 552(a), Nov. 5, 1990, 104 Stat. 1566; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(1)(I), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2147.)
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2071
Furthermore, the Sacramento/CA GOP/RNC who lynched this investigation in a conspiracy with their proxies, and in a conspiracy with at least one named defendant in the qui tam, before they lynched the same, concealed this investigation from the Crossfire Hurricane, and the Special Counsel Mueller, Durham, and/or Smith investigations, unlike the author of the lynched qui tam who made repeated efforts to disclose many different ways and for years.
TRUMP’S AND THE GOP’S ONGOING RICO, TREASON, OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE, AND ELECTIONS FRAUD CONSPIRACY DISQUALIFIED THEM FROM PUBLIC OFFICE BEFORE THE 2016 ELECTIONS, EXPLAINING THEIR RICO OBSTRUCTION, TREASON, ELECTIONS FRAUD, INSURRECTION, FAKE ELECTOR PLOT, AND CONCEALMENT AND DESTRUCTION OF DOCUMENTS CONSPIRACY AFTER THE 2016 ELECTIONS, WHICH ALSO DISQUALIFIED THEM FROM OFFICE, THUS EXPLAINING THEIR RADICALIZATION AND THEIR RADICALIZATION OF OTHERS
Here it important to note that Trump and the GOP were engineered into power by U.S. enemy, Russia, and did give comfort, aid, and did adhere to this U.S. enemy, who “engineered” Trump and the GOP into power, whereafter Trump was successfully impeached by the House of Representatives, but not by the Senate whose GOP majority Russia had engineered into power, based on the emailed treason and elections fraud conspiracy by Putin’s and Trump’s Felix Sater to Trump’s attorney Michael Cohen 11/03/2015.
“Early in Mueller's investigation, Trump critics seized on Sater's Nov. 3, 2015, email to Cohen: "Our boy can become president of the USA and we can engineer it. I will get all of Putin's team to buy in on this, I will manage this process."”
Here it is important to note that by this time, the qui tam civil complaint of the pro se relator referenced at UpRights News implicating Trump, the GOP, and Russia, had been lynched before Trump ran for office, and before Sater, Putin, Cohen, Trump, the GOP, Russia, and others conspired to overthrow the United States by “engineering” Trump and the GOP into power, in order to give aid, comfort, and to adhere to U.S. enemy Russia, and sanctioned Russian companies, including but not limited to Rosneft and Alfa Bank.
One after Putin’s and Trump’s Sater conspired with Cohen to “engineer” Trump and the GOP into power – on December 10, 2015, Mike Flynn, flew to Russia, and met with Putin at a Russian Television (RT) dinner, where Flynn was one of the very few people allowed to sit with Putin at that dinner, and on behalf of Trump and the GOP as their advisor, and where Flynn sat directly beside Putin, to his right, at a table of 10.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/guess-who-came-dinner-flynn-putin-n742696
One month later, on January 22, 2016, after the 12/10/2015 RT dinner with the GOP’s and Trump’s campaign advisor and thus campaign representative, Mike Flynn – Putin personally-approved Sater’s, Cohen’s, Trump’s, GOP’s, Russia’s, and/or Flynn’s ongoing conspiracy to treason, elections fraud, obstruction of justice, RICO, and/or other harm.
Trump later pardoned many of his and Russia’s treason and elections fraud conspirators, including Mike Flynn, who then played a role during the insurrection, in the same manner that the leader of Sacramento GOP who lynched the qui tam of the pro se relator September 21, 2014, specifically Jorge Riley, was later charged for crimes he committed during the insurrection.
This is another important reason to examine the legitimacy of Trump and the GOP before the 2016 elections, because as they disqualified themselves as individuals, and as a political party, before the 2016 elections, it would be pure fantasy, false, and unlawful that they could use the offices that they weren’t qualified for, and/or so that they could use public offices they were eligible to appoint, nominate, and/or confirm in order to illegitimately RICO obstruct, judge, pardon, and/or provide clemency to themselves and/or their co-conspirators.
It is a reasonable inference that Trump’s campaign advisor, Flynn, overtly negotiated the terms of that conspiracy agreement, and where at least some of the terms of that were negotiated were that Russia would hack every state’s voting machines to “engineer” Trump and the GOP into power, and that once in power they would give aid, comfort, and adhere to enemies of the United States and their sanctioned companies, including but not limited to Putin, Russia, Rosneft, and/or others.
Since then it has been revealed that after Putin agreed to unlawfully and illegitimately “engineer” Trump and the GOP into power over the judiciary and justice system, that Russia did hack the voting machines in every single state before the U.S. elections.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/25/us/politics/russian-hacking-elections.html
Furthermore, voting systems have been proven that can be hacked to flip votes from one candidate to another, as proven in a 2023 judicial election in Pennsylvania.
As innovation only improves technologies over time, it is a reasonable inference that before the 2016 elections that the voting machines were also hackable, and that when Felix Sater specified that Putin could “engineer” Trump and the GOP into power, he meant that they could hack the voting systems in all 50 states in such a manner as to flip enough votes for Trump to win via electoral college votes, and where Trump has never won a popular vote, including in 2020.
But in order to do this, a representative of Trump and the GOP would have to provide Russia voting data, in overt furtherance of the treason and elections fraud conspiracy that made Trump and the GOP ineligible for office (and thus made all of their changes to the government including the SCOTUS majority, Judge Cannon, other judges, pardons, clemency, and immunity claims, fruits from a poisonous tree of ineligibility).
That individual providing Russia with voting data was Trump Tower tenant and GOP and Trump campaign leader, Paul Manafort.
Accordingly, it is a reasonable inference that Trump’s and the GOP’s representative, Paul Manafort, under the control and supervision of Trump and the GOP, overtly furthered Trump’s and Putin’s Felix Sater’s 11/03/2015 treason and elections fraud conspiracy, furthered (a reasonable inference) by Trump’s, the GOP’s, Russia’s, and Putin’s Mike Flynn at the RT dinner with Putin, followed by Putin personally approving the same, followed by Paul Manafort overtly providing the Russian military’s GRU with voting data, so that Russia would know which of the 50 states it hacked it would most need to “engineer”, to flip enough votes to “engineer” Trump and the GOP into power over the judiciary and justice system.
Trump also furthered this conspiracy, when he asked Russia to engage in a cyberterrorism attack, cyber military attack, cyberespionage attack, and/or cyberattack against the critical infrastructure of the United States, in order to interfere with a federal election for POTUS, asking Russia to find emails of his political rivals, Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party, which Russia’s military did do in a conspiracy with Roger Stone (Paul Manafort’s former business partner, and where there first client was Donald Trump), Julian Assage, WikiLeaks, and/or Russia’s GRU.
“Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing. I think you will probably be mightily rewarded” (and they were when Trump and the GOP’s first moves after being engineered into power was to drop the sanctions against Russia that made Trump and the GOP ineligible, in a circular argument with these dropped sanctions fruits of the poisonous tree of ineligibility).
Donald Trump also RICO-obstructed for himself and for his 2015-2016 treason conspirators when he pardoned Roger Stone, who then like Mike Flynn, could not be leveraged by Trump-controlled Department of Justice to testify against Trump.
Res ipsa loquitur malum in se, this natural evil speaks for itself, and by way of illegitimate pardons and illegitimate clemency made Trump the judge as to who could testify against him in the investigations into him, the GOP, and U.S. enemy Russia, also under his control, in a manner that also made him a judge of his own behavior – in total violation of Nemo judex in causa sua (also written as nemo [est] judex in sua causa, in propria causa, in re sua or in parte sua), “the first principle” in constitutional law per SCOTUS and per Common Law, supra.
https://news.yahoo.com/russia-if-youre-listening-trump-urges-kremlin-210025769.html
This again is another important reason to examine the legitimacy of Trump and the GOP before the 2016 elections – and the fruits of the poisonous tree that their illegitimacy bore – because as they disqualified themselves as individuals, and as a political party, before the 2016 elections, it would be pure fantasy, false, and unlawful that they could use the offices that they weren’t qualified for, and/or so that they could use public offices they weren’t eligible to appoint, nominate, and/or confirm in order to illegitimately RICO obstruct, judge, pardon, and/or provide clemency to themselves and/or their co-conspirators.
Accordingly, if Trump and the GOP weren’t eligible for office before 2016, then this needs to be addressed by those who have been lawfully and legitimately installed into public offices, and where if they don’t, or conceal the evidence of the same, or fail to offer up the evidence of the same for consideration before the next election, or come to retrieve the evidence they know has been made available to them, then these individuals are giving aid, comfort, and/or adhering to enemies of the United States.
Paul Manafort had previously worked with U.S. enemy Russia and/or their GRU to “engineer” election wins in at least one other country, and whose business associate and/or employee, Konstantin Kilimnik, had worked for Putin’s and Russia’s military GRU, who had previously attacked the United States Department of Defense, NASA, the Pentagon, the State Department, the Democratic Party, and other military institutions, making Russia and the GRU enemies of the United States, and before Trump ran for office, for having engaged in cyber “warfare” against the United States military and intelligence complex
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Konstantin_Kilimnik
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cozy_Bear
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Manafort
This includes at least one attack after the GOP and Russia stalked and lynched the qui tam investigation into Trump, Russia, and the GOP between at least October 20, 2013 and September 21, 2014, specifically the Pentagon email system, “In August 2015, Cozy Bear was linked to a spear-phishing cyber-attack against the Pentagon email system, causing the shut down of the entire Joint Staff unclassified email system and Internet access during the investigation.[16][17].”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cozy_Bear
But Russia engaged in cyberwarfare against the United States before, during, and after Trump ran for office, important in establishing that Russia was an enemy of the United States when Trump and the GOP conspired to aid, comfort, and adhere to that enemy, and conspired to receive aid, comfort, and adherence in return.
“In 1999, Moonlight Maze was the US investigation of a 1996-1999 Russian cyberattack against NASA, the Pentagon, the US military, civilian academics and government agencies. The cyberattack was attributed to Russian-state-sponsored hackers.[71][72][73]
The 2008 cyberattack on the United States was connected to Russian language threat actors.[74]
In April 2015, CNN reported that "Russian hackers" had "penetrated sensitive parts of the White House" computers in "recent months". It was said that the FBI, the Secret Service, and other U.S. intelligence agencies categorized the attacks as "among the most sophisticated attacks ever launched against U.S. government systems."[75]
In 2015, CNN reported that Russian hackers, likely working for the Russian government, are suspected in the State Department hack. Federal law enforcement, intelligence and congressional officials briefed on the investigation say the hack of the State Department email system is the "worst ever" cyberattack intrusion against a federal agency.[76]
In February 2016, senior Kremlin advisor and top Russian cyber official Andrey Krutskikh told the Russian national security conference in Moscow that Russia was working on new strategies for the "information arena" that was equivalent to testing a nuclear bomb and would "allow us to talk to the Americans as equals".[77]
In 2016, the release of hacked emails belonging to the Democratic National Committee, John Podesta, and Colin Powell, among others, through DCLeaks and WikiLeaks was said by private sector analysts[78] and US intelligence services[79] to have been of Russian origin.[80][81] Also, in December 2016, Republicans and Democrats on the Senate Committee on Armed Services called for "a special select committee to investigate Russian attempts to influence the presidential election".[82][83]
In 2018, the United States Computer Emergency Response Team released an alert warning that the Russian government was executing "a multi-stage intrusion campaign by Russian government cyber actors who targeted small commercial facilities' networks where they staged malware, conducted spear phishing, and gained remote access into energy sector networks." It further noted that "[a]fter obtaining access, the Russian government cyber actors conducted network reconnaissance, moved laterally, and collected information pertaining to Industrial Control Systems."[84] The hacks targeted at least a dozen U.S. power plants, in addition to water processing, aviation, and government facilities.[85]
In June 2019, the New York Times reported that hackers from the United States Cyber Command planted malware potentially capable of disrupting the Russian electrical grid.[86] According to Wired senior writer Andy Greenberg, "The Kremlin warned that the intrusions could escalate into a cyberwar between the two countries."[86]
Over several months in 2020, a group known as APT29 or Cozy Bear, working for Russia's Foreign Intelligence Service, breached a top cybersecurity firm and multiple U.S. government agencies including the Treasury, Commerce, and Energy departments and the National Nuclear Security Administration.[87] The hacks occurred through a network management system called SolarWinds Orion. The U.S. government had an emergency meeting on 12 December 2020, and the press reported the hack the next day. When Russia's Foreign Intelligence Service performs such hacks, it is typically "for traditional espionage purposes, stealing information that might help the Kremlin understand the plans and motives of politicians and policymakers," according to The Washington Post, and not for the purpose of leaking information to the public.[88]
Further information: 2020 United States federal government data breach
In February 2021 a report by Dragos stated that Sandworm has been targeting US electric utilities, oil and gas, and other industrial firms since at least 2017 and were successful in breaching these firms a "handful" of times.[89][90]
In May 2021, the Colonial Pipeline ransomware attack was perpetrated by Russian language hacking group DarkSide.[91][92] It was the largest cyberattack on an energy infrastructure target in US history. Colonial Pipeline temporarily halted the operations of the pipeline due to the ransomware attack.[93] The Department of Justice recovered the bitcoin ransom from the hackers.[94]”
Accordingly, any sanctioned, unsanctioned, specified and/or unspecified person, group, political party, company, organization, rogue government employee or representative, and/or country involved in any sort of “warfare”, treason, insurrection, sedition, espionage, and/or terrorism against the United States, is necessarily an enemy of the United States, and so Russia was certainly an enemy of the United States, before and after Trump solicited Russia to attack the critical infrastructure of the United States to provide Trump the emails of Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party, whereafter Russia did, and this came after Felix Sater solicited Michael Cohen to agree to get Trump and the GOP to commit treason and elections fraud with U.S. enemy Russia, and after Putin agreed to the same, merging all of the same into an ongoing conspiracy to commit treason and elections fraud against the United States, but not limited to the same.
Trump, the GOP, and CA/Sacramento GOP/RNC, also furthered the ongoing treason, sedition, RICO, elections fraud, concealment of government documents (the lynched qui tam investigation of the pro se relator), obstruction of justice, and/or other criminal conspiracy spokes to further the same when they met with U.S. enemy, Russia’s, Ambassador at the Mayflower Hotel April 27, 2016, and continued their negotiation of terms and specifics on how to overtly further the ongoing conspiracy spokes.
“You might not have heard of the Mayflower Hotel scandal, but it goes to the heart of Trump’s unseemly relationship with Russia.
The weird thing about the scandal is that all the major facts have already been reported by established journalists in respected media outlets, yet none of them have laid out a narrative that explains how the facts fit together. Until now.
During the week, lawyer and journalist Seth Abramson released a so-called ‘megathread’ on Twitter, which pieced together an incredible tale, pointing to a cocktail party at the Mayflower Hotel last year as the place where the agreement for Russia to assist Trump in the elections all began … On 27th April last year — the night that he made his first major foreign policy speech at the Mayflower Hotel — Donald Trump held a secret cocktail party at that very same hotel where he met with the ambassadors of Russia, Italy and Singapore.
Why are Russia, Italy and Singapore significant?
Well, remember the dossier of dirt on Trump that Buzzfeed released at the end of last year? It was written in the months after that April 27th meeting, and it alleged there was a deal that Trump would drop the sanctions against Russia and let them sell 19 percent of oil company Rosneft, and that Trump would benefit from this transaction.
The thing is that in early December, shortly after Trump had won the election, 19.5 percent of Rosneft was sold to unknown buyers, in a complicated three-nation deal. Who were the countries party to the deal? Russia, Italy and Singapore.
While the details of the deal are secret, the dossier implied that if Trump was elected, and let the deal slide through, he would receive a “brokerage fee” for helping make it happen. If that fee was the extra 0.5 percent on the transaction, that means that Trump may have pocketed $200-$250 million out of the transaction.
Thus, the allegation at the centre of the Mayflower Hotel Scandal is that on that night a deal was struck: The Russians would assist Trump in getting elected, and in return, Trump would drop sanctions against Russia, allowing the Rosneft deal to go through, and to sweeten the deal, Trump would receive 0.5 percent “brokerage fee”.
All of the information that Abramson has used to compile this narrative has been reported in traditional media outlets with household names: The Wall Street Journal, The Guardian, The New York Times, The Washington Post. But none of them have quite pulled the threads together … Even though there is clearly more to unfold in the story, there are some amazing details that suggest there is at least a cover-up going on over the Mayflower Hotel meeting.
For example, Trump’s Attorney-General Jeff Sessions was at the party that night. He has admitted to meeting the Russian Ambassador twice during the election campaign, but still has not acknowledged meeting him a third time at the Mayflower Hotel, suggesting that the Mayflower Hotel meeting is particularly sensitive.
And guess who else was there that night? [Sacramento/CA GOP’s/RNC’s] Devin Nunes, the increasingly discredited Republican Congressman, who is currently supposed to be running the House Investigation into the Trump campaign’s ties with Russia.”
Accordingly, Alfa Bank’s Rosneft was a sanctioned entity and/or as was Alfa Bank, when Trump and the CA/Sacramento GOP/RNC met with a representative of an enemy of the United States to discuss how to give aid, comfort, and/or adhere to U.S. enemies in this manner, and where the State Department has previously specified that those they sanction are enemies.
In fact Trump and the GOP’s administration acknowledged the same in the Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act, and where adversary is interchangeable with the word enemy, and where Russia was specified as one of America’s adversaries or enemies.
https://www.dhs.gov/news/2021/02/11/countering-america-s-adversaries-through-sanctions-act-faqs
Similarly, “On 16 July 2014, the Obama administration imposed sanctions through the US Department of Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) by adding Rosneft and other entities to the Sectoral Sanctions List (SSL) in retaliation for the annexation of the Crimean Peninsula by the Kremlin and the ongoing Russian interference in Ukraine.[68] On 12 September 2014 the United Kingdom also sanctioned Rosneft.[69] …
The Trump administration expanded further sanctions on its Swiss-incorporated company (Rosneft Trading S.A.) and its president Didier Casimiro on 18 February 2020, for supporting Venezuela's Nicolás Maduro regime by operating in the oil sector of the Venezuelan economy.[70][71]””
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosneft
Accordingly, not only were Russia and Alfa Bank’s Rosneft enemies or adversaries of the United States before, during, and after Trump and the GOP ran for office in 2016, but Trump and the GOP acknowledged the same in Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act thereafter.
However, this Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act was made only after Russia engineered Trump and the GOP into power – and within weeks of the same, Mike Flynn and the Russian Ambassador Sergei Kislyak, who Trump met with at the Mayflower Hotel to discuss aiding enemies of the United States by dropping sanctions against U.S. enemies, collaborated on how to aid, comfort, and adhere to U.S. enemy Russia and its sanctioned companies, by dropping sanctions against Rosneft, to allow the conspiracy terms to be completed, during the transition period between presidencies, and so outside of the alleged Trump presidency.
“On 7 December 2016, Rosneft signed a deal to sell 19.5% of the outstanding shares, or roughly US$11 billion, to the Anglo-Swiss multinational commodity trader Glencore and the Qatar Investment Authority.[41] Officially, the stake was split 50/50 between Glencore and Qatar, but Glencore contributed only €300 million and claims only a 0.54% stake. The ownership structure includes a Cayman Islands company, QHG Cayman Limited, whose ownership can not be traced.[42] After the transaction, Rosneft's holding company Rosneftegaz retained 50% + 1 share of the company.[43]
On 26 September 2017, the Russian government controversially approved the former German chancellor Gerhard Schröder as chairman of Rosneft.[46]
In May 2018, it was announced that the Qatar-Glencore consortium is cancelling the plan to sell a $9.1 billion (14%) stake of Rosneft to CEFC China Energy. With the dissolution of the consortium, the Qatar Investment Authority purchased the shares instead, thereby solidifying its position as one of the biggest shareholders (19%) of Rosneft.[47]
In the 2010s, the extensive contact between Rosneft and ExxonMobil were further deepened, with Igor Sechin and Rex Tillerson getting to know each other personally.[48]”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosneft
Accordingly, on April 27, 2016, at the Mayflower Hotel, Trump, the GOP, Russia via Kislyak, and Sacramento/CA GOP/RNC via Devin Nunes, and/or others conspired to give aid, comfort, and/or to adhere to U.S. enemies Russia, Rosneft’s Alfa Bank, and/or Alfa Bank’s Rosneft, when specific treason and elections fraud terms were made with these U.S. enemies, which were completed before Trump’s inauguration, during the transitionary period, whereafter Seth Abramson and Charles Firth published some of the details of the treason and elections fraud terms, whereafter Trump and the GOP pivoted after the sale of Alfa Bank’s Rosneft to a position where they viewed them as enemies they had aided, before Trump and the GOP officially “took” power in a conspiracy with U.S. enemy Russia and other enemies in order to aid, comfort, and adhere to them after being “engineered” into power.
Furthermore, Trump (who asked Russia to engage in cyberwarfare against the United States, and who negotiated with Russia’s Kislyak to reward Russia, and who dictated the meeting at Trump Tower June 9, 2016), the GOP (who on 09/21/2014 lynched and thus obstructed an investigation into Trump Organization, Trump Tower tenants, the CA/Sacramento GOP/RNC, Russia, and oligarchs operating in Russia), Paul Manafort (who provided the GRU’s Konstantin Kilimnik sensitive voting data), Jared Kushner (also at the Mayflower Hotel sanctions meeting connecting the two meetings), and Russia’s sanctions lawyer in both the U.S. and in Switzerland, Natalia Veselnitskaya, collectively conspired to further discuss terms of the terms of the evolving and ongoing criminal conspiracy to commit treason, sedition, elections fraud, and/or other harm on June 09, 2016.
“Trump Jr. initially told reporters that the meeting had been "primarily about adoptions".[2][42] He then released a statement saying it had been a "short introductory meeting" concerning "a program about the adoption of Russian children".[43]
A few days later Trump Jr. acknowledged that he went into the meeting expecting to receive opposition research from Veselnitskaya that could hurt Clinton's campaign, adding that none was presented and that the conversation instead focused on the Magnitsky Act.[23][44][45]
Later a statement from Trump Jr.'s lawyer said Veselnitskaya had claimed to have information "that individuals connected to Russia were funding the Democratic National Committee and supporting Mrs. Clinton" but "it quickly became clear that she had no meaningful information".[46] Trump Jr. said he felt the adoption issue was her "true agenda all along" and the claims of helpful political information were a pretext.[47]
After learning that the New York Times was about to publish the series of emails setting up the meeting, Trump Jr. himself published the email chain via Twitter, and explained that he considered the meeting to be "political opposition research".[19][48] He summarized the meeting as "such a nothing... a wasted 20 minutes".[49]
Both Donald Trump and Trump Jr. have claimed this was "opposition research", but Steven D'Amico, an expert on the subject, denies the claim and describes proper opposition research: "All information gathered must be lawfully obtained....and you certainly don't sit in on meetings where a foreign attorney promises sensitive information obtained by a rival government."[50]
Veselnitskaya said that she intended to provide allegations to the Trump campaign about a firm connected to William Browder, a financier who lobbied for the Magnitsky Act. She said that the firm committed tax evasion in Russia and donated to Democrats.[51] She said in an interview, "I never had any damaging or sensitive information about Hillary Clinton. It was never my intention to have that."[52] She initially denied the allegation that she was or is connected to the Russian government. At a later date she disclosed that she was in regular contact with the Russian Prosecutor General's office and with Prosecutor General Yury Chaika, about sharing information she acquired in her investigation relating to the Magnitsky Act.[51][52][53]”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump_Tower_meeting
An additional term of this sprawling ongoing organized crime syndicate was to traffic children from Russia to the Trump family, many of whom were named clients, financiers, and/or associates of child kidnapper, child rapist, and child sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein, in the context Trump was specifically accused of gang raping and/or sodomizing 13 and/or 12 year old girls in a lawsuit by Katie Johnson, who specified that after Trump raped her, that he threw money at her and told her to “get a fucking abortion”.
https://cdn.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/Johnson_TrumpEpstein_Calif_Lawsuit.pdf
According to the International Criminal Court, who issued a warrant for the arrest of Putin for war crimes, specifically trafficking children as the Trump-Kushner family and their legal representative discussed at the Trump Tower meeting June 9, 2016 – Putin and/or Russians under the control of Putin did traffic, rape, and/or sex traffick children from Ukraine to Russia, where the Trump-Kushner family had conspired to traffic children from during the meeting with Putin’s, and/or Russia’s legal team representative June 9, 2016, which then can be argued to have furthered this spoke of the ongoing conspiracy to overthrow the United States, as one of the spokes in the ongoing conspiracy to general commit sprawling organized crime.
The Mueller Investigation, which superceded the Crossfire Hurricane investigation championed by the FBI and Senator Dianne Feinstein, revealed even more conspiracies between Trump, the GOP, Russia, and others before, during, and after Russia engineered Trump into power over Robert Mueller and over William Barr, but these investigations were eventually RICO-obstructed by Russian agents the GOP, Donald Trump, and their proxies.
As a reality check and unifying circumstantial evidence, the investigation or “witch-hunt” Trump specified he knew about before he ran for office as he came down the escalator of Trump Tower, June 16, 2015 (the birthday of the daughter of the author of the lynched and RICO obstructed pro se relator’s qui tam September 21, 2014) – which came after Russia and Sacramento/CA GOP/RNC conspired to stalk, cyberstalk, cyberattack, lynch (September 21, 2014), and RICO obstruct by the complex conspiracy specified herein, but not limited to the same, and which was focused on the organized crimes of Russia, oligarchs operating in Russia, the GOP/RNC, Trump Organization, Trump Tower tenants, and/or others – resulted in Trump, the GOP, and Russia’s representative conspiring to overthrow the United States in order to give aid, comfort, and to adhere to Russia on April 27, 2016 (the birthday of the author of the pro se relator’s qui tam), from the Mayflower Hotel (named after the historical family voyage of the author of the pro se relator’s qui tam).
Furthermore, this resulted in the FBI and Senator Feinstein championing Crossfire Hurricane, and continuing with the reality check, Senator Feinsten directly met twice with the brother of the author of the Russian and GOP stalked and lynched qui tam), whereafter the chief obstructor of Crossfire Hurricane, William Barr (whose father is who was Jeffrey Epstein’s mentor, Donald Barr, the author of pedophile fantasy novel Space Relations), also met with the brother of the author of the Russian and GOP stalked and lynched qui tam, as did Harlan Cross, Trump’s General H.R. McMaster, Jeb Bush, and G.W. Bush – directly meeting with the brother of the author of the Russian and GOP stalked and lynched qui tam into Russia, the GOP, and Trump orbit.
Alone, any one of these might be random circumstance, but collectively, this forms a pretty telling pattern, that makes it a reasonable inference that the Russian and GOP stalked and lynched qui tam of the pro se relator in California, is in part, the origins of, the overlapping investigation of, the parallel investigation, the preceding investigation, and/or the subsequent investigation of Crossfire Hurricane, and thus by extension the Mueller and Durham investigations. And this explains why Senator Feinstein from California championed Crossfire Hurricane, and then later met with the brother of the lynched qui tam not once but twice.
And where the author of the stalked and lynched qui tam made attempts to repeatedly reach out to different government investigators, including but not limited to Mueller and/or SDNY, specifying his investigation was “the origins of the Mueller Investigation”, resulting in Russian agents Trump, the GOP, Bill Barr, John Durham, and/or others much later (months to years later) specifyied that the investigation of John Durham was to be known as the “origins of the Mueller Investigation” (and yet Durham avoided contacting the author of the earlier origins of the Mueller Investigation and made many different attempted to “disconnect” evidence proving a Trump, GOP, and Russia treason and elections fraud conspiracy, debunked by the actual facts, and where Barr did make contact with the brother of the author of the GOP and Russian stalked and lynched investigation).
Bill Barr, Trump, the GOP, Durham, and/or others retroactively claimed to have “secretly” and thus questionably-made Durham Special Counsel around the same time as the fake electors and insurrection conspiracies were being planned via complex sedition, treason, and terrorism ongoing conspiracy spokes – but where the reporting by legal analyst and national security journalist, Dr. Marcy Wheel, at Empty Wheel, generated a massive amount of evidence of corruption by Durham and Barr, in a manner that would jeopardize national security if they were to be provided an advanced understanding of the Russia and GOP stalked and lynched pro se qui tam investigation.
And so the author of the Russia and GOP stalked and lynched pro se qui tam investigation made repeated efforts to communicate what he knew to help investigators, directly communicating with investigators, including the Special Counsel’s Office, but not limited to the same, and also indirectly communicating with investigators via UpRights News publications, with emphasis on the sections named “Crossfire Hurricane Origins” and “Terror Log”, but not limited to the same, after instructing federal investigators to follow the pro se qui tam author’s online searches, and to probe specific accounts and files, and also offering to debrief federal investigators in person, specifying an 11 year investigation into organized crime, organizing an estimated million pages of evidence, which were compared to the elements of law, their sources, and their authorities, resulting in about 10,000 pages of reports and summaries, some as concise as a page, or multiple pages, the largest report being about 8000 pages.
Accordingly, all of the evidence published and not published but referenced at UpRights News makes it perfectly clear that Trump and the GOP made themselves ineligible for public office and many different ways, before, during, and/or after Trump ran for office, and/or before Russia engineered Trump and the GOP into power in a treason conspiracy to aid, comfort, and adhere to Russia and vice versa.
This is why Trump’s and the GOP’s last defense is to ask the SCOTUS and other judges and/or others they illegitimately-installed to RICO-obstruct justice for them in any manner they can, to do so in 2024, in a manner that will violate the 14th Amendment Section 1 and other sections specified herein, but in doing so, like the getaway driver for a bank/elections heist, these RICO obstructors, aid, comfort, and adhere to enemies of the United States in overt furtherance of Felix Sater’s, Putin’s, Russia’s, the GOP’s, Trump’s, Trump’s family’s, and/or others’ ongoing criminal conspiracy spokes, which include treason, sedition, insurrection, espionage, terrorism, elections fraud, obstruction of justice, RICO, witness intimidation, and/or other harm, and where witness, victim, and government informant intimidation is a type of obstruction of justice, or continuing with the analogy, each a getaway car, whose collective goal is to allow the ongoing organized crime syndicate to evade prosecution and/or liability for their organized crimes, so that they can continue with more harm against the American people and our government.
This is why it is important to closely examine the eligibility of Trump, the GOP, SCOTUS, other judges, and/or any other RICO obstruction proxy installed by Jeffrey Epstein’s and Russia’s overlapping organized crime syndicate, also proven at UpRights News, and beyond a reasonable doubt – because it is a frivolous conspiracy that Trump, the GOP, and at least half of the GOP SCOTUS majority were qualified for public office before, during, and after the 2016 elections – and only a frivolous conspiracy by a RICO-corrupted, treason-got, and thus illegitimate SCOTUS and Judge Cannon can save themselves and them all, and thus is almost certain to result in the further RICO corruption by Cannon and SCOTUS – to become the judges in their own ineligibility cases is a reasonable inference and expectation.
BECAUSE THE GOP CONSPIRED TO GIVE AID, COMFORT, AND ADHERED TO U.S. ENEMIES BEFORE, DURING, AND AFTER THE 2016 ELECTIONS, THEY TOO WERE NOT IN A LEGITIMATE NOR LAWFULLY POSITION TO LEGITIMATELY CONFIRM JUDICIAL OR ANY APPOINTMENTS, NOR TO FAIL TO IMPEACH TRUMP
Accordingly, the GOP, like Trump, who are provable treason and elections fraud conspirators with U.S. enemy Russia, were not in a lawful nor legitimate position to be able to confirm SCOTUS judges, other judges, and/or other proxies Trump, the GOP, and Russia sought to install into the U.S. government, to irreparably harm the United States, our people, and our rule of law – as a defense to all of this harm, and why examining the legitimacy of the 2016 elections and its candidates, and their conduct before and after 2017 is of paramount importance, and relevant to many ongoing criminal prosecution of Trump, the GOP, and/or others.
Accordingly, subtracting the ineligible votes of those members of the GOP who were not eligible to vote for Trump’s impeachment, would have otherwise successfully impeached Trump and the GOP in Congress, and every SCOTUS and other judge unlawfully installed by them.
And where Nemo judex in causa sua (also written as nemo [est] judex in sua causa, in propria causa, in re sua or in parte sua) from Common Law and SCOTUS rulings demand that the GOP engineered into power by Russia could not have lawfully voted to impeach their coconspirator, nor could they have lawfully RICO obstructed justice for the same in the manner that they did – as a “first principle in constitutional law” – as to do so would make them the judges of their own sprawling and ongoing organized crimes, which is what happened between 2017 through to the present day, and why examining the eligibility of Congress, SCOTUS, Trump, other judges, and/or their installed proxies is so very important to defending the United States, our people, our way of life, and our rule of law, which the conspirators are now organizing to overthrow, as enemies of the United States and organized crime would.
Nemo judex in causa sua (also written as nemo [est] judex in sua causa, in propria causa, in re sua or in parte sua) is a Latin brocard that translates as "no one is judge in their own case". Originating from Roman law, it was crystallized into a phrase by Edward Coke in the 17th century and is now widely regarded as a fundamental tenet of natural justice and constitutionalism.[1] It states that no one can judge a case in which they have an interest. In some jurisdictions, the principle is strictly enforced to avoid any appearance of bias, even when there is none: as Lord Chief Justice Hewart laid down in Rex v. Sussex Justices, "Justice must not only be done, but must also be seen to be done".[2][3]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nemo_iudex_in_causa_sua
In a similar manner, Nemo judex in causa sua (also written as nemo [est] judex in sua causa, in propria causa, in re sua or in parte sua) also prevented Trump from being the chief enforcers of the laws of Congress via the heads of the divisions of government, into the investigations into himself.
And the 14th Amendment Section 3 is not the only body of self-executing law that Trump and the GOP violated before the 2016 elections, which disqualified them from running for office then, and in the same sort of self-executing manner as someone who is underage simply can’t hold public office.
No one who is a minor has legal standing that they are eligible to run for public office, just as no one who has disqualified themselves from public office, has legal standing to run for public office in exactly the same manner.
Similarly, no one who is a minor and who runs for public office and wins, may lawfully change anything about how the United States operates, including appointing, nominating, and/or confirming SCOTUS and other judges, which would be fruits from the poisonous tree of ineligibility, and mandate the application of U.S voiding laws.
As Donald Trump, the GOP, and/or others were not qualified and/or not eligible to be President, members of Congress, SCOTUS justices, other judges like Aileen Cannon, then they could not have legitimately appointed, nominated, nor confirmed any judges, nor legitimately granted any pardons nor clemency, nor could they have issued an legitimate executive orders, nor could they have made any other legitimate changes to the government, nor were they in a position to receive any legitimate executive immunity, nor did they have any legitimate executive privileges, nor did they have any legitimate advice of White House counsel reserved for Presidents, nor were they in a position to ever legitimately receive any top secret intelligence briefings, nor secret service protections, nor were they able to benefit from the direction of funds from the government, nor were they able to receive any funds, as a result of being President – and if they weren’t legitimate Presidents, and concealed the same to receive payment or any other benefit – this would constitute government fraud – and RICO obstruction of justice and corruption, if they conspired with others to conceal the same to usurp the Presidency and to use the powers of the Presidency they were not permitted to legitimately used, to make any changes to the government, warranting the application of U.S. voiding laws to undo the illegitimate changes they were not legitimately allowed to make.
Accordingly, no one shall be a judge in their own case nor cause is long-established law, including among English monarchs, whose Common Law legal system is the basis for the legal system in the United States, and the need for the same is further supported by the elucidation of Privilegium maius, which were forged royal claims used to unlawfully elevate the Habsburg crime family into fake or inferior European royalty, who then lorded over Europe based on the same for 666 years this year, through to the modern era – and so no monarch can be their own judge because of illegitimate nature of many a monarch, who can’t dictate law if they aren’t monarchs, again based on precedences and precedents.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privilegium_Maius
“Precedence means “priority of importance,” as in “Their request takes precedence because we received it first.” Precedent means “an earlier occurrence” or “something done or said that may serve as an example.” https://www.merriam-webster.com/grammar/usage-of-precedent-vs-precedence
And yet SCOTUS wants to police itself and doesn’t want to be held by the same standards of equal treatment under the law as other judges otherwise required by the 14th Amendment Section 1, and thus in violation of the Constitution, their oaths of office, the scope and nature of their employment, and Congress gets to impeach itself and/or others, and Trump plans to grant pardons to himself and/or others in a manner that makes each of these branches their own judges for their own crimes, which then results in little to no prosecution of their own crimes by themselves.
Taken together, an ongoing organized crime syndicate planning to overthrow the justice system and rule of law in the United States so that they can continue with decades more of organized crime above the law and as their own judges or the judges for one another’s sometimes conspiring criminal misconduct.
In a similar manner as stare decisis, precedence, and precedent, there are the legal terms a priori and a fortiori.
“Argumentum a fortiori (literally "argument from the stronger [reason]") (UK: /ˈɑː fɔːrtiˈoʊri/,[1] US: /ˈeɪ fɔːrʃiˈɔːraɪ/) is a form of argumentation that draws upon existing confidence in a proposition to argue in favor of a second proposition that is held to be implicit in, and even more certain than, the first.[2]”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_a_fortiori
“A priori ('from the earlier') and a posteriori ('from the later') are Latin phrases used in philosophy to distinguish types of knowledge, justification, or argument by their reliance on experience. A priori knowledge is independent from any experience. Examples include mathematics,[i] tautologies and deduction from pure reason.[ii] A posteriori knowledge depends on empirical evidence. Examples include most fields of science and aspects of personal knowledge.
The terms originate from the analytic methods found in Organon, a collection of works by Aristotle. Prior analytics (a priori) is about deductive logic, which comes from definitions and first principles. Posterior analytics (a posteriori) is about inductive logic, which comes from observational evidence.
Both terms appear in Euclid's Elements and were popularized by Immanuel Kant's Critique of Pure Reason, an influential work in the history of philosophy.[1] Both terms are primarily used as modifiers to the noun knowledge (i.e., a priori knowledge). A priori can be used to modify other nouns such as truth. Philosophers may use apriority, apriorist and aprioricity as nouns referring to the quality of being a priori.[2]
A priori example
“Consider the proposition: "If George V reigned at least four days, then he reigned more than three days." This is something that one knows a priori because it expresses a statement that one can derive by reason alone.”
A posteriori example
Consider the proposition: "George V reigned from 1910 to 1936." This is something that (if true) one must come to know a posteriori because it expresses an empirical fact unknowable by reason alone.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_priori_and_a_posteriori
However, anyone who retraces the legitimacy of Jeffrey Epstein’s UK and EU royal families will reasonably conclude that George V was never eligible to rule, due to the likes of the forged royal claims of Privilegium maius, but not at all limited to the same, with no fewer than 50 different violations or aberrations of royal succession laws between these forged claims and the modern day, a priori and a fortiori Caroligian laws of royal succession, a priori and a fortiori Salic laws of royal succession, a priori nemo [est] judex in sua causa, in propria causa, in re sua or in parte sua and a fortiori regarding laws of royal succession and possession of property laws, a priori and a fortiori biblical law regarding not violating the laws of the government (Romans 13) to comply with the word of God, a priori and a fortiori Magna Carta regarding laws of royal succession, property, and/or treason laws, a priori and a fortiori the Charter of Civil Liberties, and a priori and a fortiori Common Law, but not at all limited to the same.
Accordingly, nemo [est] judex in sua causa, in propria causa, in re sua or in parte sua, stare decisis, a fortiori, a priori, precedences, and precedents form the basis of modern and shared law in the US and UK – or more simply, older and stronger laws must prevail and no person(s) may [directly or indirectly (by proxy)] be their own judge in the matter, with respect to the legitimacy of government.
Accordingly, as a matter of established law, SCOTUS nor any judge installed, appointed, nominated, and/or confirmed by any President and/or Congress who themselves were not legitimately elected, and/or who were not qualified to run for and/or hold public office, can legitimately rule or opine on the legitimacy of the illegitimacy of those who illegitimately installed, appointed, nominated, and/or confirmed them.
The same is known as a circular or illogical or illegitimate argument, which violates logic, reasoning, and critical thinking, or more simply is a false or wrong argument that has no legitimate teeth, regardless of how others may want to spin or posture their illegitimacy as legitimate.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_reasoning
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy
As swing voters, no one is trying to steal elections here, but rather by employing basic logic, reasoning, and critical thinking here, with the facts, the elements of law, their sources, and their authorities, there is evidence well beyond a reasonable doubt of an ongoing organized crime syndicate involving enemies of the United States, who have conspired to overthrow the United States, U.S. Constitution, and rule of law over and over again towards a fascist dictatorship and/or kleptocracy.
A different way to say this is that there can’t be a legitimate cause (legitimate governance, laws, rulings, pardons, clemency, privilege, immunity, and the like) without a legitimate effect (legitimate appointment to government).
Another way to say this is that it would be unreasonable for anyone to argue the frivolous conspiracy that John Roberts, Brett Kavanaugh, Clarence Thomas, Amy Barret, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch were legitimately installed, appointed, nominated, and/or confirmed, because they most certainly were not, is what the facts and the laws prove beyond a reasonable doubt, and largely because the Presidents and/or GOP members who appointed them furthered an ongoing treason, elections fraud, and RICO obstruction of justice conspiracy.
THE PLEDGE OF “ALLEGIANCE” AS A STARTING POINT FOR CLAWING BACK ILLEGITIMATE POTUS, SCOTUS, CONGRESSIONAL, AND JUDICIAL APPOINTMENTS
Though the Pledge of Allegiance has changed over time, much of it has has not change and is now an integral part of the body of laws that disqualify any person from public office within the United States.
All POTUS, SCOTUS, members of Congress, and the judiciary have pledged to one or both of the following, between 1924 to 1954,
"I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all", and/or since 1954 (current version, per 4 U.S.C. §4)[4]
"I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pledge_of_Allegiance
As this pledge is nearly ubiquitous across American culture, education, social, sporting, religious, legal, and/or employment settings, it is a reasonable inference that every American has pledged allegiance to the United States, and the Republic for which it stands (defined by the Constitution), in an indivisible manner, with liberty and justice for all).
This includes Trump, the GOP, SCOTUS, other judges, and members of congress, but not limited to the same, and thus at the very least, the Pledge of Allegiance is important to establishing that Trump and these others more likely than not pledged allegiance to the United States before betraying the United States, and/or RICO obstructing the same like getaway drivers of a bank/elections heist.
THE OATHS OF OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, THE U.S. CONGRESS, AND THE U.S. JUDICIARY
In a similar manner to the pledge of allegiance to the United States, the highest officers and offices of the United States must make additional pledges, oaths, and/or make contracts with the United States and/or its people, before, and as a prerequisite to, and in order to, obtain the authority to change and enforce U.S. laws.
Anyone committing perjury here in order to deceive the US government, and its people into giving this person authority, would be committing government fraud by way of false claims and perjury, and thus would not have legitimately been installed, appointed, nominated, and/or confirmed as a matter of fact and law, and thus by default, would be illegitimately installed, appointed, nominated, and/or confirmed.
THE OATH OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES
“The oath of office of the president of the United States is the oath or affirmation that the president of the United States takes upon assuming office.
The wording of the oath is specified in Article II, Section One, Clause 8, of the United States Constitution, and a new president must take it BEFORE exercising or carrying out any official powers or duties.
This clause is one of three oath or affirmation clauses in the Constitution, but it is the only one that actually specifies the words that must be spoken. Article I, Section 3 requires Senators, when sitting to try impeachments, to be "on Oath or Affirmation." Article VI, Clause 3, similarly requires the persons specified therein to "be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution."
And so violating the oath, allegiance, and/or Constitution in any provable manner by a POTUS disqualifies that POTUS, because per the Constitution one cannot be POTUS without swearing an oath or affirmation, and if violated then that prerequisite oath to being POTUS is invalid. Similarly, engaging in disqualifying crimes and/or the RICO obstruction of justice of the same like getaway drivers is well outside of the scope of the oath of POTUS, which helps define what a POTUS actually is and isn’t.
The presidential oath requires much more than that general oath of allegiance and fidelity. This clause enjoins the new president to swear or affirm: "I will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."[1]
Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:— "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."[2]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oath_of_office_of_the_president_of_the_United_States
Note, this would include following the advice of legal counsel to not commit crimes (like stealing, concealing, and/or destroying the top secret documents of the Origins of Crossfire Hurricane to leave an evidence void proving one’s own disqualification from public office), and not committing the same crimes thereafter, as Trump did against advice of legal council, best suited to let him “know” that he would be violating the law and thus his oath and thus his duties as POTUS if violated the law instead of upheld the same.
There is no defense to violating the country’s highest laws and to this degree and in an ongoing manner, perfectly explaining the radicalization of Donald Trump, the GOP, GOP’s members in Congress, SCOTUS, Russia, and/or those they have sought to radicalize in violation of their oaths of office, and thus in violation of the scope of their duties, also described in the oath of office, which if violated is thus outside the scope of their prescribed duties and oaths, and thus outside of the definition of the public offices they have usurped and corrupted, and thus outside of any reasonable application or interpretation of law that would prove otherwise, which would be fruits of the poisonous tree of illegitimacy, and heavily steeped in frivolous logic, reasoning, and critical thinking, and precedent, and in violation of the Constitution, and thus outside the protections of those offices and protective laws or conventions for those offices.
More simply violating the oath of public office ensures that individuals violating the same are not operating within the scope of their public offices, but rather, far outside of the same, and thus far outside of the same may be prosecuted when the conduct is criminal in nature as matter of established law.
“Article Two of the United States Constitution establishes the executive branch of the federal government, which carries out and enforces federal laws. Article Two vests the power of the executive branch in the office of the president of the United States, lays out the procedures for electing and removing the president, and establishes the president's powers and responsibilities.”
Accordingly, anyone operating outside of what the Constitution has prescribed is operating outside of the protections and scope of their oaths and offices.
“Section 1 of Article Two establishes the positions of the president and the vice president, and sets the term of both offices at four years. Section 1's Vesting Clause declares that the executive power of the federal government is vested in the president and, along with the Vesting Clauses of Article One and Article Three, establishes the separation of powers among the three branches of government. Section 1 also establishes the Electoral College, the body charged with electing the president and the vice president. Section 1 provides that each state chooses members of the Electoral College in a manner directed by each state's respective legislature, with the states granted electors equal to their combined representation in both houses of Congress. Section 1 lays out the procedures of the Electoral College and requires the House of Representatives to hold a contingent election to select the president if no individual wins a majority of the electoral vote. Section 1 also sets forth the eligibility requirements for the office of the president, provides procedures in case of a presidential vacancy, and requires the president to take an oath of office.”
Accordingly, Trump, G.W. Bush, Bill Clinton, G.H.W. Bush, Reagan, Johnson, Truman, and FDR were required to take the oath of office specifying their duties as POTUS, and where operating outside of the same would not be within the scope of POTUS, but outside of the same, and thus outside of their official duties, and outside of the laws or conventions that protect or provide immunity or impunity to POTUS not violating their oaths of office or their duties.
“Section 2 of Article Two lays out the powers of the presidency, establishing that the president serves as the commander-in-chief of the military, among many other roles. This section gives the president the power to grant pardons.”
But anyone who disqualified themselves from public office by violating their oaths or laws disqualifying them, wouldn’t have legitimate power to grant pardons, nor would the have the legitimate power as agents of Russia, to betray our military in Syria by pulling them out, in order to give aid, comfort, and/or to adhere to our enemies Syria, Hamas, ISIS, Iran, and/or Russia, like Trump did.
Here the sum of Trump’s illegitimacy and him operating outside the scope and thus duties of his office and oath will prove in an increasing manner that not only wasn’t Trump eligible for public office but that while usurping office he wasn’t behaving within the scope of the office of POTUS nor within the scope of his oath much of the time, as an agent of Russia wouldn’t.
“Section 2 also requires the "principal officer" of any executive department to tender advice. Though not required by Article Two, President George Washington organized the principal officers of the executive departments into the Cabinet, a practice that subsequent presidents have followed. The Treaty Clause grants the president the power to enter into treaties with the approval of two-thirds of the Senate. The Appointments Clause grants the president the power to appoint judges and public officials subject to the advice and consent of the Senate, which in practice has meant that presidential appointees must be confirmed by a majority vote in the Senate. The Appointments Clause also establishes that Congress can, by law, allow the president, the courts, or the heads of departments to appoint "inferior officers" without requiring the advice and consent of the Senate. The final clause of Section 2 grants the president the power to make recess appointments to fill vacancies that occur when the Senate is in recess.”
Again, like pardons, and clemency, all of this is true for a lawfully elected and not disqualified individual into POTUS, but is not true for an individual who was not elected having disqualified him and/or themselves from public office in conspiracy with enemies of the United States, for which their is no legal defense.
“Section 3 of Article Two lays out the responsibilities of the president, granting the president the power to convene both houses of Congress, receive foreign representatives, and commission all federal officers. Section 3 requires the president to inform Congress of the "state of the union"; since 1913 this has taken the form of a speech referred to as the State of the Union. The Recommendation Clause requires the president to recommend measures deemed "necessary and expedient." The Take Care Clause requires the president to obey and enforce all laws, though the president retains some discretion in interpreting the laws and determining how to enforce them.”
This is not the same as the President may violate their oath and U.S. laws, including the highest crimes and misdemeanors, and then retain some discretion in interpreting whether or not to enforce their own violations of crimes, and crimes that specify would disqualify them from office, which would be outside of the scope of the duties of POTUS.
Interpreting the laws and enforcing them is not the same as violating the law and then not enforcing the violated laws, which would be outside of the scope of the duties and oath of POTUS, members of Congress, SCOTUS, other judges, and others.
“Section 4 of Article Two establishes that the president and other officers can be removed from office through the impeachment process, which is further described in Article One.”
Here it is important to note that the language does not specify that the president and other officers can ONLY be removed from office through the impeachment process, but rather this is one way to remove them from office, and where another way explored herein, is to prove they disqualified themselves from the offices before they entered the same, and/or those they appointed, nominated, and/or confirmed were not legitimately installed into public office as a result of their disqualification.
As specified by the constitution and U.S. law, and in more than one body of law (for example but not limited to treason, insurrection, and concealment of government documents), very broad language specifies “whoever” engages in these and other behaviors won’t just disqualifying themselves from holding public office, but will have to forfeit the same, as specified herein this article for Trump’s, the GOP’s, Mark Meadows, and/or others concealment and/or destruction of the government documents proving their ineligibility.
Accordingly, this proves that there is more than one way to remove POTUS and others from their offices, other than impeachment, which is simply one way to do the same, and the other is to prove they violated laws that disqualified or required them to forfeit their offices, which happened in Trump’s last days when Trump, the GOP, Mark Meadows and/or others conspired to conceal the evidence of Crossfire Hurricane’s origins, which by law, and even if at the end of their illegitimate term, still disqualified them from office, and forfeited their offices as specified elsewhere herein this article for concealment and/or destruction of government documents, which there is now proof and witnesses of the same, demanding the application of the law in an equal manner that disqualified Trump, the GOP, Meadows, and/or others from holding office, and demanded the forfeiting of their offices.
Section 1: President and vice president
“Clause 1: Executive power and term of office
The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years, and, together with the Vice President, chosen for the same Term, be elected, as follows:[1]
George Washington, inaugurated as President, April 30, 1789
George Washington's inauguration as the first U.S. president, April 30, 1789, by Ramon de Elorriaga (1889)
Section 1 begins with a vesting clause that confers federal executive power upon the president. Similar clauses are found in Article I and Article III; the former bestows federal legislative power exclusively to Congress, and the latter grants judicial power solely to the Supreme Court, and other federal courts established by law.[2] These three articles together secure a separation of powers among the three branches of the federal government, and individually, each one entrenches checks and balances on the operation and power of the other two branches.[3]”
Accordingly, a criminal conspiracy being operated by enemies of the United States and illegitimately usurping public offices violates this clause of the constitution and the separation of powers – because the criminal conspirators are involving in a “meeting of the minds” with a common purpose to violate their oaths of office and duties specified in the U.S. Constitution – and thus are operating as one and not as checks and balances on one another – for the common or central purpose of overtly furthering an ongoing criminal conspiracy giving aid, comforting, and adhering to enemies of the United States, and/or obstructing justice for the same in an ongoing manner.
“Article I grants certain powers to Congress, and the Vesting Clause does not reassign those powers to the President. In fact, because those actions require legislation passed by Congress which must be signed by the president to take effect, those powers are not strictly executive powers granted to or retained by Congress per se.”
This important to some very questionable and/or criminal rulings made by SCOTUS, including but not limited to making the executive the discretionary gateway keepers of the rights conferred to pro se relators via the False Claims Act and/or Whistleblower Protection Act, each of which was made by both Congress and signed off by Presidents, and so just as one branch may not usurp the power of any other branch, and/or join authority, SCOTUS’ attack on whistleblower rights and laws in effect usurped the legislative power of each Congress and POTUS to pass acts as law, by making the laws created by them obsolete, and arguably in a criminal manner to RICO obstruct justice for the GOP and Russia stalked and lynched qui tam specified herein this article, which would doubly be outside the scope of their duties and oaths and employment protections.
“Nor were they retained by the U.S. Congress as leftovers from the Articles of Confederation. The Articles of Confederation, Continental Congress and its powers were abolished at the time the new U.S. Congress was seated and the new federal government formally and officially replaced its interim predecessor. And although the president is implicitly denied the power to unilaterally declare war, a declaration of war is not in and of itself a vehicle of executive power since it is literally just a public declaration that the U.S. government considers itself "at war" with a foreign political entity.”
This is important with respect to Russia’s cyberwarfare against the United States, in establishing Russia as an enemy of the U.S. before, during, and after Trump, the GOP, and Russia “took” public offices, disqualifying them from the same before and after they “took” power over the U,S. justice system.
Another way to say the same thing is that it is not the declaration of war that determines if war is being waged against the United States, which makes perfect sense, because if the United States is attacked, as it has been by the GOP and enemies of the United States for decades, involving warfare, then it is not the declaration of war that determines if the U.S. is at war with an enemy or adversary, but rather the conduct of the enemy of adversary is what determines if there has been warfare and/or war.
“As treaties are by U.S. law official agreements with foreign governments recognized as such only after the Senate approves or rejects a resolution of ratification, the president obviously cannot make treaties unilaterally. However, the president does determine and decide U.S. foreign policy, and can enter into non-binding discussions and give conditional approval to agreements reached with foreign governments subject to Senate approval at a future date.[5]”
Note this does not say that Presidents may engage in treason, insurrection, sedition, terrorism, elections from and/or concealment and/or destruction of government against the United States and/or obstruction of justice for the same, nor delegate anyone else to do the same, to give aid, comfort, and/or to adhere to enemies of the United States during wartime or warfare, which is what Trump and/or the GOP did.
“Additionally, since official treaties are specifically created under and by constitutional U.S. law, and are entered into by both government and the people as a whole, in their capacity as head of state and as the single individual representative of the United States and its citizens, the president does have Coauthority and Constitutional duty to unilaterally withdraw the United States from treaties when it is in the best interests and well being of the U.S..”
Here, Trump’s and the GOP’s withdrawal from Syria to give aid, comfort, and/or adhere to enemies of the United States, including Syria, Hamas, ISIS, Iran, and/or Russia was not in the best interest nor well being of the U.S..
“As far as presidential appointments, as with treaties a person is not officially and legally appointed to a position until their appointment is approved by the Senate in office. Prior to Senate approval and publication of that approval along with an official date and time for their swearing-in and assumption of duties and responsibilities, they are nominees rather than appointees. And again, the president nominates people for specific positions at their pleasure and can do so without or in spite of Senate advice. Senate consent occurs when a majority of senators votes to approve and therefore appoint a nominee.”
This goes to the heart of earlier arguments herein, where before any of this can be legitimate, true, or lawful, a person has to be eligible for POTUS and/or Congress and/or public office, and cannot have engaged in disqualifying and/or forfeiting violations of law, which really creates a decision tree for legitimacy of government, where if it is true that a person is qualified for public office, and if they haven’t engaged in conduct that disqualifies them or forfeits their public offices, then they may take the oath of office, and then they may perform the duties of that office, all thwarted if the person wasn’t eligible for public office and/or disqualified themselves from the same, and/or the law demanded that they forfeit the same, in which case in the legitimacy of government decision tree, the tree ends at their illegitimacy and doesn’t confer duties, privileges, benefits, actions, or oaths onto them in any legal, valid, legitimate, reasonable, and/or constitutional manner for offices they weren’t eligible for, and/or disqualified themselves for, and/or forfeited.
“Clause 2: Method of choosing electors
Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.”
Of course Trump, the GOP, and/or others have since been found to have engaged in a fake elector conspiracy, which was thus outside the scope of their duties and oaths, and thus outside of their employment or office protections.
Again, these violations of oaths of office and duty are cumulative and thus important in establishing that Trump and the GOP have largely been operating outside of the scopes of their oaths and offices to give aid to organized crime and enemies of the United States, and thus largely didn’t operate as POTUS or Congress accepts to act, and thus largely operated outside of the law and their employment or office protections.
For example, in addition to not being qualified for public office, Trump largely operated outside the scope of his duties and sworn oath, and thus largely to completely can’t benefit from the power, immunity, privileges, of POTUS, even if others who did the same or similar argue, posture, and/or illegitimately determine the same.
“Article I, Section 3, Clause 7, gives the U.S. Senate the option of forever disqualifying anyone convicted in an impeachment case from holding any federal office.[14]
The Section 3 of the 14th Amendment prohibits anyone who swore an oath to support the Constitution, and later rebelled against the United States, from becoming president. However, this disqualification can be lifted by a two-thirds vote of each house of Congress.[15]”
Here again, Trump and the GOP SCOTUS majority have conspired to act as one to usurp the power of Congress, who is the only body who can lift this self-executing provision of the United States, a power not reserves for POTUS nor SCOTUS, but where Trump has asked SCOTUS to lift this disability two different ways, one to provide him immunity he wasn’t entitled to having not been qualified for office before or after taking office, and being required to forfeit office for concealing and/or destroying government documents, and two by asking SCOTUS to lift the disability of disqualification that only Congress can lift by a 2/3rds majority.
“The 22nd Amendment prohibits anyone from being elected to the presidency more than twice (or once if the person serves as president or acting president for more than two years of a presidential term to which someone else was originally elected).[16][17]”
This clause is interesting because Trump was not eligible to hold office after his treason and elections fraud conspiracy with Russia before the 2016 election, which by default means that Hillary Clinton is who won the 2016 election, and where she did in fact win by popular or democratic vote, and thus this also prohibits Trump from a second term because he was only “acting” as President, when someone else was more lawfully qualified to be elected, and not disqualified like Trump and the GOP. Accordingly, Trump is also disqualified by the 22nd Amendment, and was by the end of his term, but concealed the government documents that proved the same, but in doing so disqualified and forfeited his office.
“The Congress may provide for a line of succession beyond the vice president. The current Presidential Succession Act establishes the order as the speaker of the House of Representatives, the president pro tempore of the Senate and then the fifteen Cabinet secretaries in order of each department's establishment. There are concerns regarding the constitutionality of having members of Congress in the line of succession, however, as this clause specifies that only an "officer of the United States" may be designated as a presidential successor. Constitutional scholars from James Madison to the present day have argued that the term "officer" excludes members of Congress.”
This has been resolved by convention because of the fact that only officers of the United States may be within the succession, and where per the Presidential Succession Act, this includes members of Congress.
Further supporting that members of Congress are officers, each must swear an oath to their office.
“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.”
https://oaths.us/senate-oath-of-office/
And where any member of Congress, each an officer, swearing to this oath of office, who violates the same in a significant manner is operating outside of the scope of their office and oath of office, and thus outside the scope of protections, immunities, and/or benefits otherwise attributed to that office.
“The Amendment further provides that the president, or the vice president and Cabinet, can declare the president unable to discharge his or her duties, in which case the vice president becomes Acting president. If the declaration is done by the vice president and Cabinet, the Amendment permits the president to take control back, unless the vice president and Cabinet challenge the president and two-thirds of both Houses vote to sustain the findings of the vice president and Cabinet. If the declaration is done by the president, the president may take control back without risk of being overridden by the Congress.”
Accordingly, this further supports the already proven fact that POTUS may be removed from public office many different ways – not limited to impeachment – which is only one way to remove a President, per treason, insurrection, elections fraud, concealment and/or destruction of government documents, and/or other similar laws disqualifying and/or forfeiting “whoever” from public office.
“Clause 7: Salary
"The President shall, at stated Times, receive for his Services, a Compensation, which shall neither be increased nor diminished during the Period for which he shall have been elected, and he shall not receive within that Period any other Emolument from the United States, or any of them.”
And yet Trump’s administration violated the Emoluments clause by paying Trump’s companies as a government contractor in a manner that increased his compensation, and so for the entire period that Trump was engaged in this conduct, he was operating outside of the scope of his oath and duties and employment protections, which again goes to proving that he can’t rely on POTUS protections, benefits, and immunities, if he was not operating under nor complying with the constitution, which defines what a POTUS is many different ways – totally discounting that he was never eligible for public office by the 2016 elections, nor thereafter, and thus boils down to what a POTUS is and what a POTUS isn’t, based on behavior, and where Trump’s constant misbehavior, in violation of U.S. laws in a near perpetual manner leaves him without little to no POTUS-based defenses.
“The president's salary, currently $400,000 a year,[18] must remain constant throughout the president's term. The president may not receive other compensation from either the federal or any state government.”
Again, Trump’s compensation was not constant and was not fixed at $400,000 per year, and resulted in his violation of the Emoluments clause.
In fact, he took no less than $8 million dollars from taxpayers, beginning self-dealing with the government, while in illegitimately in
control of the government as early as 2017, which means that for almost the entire Trump presidency he was at least violating the U.S. Constitution almost every day if not every day, which would not confer him the protections of POTUS, having regularly operated outside of the duties and oath of POTUS, and in a cumulative manner, or said differently beyond a reasonable doubt, as an agent of Russia involved in ongoing organized crimes and not the duties of POTUS regularly and/or continuously would.
The illegitimate GOP SCOTUS majority born out of ongoing GOP treason conspiracies, in part overtly furthered by Trump with Russia, RICO obstructed justice for victims of Trump’s emoluments violations, as organized crime would do, and SCOTUS’ RICO obstruction is analogous to the getaway driver of a bank/taxpayer/government heist, as complicit to the violations of law as Trump, and outside of the oath and scope of duties of SCOTUS, and thus outside the protections of their office.
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/25/us/emoluments-trump-supreme-court.html
“Clause 8: Oath or affirmation for POTUS
Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:—"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."
As specified throughout this article, Trump regularly to continuously violated his oath or affirmation, and where an unviolated oath is what is what defines POTUS, not a regularly to constantly violated oath, or the opposite of what defines POTUS per the Constitution.
“The Constitution vests the president with Executive Power. That power reaches its zenith when wielded to protect national security,[26] and federal courts in the United States must pay proper deference to the Executive in assessing the threats that face the nation.[27]
Here it is important to differentiate between Trump’s use of illegitimately-got or engineered power and POTUS’ use of lawfully-got power.
Much of Trump’s and the GOP’s post-Russia treason and elections fraud conspiracy was spent using the power of POTUS, SCOTUS, and/or Congress to defend by RICO obstruction, corruption, influence, and/or organized crime the enemies of the United States, specifically, Trump, the GOP, Russia, and/or others – and not in defense of the nation against the enemies of the United States as POTUS is expected to – again differentiating between how the Constitution defines POTUS and how Trump behaved in a manner that rarely resembled POTUS, using the power to defend himself, enemies of the United States, and/or organized crime from those trying to get them to follow the law and/or trying to hold them accountable for the same – and thus making the argument that acting outside of the duties and oath of POTUS, Trump can’t be defended by protections of that office in retrospect, especially given that he was not eligible for and disqualified and forfeited the public office he usurped as a matter of both fact and law, regardless of how his organized crime spins the contrary.
“The president is the military's commander-in-chief; however Article One gives Congress and not the president the exclusive right to declare war. Nevertheless, the power of the president to initiate hostilities has been subject to question. According to historian Thomas Woods, "Ever since the Korean War, Article II, Section 2 [...] has been interpreted 'The president has the power to initiate hostilities without consulting Congress' [....] But what the framers actually meant by that clause was that once war has been declared, it was the president's responsibility as commander-in-chief to direct the war. Alexander Hamilton spoke in such terms when he said that the president, although lacking the power to declare war, would have 'the direction of war when authorized or begun.”
Accordingly, because the enemies of the United States, the GRU, FSB, Putin, and/or Russia “begun” cyberwarefare against the United States before Trump and the GOP conspired to aid, comfort, and adhere to them, and thereafter, it is the conduct of these U.S. enemies that made them enemies of the United States at war with the United States, and not requiring any declaration of war.
“Commutations (reduction in prison sentence), unlike pardons (restoration of civil rights after prison sentence had been served) may not be refused. In Biddle v. Perovich 274 U.S. 480 (1927), the subject of the commutation did not want to accept life in prison but wanted the death penalty restored. The Supreme Court said, "[a] pardon in our days is not a private act of grace from an individual happening to possess power. It is a part of the Constitutional scheme. When granted it is the determination of the ultimate authority that the public welfare will be better served by inflicting less than what the judgment fixed."[32]”
And yet Trump pardoned his coconspirators in order to tamper with, intimidate, obstruct justice and/or congress for, coerce, influence, bribe, corrupt, blackmail, and/or reward loyalty to him and enemies of the United States, specifically Russia, the Trump family, the GOP, and/or others, and where the end result was insufficient evidence and insufficient allegiance to the United States to prosecute and impeach Trump, for a lack of witnesses and testimony allowed, which specifically had the opposite effect of better serving the public welfare by inflicting less than what the judgment fixed, because Trump, the GOP, SCOTUS, other judges, and others would have otherwise readily been ousted from office, and/or denied the ability to run for office, after they conspired with U.S. enemy Russia, if members of Congress, SCOTUS, and others had not deviated from their oaths of office in order aid, comfort, and adhere to enemies of the United States waging comprehensive war on our country and people.
Clause 2: Advice and Consent Clause
The president exercises the powers in the Advice and Consent Clause with the advice and consent of the Senate.
“He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.”
And yet Trump and the GOP did not establish the powers of government by Law, but gained and established these powers unlawfully, and thus in violation of this clause, supra.
“The president may also appoint judges, ambassadors, consuls, ministers and other officers with the advice and consent of the Senate. By law, however, Congress may allow the president, heads of executive departments, or the courts to appoint inferior officials.”
And so the key word here is “president”, and supra and infra, that is specifically defined by the Constitution and the oath of office, which Trump largely violated after being engineered into power by enemies of the United States, disqualifying him and thus not establishing Trump as a lawful or legitimate president, and making Joseph Biden the 45th POTUS, due to the illegitimate occupancy and usurping of the U.S. government by Trump and the GOP.
“At times the president has asserted the power to remove individuals from office. Congress has often explicitly limited the president's power to remove; during the Reconstruction Era, Congress passed the Tenure of Office Act, purportedly preventing Andrew Johnson from removing, without the advice and consent of the Senate, anyone appointed with the advice and consent of the Senate. President Johnson ignored the Act, and was later impeached and acquitted. The constitutionality of the Act was not immediately settled. In Myers v. United States,[36] the Supreme Court held that Congress could not limit the president's power to remove an executive officer (the Postmaster General), but in Humphrey's Executor v. United States, it upheld Congress's authority to restrict the president's power to remove officers of the Federal Trade Commission, an "administrative body [that] cannot in any proper sense be characterized as an arm or an eye of the executive."[37]”
This of course further supports that SCOTUS had no business granting the executive the discretionary rights of whistleblowers, who also cannot in any proper sense be characterized as an arm or an eye of the executive, but rather by acts of congress, the False Claims Act and the Whistleblower Protection Act, but non limited to the same, passed by Congress and signed by presidents, making whistleblowers lesser officials by Presidents and Congress, whose power to establish the same was usurped by SCOTUS, and likely in a RICO obstruction conspiracy to protect enemies of the United States and the organized crime syndicate which unlawfully installed the majority, supra.
“Section 3: Presidential responsibilities
He shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; he may, on extraordinary Occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in Case of Disagreement between them, with Respect to the Time of Adjournment, he may adjourn them to such Time as he shall think proper; he shall receive Ambassadors and other public Ministers; he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed, and shall Commission all the Officers of the United States.”
Here again as Trump did not take care that the laws of the United States be faithfully executed, and on a regular if not continuous basis before and after Russia engineered Trump into power, he regularly if not continuously violated this constitutional definition of what POTUS is, and where the opposite of the same, is what POTUS is not, and where the sum of violations of what POTUS is by Trump fails on many front to define Trump as a legitimate “oath keeper” and fails to define him as any sort of regularly or constitutionally-defined POTUS. More simply, no one is a POTUS who isn’t, can’t be, and/or won’t be most if not all of the time they are supposed to be POTUS. To be a POTUS, one has to behave like a POTUS, which is largely defined by the constitution as specific behaviors, the bulk of which, if not all of which, Trump violated before and/or after Russian “engineered” Trump and the GOP into power, specifically not defining Trump as POTUS, and even the opposite of a POTUS.
“Kesavan and Sidak explain the purpose of the Recommendation Clause:
The Recommendation Clause also imposes an executive duty on the president. His recommendations respect the equal dignity of Congress and thus embody the anti-royalty sentiment that ignited the American Revolution and subsequently stripped the trappings of monarchy away from the new chief executive.”
Trump has been pitching a monarch or dictator-like regime since he was voted out of office (another way to remove a president that doesn’t involve impeachment).
Under Trump’s illegitimate authority, Bill Barr pitched a unitary executive theory or king theory.
Trump’s merchandising and/or elections tour bus bore his face and the face of Elizabeth II of England.
Trump allowed alleged “prince” Harry to move to America as an unregistered foreign agent and influencer, and Harry lied regarding his use of hard drugs to enter the country, whereafter Trump did not have him removed, but did have little kids taken from their parents at the border, who where put in squalor cages, where they were raped.
Trump’s CIA Director pick, Kash Patel wrote children’s books depicting Trump as the king of America (who had to defend against his throne from others trying to hold him accountable for unlawfully stealing the same).
The GOP in Florida were not able to enforce the law against pro-royal and pro-imperial cult propaganda organization, Disney (because Disney specified and/or implied to the GOP that they are loyal to and/or governed by the Privilegium maius-forged royal monarchs of the UK and EU, since devolved into the clients, financiers, and/or associates of Jeffrey Epstein, like Trump and his family, who Trump has long been associates with per Mary Trump).
“Clause 5: Caring for the faithful execution of the law
The president must "take care that the laws be faithfully executed."[49] This clause in the Constitution imposes a duty on the president to enforce the laws of the United States and is called the Take Care Clause,[50] also known as the Faithful Execution Clause[51] or Faithfully Executed Clause.[52] This clause is meant to ensure that a law is faithfully executed by the president[50] even if he disagrees with the purpose of that law.[53] Addressing the North Carolina ratifying convention, William Maclaine declared that the Faithful Execution Clause was "one of the [Constitution's] best provisions."[51] If the president "takes care to see the laws faithfully executed, it will be more than is done in any government on the continent; for I will venture to say that our government, and those of the other states, are, with respect to the execution of the laws, in many respects mere ciphers."[51] President George Washington interpreted this clause as imposing on him a unique duty to ensure the execution of federal law. Discussing a tax rebellion, Washington observed, "it is my duty to see the Laws executed: to permit them to be trampled upon with impunity would be repugnant to [that duty]."[51]”
Of course Trump miserably failed in this POTUS duty, so much as to have four grand juries see the evidence of his crimes and believe that there was evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that he should be prosecuted for 91 felonies, which Trump is asking SCOTUS to trample the constitution and Take Care Clause – the most important duty defining POTUS – in order to help their organized crime syndicate coconspirator, Trump, evade prosecution for having not fulfilled the most important duty defining POTUS.
Again, POTUS qualifications and disqualifications and the scope of duty, and the scope of oaths taken, are defined in the constitution, and so if Trump so significantly deviated from the same, only organized crime he installed can save him with more organized crime and unhinged or frivolous legal theories, short on facts and law. It is clear that Trump largely did not meet the definition of POTUS in an substantive, lawful, or legitimate manner.
“According to former United States Assistant Attorney General Walter E. Dellinger III, the Supreme Court and the Attorneys General have long interpreted the Take Care Clause to mean that the president has no inherent constitutional authority to suspend the enforcement of the laws, particularly of statutes.[54] The Take Care Clause demands that the president obey the law, the Supreme Court said in Humphrey's Executor v. United States, and repudiates any notion that he may dispense with the law's execution.[55] In Printz v. United States, the Supreme Court explained how the president executes the law: "The Constitution does not leave to speculation who is to administer the laws enacted by Congress; the president, it says, "shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed," Art. II, §3, personally and through officers whom he appoints (save for such inferior officers as Congress may authorize to be appointed by the "Courts of Law" or by "the Heads of Departments" with other presidential appointees), Art. II, §2."[56]
The president may not prevent a member of the executive branch from performing a ministerial duty lawfully imposed upon him by Congress. (See Marbury v. Madison (1803); and Kendall v. United States ex rel. Stokes (1838).) Nor may the president take an action not authorized either by the Constitution or by a lawful statute. (See Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer (1952).) Finally, the president may not refuse to enforce a constitutional law, or "cancel" certain appropriations, for that would amount to an extra-constitutional veto or suspension power.[51]
Some presidents have claimed the authority under this clause to impound money appropriated by Congress. President Jefferson, for example, delayed the expenditure of money appropriated for the purchase of gunboats for over a year. President Franklin D. Roosevelt and his successors sometimes refused outright to expend appropriated money.[51] The Supreme Court, however, has held that impoundments without Congressional authorization are unconstitutional.[57]
It has been asserted that the president's responsibility in the "faithful" execution of the laws entitles him to suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus.[58] Article One provides that the privilege may not be suspended save during times of rebellion or invasion, but it does not specify who may suspend the privilege. The Supreme Court ruled that Congress may suspend the privilege if it deems it necessary.[59] During the American Civil War, President Abraham Lincoln suspended the privilege, but, owing to the vehement opposition he faced, obtained congressional authorization for the same.[60] Since then, the privilege of the writ has only been suspended upon the express authorization of Congress, except in the case of Mary Surratt, whose writ was suspended by President Andrew Johnson regarding her alleged involvement in the assassination of President Lincoln.
In Mississippi v. Johnson, 71 U.S. 475 (1867), the Supreme Court ruled that the judiciary may not restrain the president in the execution of the laws. In that case the Supreme Court refused to entertain a request for an injunction preventing President Andrew Johnson from executing the Reconstruction Acts, which were claimed to be unconstitutional. The Court found that "[t]he Congress is the legislative department of the government; the president is the executive department. Neither can be restrained in its action by the judicial department; though the acts of both, when performed, are, in proper cases, subject to its cognizance."[61] Thus, the courts cannot bar the passage of a law by Congress, though it may later strike down such a law as unconstitutional. A similar construction applies to the executive branch.”
Accordingly, Trump’s most important duty to enforce all of the law is one of the duties he failed, and where he did so because following the law would have required that he turn himself in for impeachment and prosecution, and abandon the presidency Russia engineered for him, and to prosecute every member of Congress who refused to protect the rule of law by refusing to impeach him.
Again, the cumulation of Trump’s failure to behave like POTUS – as defined by the constitution – substantively defines him not as POTUS but as an enemy of the United States, with evidence beyond a reasonable doubt of the same, and overtly aided, comforted, and/or adhered to by the GOP, SCOTUS, other judges like Cannon, insurrectionists, and/or others – proves that Trump can’t readily or substantively be defined as a POTUS, per the constitution, and per the constitution, was not eligible for POTUS by the 2016 elections, which Trump concealed government documents like the origins of Crossfire Hurricane raw intel, and other government documents, in order to prevent the public from realizing he was never eligible for public office by the 2016 elections.
More simply Trump had to use the power he and Russia stole to further crimes that disqualified Trump and the GOP throughout and before his alleged Presidency, and he had to violate some of the most serious laws America has, in order to conceal his ineligibility, and then he directed others to violate the law to do the same, and so the total opposite of how the constitution defines POTUS.
“Section 4: Impeachment
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.”
Here it is important to note that the constitutional language is not vague nor open to interpretation but employs a directive “shall”, and so because the GOP refused to follow this constitutional directive in order to give aid, comfort, and adhere to enemies of the United States between 2017 through to the present day, the GOP in congress is violating this constitutional imperative to do so, and as such, have been operating outside of the scope of their duties, oaths, and protections and benefits of their alleged and illegitimate offices Russia engineered them into.
This means that the GOP was required to impeach not just Trump, but others, but instead they have been acting like the criminal defense attorneys of enemies of the United States, to give aid, comfort, and adhere to the same, in an ongoing RICO obstruction of justice and obstruction of congress conspiracy, with many spokes, but in doing so have in an analogous manner become the getaway driver conspirators to the crimes that the enemies of the United States have committed, requiring them to impeach or remove themselves as officers, having taken an oath of office they would and “shall”, but didn’t.
They both were required to impeach Trump, Judge Cannon, all of the GOP SCOTUS judges, and/or others but have instead of performing their duty, have been acting outside the scope of their duties, and outside the scope of their oaths as defined by the constitution, to give comfort, aid, and adhere to enemies of the United States in an ongoing conspiracy with them, supra.
“The Constitution also allows for involuntary removal from office of the president, vice president, Cabinet secretaries, and other executive officers, as well as judges, who may be impeached by the House of Representatives and tried in the Senate.”
Any official convicted by the Senate is immediately removed from office, and to prevent the President's Article II appointment power from being used as a de facto pardon the Senate may also vote by a simple majority that the removed official be forever disqualified from holding any future office under the United States.[62]: 71 [63][64][65]
Accordingly, but for the RICO obstruction of the treason, elections fraud, RICO, and obstruction of justice by Trump, the GOP in Congress and other law enforcement positions, SCOTUS, Judge Cannon, and/or others Trump, the GOP in Congress and other law enforcement positions, SCOTUS, Judge Cannon, and/or others were required to be permanently removed per the constitution in an imperative and not discretionary manner.
This again is how the Democrats proved they were NOT part of Russia’s and the GOP’s conspiracy, because the Democrats largely fulfilled their constitution duty to remove the liability known as Trump, but the GOP and SCOTUS, and others conspiring together refused to remove the liability they were otherwise forced to remove, even if their feelings disagreed with the facts, it was their duty to our country and people.
“While no other punishments may be inflicted pursuant to the impeachment proceeding, the convicted party remains liable to trial and punishment in the courts for civil and criminal charges.[66]”
Accordingly, Trump is asking SCOTUS to violate this 14th Amendment Section 1 freedom and right for everyone, including Trump and themselves, but not limited to the same, to have the law applied to every American in an equal manner, but where doing so wouldn’t help, give comfort, nor adhere to enemies of the United States and organized crime, so they are considering not allowing Trump to be prosecuted for his crimes in office, which by the way is why the GOP stated they would not convict Trump during impeachment, because he could be prosecuted later, and now that it is later Trump is trying to corrupt more offices and officers into helping him and other enemies of the United States evade accountability in a manner that makes Trump above the law or a king.
But with the affirmation to Congress by Trump’s Attorney General and principle obstructor – Bill Barr’s hand-picked “special” counsel John Durham – on 06/21/2023, during the Hearing on the Report of Special Counsel John Durham 118th Congress (2023-2024), Durham affirmed that Trump and the GOP did conspire/collude with an “enemy” of the United States (Russia) to “cheat” in an election in 2016 (which is a conspiracy to engage in elections fraud), and Durham specified that Trump, the GOP, Russians, and/or others significantly conspired to RICO-obstruct the same (proving their intent and knowledge that they had conspired with an enemy of the United States and needed to desperately cover that up).
This testimony came after Trump, the GOP, Mark Meadows, and/or others eventually stole, concealed, sold, and/or destroyed the evidence and top secret government documents of the truer origins of the Crossfire Hurricane binder from a CIA vault, likely part of Trump’s “beautiful mind boxes” he carried around with him like a safety blanket from state to state, which proved and/or contributed to the proof of Trump’s and the GOP’s treason and elections fraud conspiracy with an enemy of the United States, and thus proved Trump and the GOP had disqualified themselves from public office BEFORE the 2016 elections, which Russia “engineered” in a manner to allow Trump and the GOP to further give aid, comfort, and adhere to enemies of the United States, specifically themselves, one another, Russia, Putin, Alfa Bank, Rosneft, and/or others.
Having disqualified themselves from public office BEFORE the 2016 elections, they were not eligible to occupy the public offices and government employment they occupied, nor were they able to legitimately nor lawfully appoint, nominate, and/or confirm others into government offices and employment, nor make any other changes to the government, but these conspirators and fruits of this ongoing conspiracy RICO-obstructed, concealed, sold, and/or destroyed evidence of their ineligibility, to receive money and things of value from the government, in such a manner that does prove beyond a reasonable doubt that they impersonated officers and employees of the United States to receive money and things of value from the government before and/or after falsely claiming and pretending to be officers, offices, and/or employees of the government, when they were not, having disqualified and forfeited their public offices, still being concealed by them and others to “engineer” Trump and the GOP into power again in 2024, to steal another election, and control of the justice system which would otherwise send them to way for life and/or have them executed per treason laws.
There are many different ways to remove these enemies of the United States and members of ongoing organized crime from their nihilistic, toxic, sadistic, narcissistic, sociopathic, Machiavellian, criminal, and lethal stranglehold on what under support of the Constitution would be an otherwise free, productive, and happy America. And these are just some of the many ways they can be removed, to free our country from monsters.
Though this crime syndicate has stolen, concealed, leaked, sold, and/or destroyed top secrets putting our intelligence community at risk, and though these enemies of the United States have called for the destruction and the slitting of throats of our law enforcement brothers and sisters, and thought these unregistered foreign agents and proxies of a failed billionaire experiment gone wrong have called for the execution of our military personnel, and though they have weaponized our faithful, threatened our judges, prosecutors, witnesses, victims, government informants, journalists, academics, activists, children, communities, and our way of life – in an effort to divide and conquer us all, and to exploit us to no end, and in a manner that is not sustainable – united we are more powerful and we will remove them from their illegitimate and abusive stranglehold and see them prosecuted to the full extent of the law, so help us God.