Thursday, February 22, 2024

Writing my Congessman

Feel free to contact your member. Divide your submission into 2 parts.

Smith, Jordan and Comer have been acting in unison in using GRU Agents Smirnoff's information. I have concerns as to how they received this information in the first place and (we must ask) whether they knew where it was coming from. 

When the January 6 Select Committee was early in its investigation, I urged you to refer the matter of the December congressional members meeting with Trump directly to the Ethics Committee for their involvement in the overall conspiracy.

I urge you again to make this referral, adding Smith and Comer.

The speech and debate clause protects these members from examination of their official activities in any other place BUT CONGRESS! It is time for Congress to step up, especially given a possible GRU connection to their recent efforts as well as January 6th. Recall that the December 18, 2020 meeting was full of Russian operatives (Flynn, Giuliani, Byrne and Trump).

Any conduct involving the GRU is likely already under FBI investigation, which is why Jordan is going after the Bidens. Three explanations are possible. 1. Jordan is pre-taliating to make it look like any coming indictments headed his way look like retaliation. 2. Jordan thinks he could leverage a deal to have Biden's troubles go away if Biden calls off investigations of he and his co-conspirators or 3. He is actively pursuing a Moscow agenda.

Hopefully the Smirnoff affair will have the Speaker put Ukraine aid on the table immediately. 

I am sure it is tempting to let DOJ take the lead on GOP aid and comfort to Moscow. I urge you not to wait.

PART 2

Please allow me to restate my proposal for the Ethics Committees of each chamber to expand their purview, possibly as a joint effort, to include investigating presidential disqualification under the 14th Amendment. Please communicate this proposal to the Vice Chair of the Committee and to Leader Jeffries for action when Insurrectionists in the House start resigning or are expelled for that involvement. Ethics should also be empowered to investigate members who participated in January 6. A finding by the Committee should require that a 2/3rds majority be required to retain office (rather than to expell such members). A bipartisan committee like Ethics should be trusted not to abuse this precedent.

Finally, let me comment on the timeline of the afternoon of January 6. This was apparent to me watching events unfold on television, which was a better viewpoint than members of the Select Committee had because you were sheltering from the mob.

When Babbitt was shot and her squad arrested, the air was immediately taken out of the event. Aside from those in active melee with officers, the building started to clear as if by magic. Connie Meeks, who was a member of the Oath keepers stack - indeed the entire stack - melted away. The stack seems to have been timed to see if security had been breeched at the Speaker's lobby and on the Senate side. And then it was gone.

The moment Babbitt was shot and her squad arrested and this was televised is the moment Trump began to cooperate with Meadows in unwinding the insurrection. Given his remarks on the Ellipse on convincing "week Republicans," and finding Democrats hopeless, the opportunity to do this meant breaching the lobby and seeing what the Oath Keepers stack had in their backpacks. Trump demonstrating his knowledge of the plan by referring to it in his speech is not protected speech - it is evidence that he knew what the plan was.

Hanging or convincing Pence was the perfect smoke screen, just like election interference and the perfect phone call were misdirection from the plan to deny (not leverage) the sale of the Javelins in obedience to Putin (which is likely found in the NICE records that Trump was likely trying to hide in his office at Mar O Largo). The quid pro quo was the funding of the Defend the House PAC - and covering the tracks on how the PAC was set up explains why there was so much congressional involvement in January 6.

None of the events were about the election or Trump's ego or ambitions. They were and are about Ukraine. It is all a single narrative, not a series of unrelated events.

Again, the Ethics Committees need to take point on how members were and are involved. For the sake of the people of Ukraine, this cannot wait for the FBI to act first.


Friday, February 09, 2024

Memo to CREW: Arguments did not go well

If your goal is to keep Trump out of office, here is a list of tactics for a way forward:

Play up how many people in "Team Crazy" from Dec 18 2020 meeting are on Team Putin (Trump, Flynn, Byrne, Giuliani).

Amend Electoral Count Act to provide for objection to candidate disqualification while still affirming validity of the vote for that party (making VP Acting President under 20th Amendment).

Advance notion that 20th Amendment, Section 3 implies presidents-elect are covered under 14th Amendment.

Advocate for repeal of OLC memo and associated meme that sitting president cannot be indicted. Reinforcing this gave us insurrection and current campaign. Not for Trump's ego but for obstruction of justice and possibly to please Russian masters.

The answer to the question of whether Trump cannot be obeyed post Jan 6 is that he cannot. Had he succeeded in using violence to overturn the Electoral Count, the rule of law would have demanded disobedience by military officers, civil servants and a denial by Chief Roberts of the Oath of Office. 

If XIV§3 is truly self enforcing, Chief Roberts must take a pass at swearing him in. That should have been a topic in today's argument and briefing.

Press for change in House Rules (Jefferson's Manual) to move XIV§3 objection to swearing in a Representative to before the election of the Speaker.

Forget about hanging Pence. It was never going to happen. It was a diversion that Jan 6 Committee fell for. The real action was breaching the Speaker's lobby door. The Oath Keepers Stack was timed to be ready if it had succeeded. The President's remarks about giving weak Republicans strength shows that breaching the lobby was the heart of the plan and Trump's cooperation with staff and exit if most rioters from the building coinciding with fatal wounding of Babbitt and arrest of her squad shows Trump was in on the actual plan. Any conspiracy with Trump, even if walled off from the violence as the congressional participants will claim, cannot be regarded as protected by immunity if (and only if) Trump is proven to have known the timeline in advance. 2:44 pm, January 6 is the tipping point.

Ethics Committees in each chamber need to have jurisdiction expanded to include Insurrection by presidential candidates and members, with denial of office or expulsion occurring with a Committee finding unless 2/3rds of each house remove the disqualification. January 6 merits a Joint Ethics Committee examination of Trump and members of Congress and Senate. Just having the inquiry under these conditions will cause retirements and resignations.

Indeed, under such a scheme, Trump will end his campaign and no Insurrectionist member will fail to participate. Forcing Trump off the ballot does not prevent faithless electors putting him in. An honest, bipartisan Ethics Committee procedure that he needs super majorities to reverse will have him make his best deal with Smith as soon as Ethics Committee expands its own jurisdiction or Speaker Jeffries goes along (or gets at least 4 Republicans to join him in having any Ethics Committee rule change discharged from Committee).

Time for a gut check. Are you willing to accept a President Haley as the price for getting Trump to take himself off the ballot? Or have Joe step aside for Kamala to run? Some members may be squishy. Don't let them be.

Thursday, February 08, 2024

My memo to DOJ on OLC

Please choose the general topic of your message:

Office of Legal Counsel

Your message to the Department of Justice

In light of the OLC memo on indictment of a sitting President's origins in justifying the indictment of Agnew, the dicta in Trump v. Mazars regarding the lack of weight of the memo as law, it's use to not indict then President Trump for fully developed obstruction of justice charges and the desire of Trump to hold office through insurrection and regain office through election as a shield against prosecution, please reconsider and revoke this policy. It is not interference in the election to take away the incentive for a candidate to regain power in order to obstruct justice.

Any magistrate could have easily had their clerk email the presidential security detail to change Trump's protective custody to criminal custody. Indeed, this could happen at anytime now. Because of the existing memo, the narrative has been that Trump could not be arrested or indicted while in office. This narrative is Trump's motivation to seek office. Repealing the memo will defeat that motivation and lead defendent Trump to seek a plea deal with Special Counsel Smith. Not repealing the memo would have the force of providing a president to act in the manner Trump did in January 6, 2021.

Had that memo not existed, there would not have been an insurrection. Trump's Ukrainian misdeeds would likely have not been investigated anyway due to a reticence to not criminalize foreign policy (which is no shield to Trump given Hamdi). The Insurrection and campaign are to obstruct justice, not because of Trump's mental condition or character flaws (which are the meme that even the January 6 Committee and managers of both impeachments fell victim to - and the media still advances).

In Washington, repeating a lie 3 times makes it true. It is time for OLC to defeat this meme by overturning the previous memo for the reasons set out here.

Tuesday, January 23, 2024

The Guilt of Donald Trump - I need a lawyer

 I wrote an Amicus brief for Trump v. Anderson (the Colorado ballot case) and a dear friend demurred on filing it for me. She did suggest I do an article anyway, so here it is. If anyone on the Supreme Court Bar can file this for me, I would be much appreciated. It is offered here to any other Amicus supporting the respondents. Steal liberally.

INTEREST OF THE AMICUS CURIAE 

Amicus advanced to doctoral candidacy in 1990 at the School of Public Affairs at the American University, having completed the required pro-seminars, including those on American Government, and has sworn an oath of allegiance to the U.S. Constitution as a Senate Intern, a Presidential Management Intern and as a political appointee in the District of Columbia. His interest is in protecting the Constitution from all domestic enemies, such as Mr. Trump and any associated foreign enemies associated with the former President, as the Amicus has sworn to do, as well as a scholar.

INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT
Petitioner Trump as invoked his ability to retain ballot access under Amendment XX § 3 without acknowledging that this implies that he is, in fact, disqualified to serve as president because of his involvement in the Insurrection. This Amicus brief lays out twelve arguments as to why Trump must be declared an Insurrectionist and what must be done to officially take notice of this fact so that he may not serve without permission of super-majorities of each chamber of Congress.

THE ARGUMENT
I. The Question Presented Ignores Disqualification
Candidate Trump's petition for certiorari limits the question presented to “Did the Colorado Supreme Court err in ordering President Trump excluded from the 2024 presidential primary ballot?” quite correctly invoking Amendment XX § 3, while at the same time arguing the question of whether he is an insurrectionist under Amendment XIV § 3, which is the underlying issue of this case. 
(Donald J. Trump petition for certiorari. II. Disputed questions of Presidential Qualifications are reserved for Congress to resolve, 18.)

II. Petitioner Is Covered Under Amendment XIV § 3
Petitioner claims that he is not an officer of the United States.  He must be considered an officer of the United States covered under Amendment XIV § 3 because Amendment XX § 3 provides that he may be later qualified. This qualification cannot be the counting of electoral votes because the Vice President Elect is to serve as acting President. That this service is possible indicates a valid electoral count may already have been achieved. As this eventuality is laid out in the text, the implication is that disqualification under Amendment XIV § 3 is possible for Petitioner, even if ballot access is allowed or the Electors of the President-Elect’s party cast faithless votes for Petitioner. Petitioner is therefore mistaken in his claim.
(Donald J. Trump petition for certiorari. III. Section 3 is inapplicable to President Trump, 23.)

III. There Are Legitimate Doubts That Congress Will Enforce Amendment XIV § 3
A. Respondents Have Cause to Distrust the Process
Removing the Petitioner from the ballot betrays a distrust of the process by which presidential disqualification is adjudicated. Currently, there is no provision in the Electoral Count Act, as Amended, to consider the constitutional qualifications of the president-elect to serve. Denying ballot access may be the only path to enforce the amendment.

B. The Process Is Not Trustworthy
If the president-elect’s party controls the Congress, these doubts may be justified, therefore the process by which a president-elect is disqualified must be beyond politics.
If the president-elect’s party does not control the Congress, it may abuse the process. The Insurrection can be seen as an attempt to do so.

C. The Process is Unbalanced
Amendment XIV § 3 empowers a third of either Chamber to disqualify a member of Congress, a president-elect or a vice president-elect. Expelling a member or impeaching a federal officer requires two-thirds votes to accomplish. A simple majority is required to change the rules to enforce the provisions of the Amendment. It is no wonder that such provisions are absent.

D. No Objection was In Order to Enforce Amendment XX § 3 On January 7, 2021
After the Insurrection, when the involvement of President Trump was obvious to both parties, there was no discussion on invoking the Amendment. While the question was largely moot, had it not been, the result would have been the declaration that Petitioner would be re-elected. Therefore, provisions for recognizing such disqualification must be part of the constitutional process, regardless of the text of the Electoral Count Act. The process for disqualification is not self-executing.

E. No Objection was In Order to Enforce Amendment XX § 3 on January 3, 2023
Although members of Congress had been implicated in the Insurrection, having met with the President on December 21st, 2020 and having taken actions in furtherance of illegal efforts to overturn electoral votes in certain states through the proposed appointment of Jeffrey Clark as Attorney General,  no objection was in order to further examine such conduct when the 118th Congress convened. The only qualification examined was the receipt of valid certifications of election from the various states.  That this is the case provides support for Respondent efforts to deny Petitioner ballot access.
(Select January 6th Committee Final Report, Dec 22, 2022, House Report 117-663
Congressional Record: 118 Congress, Vol. 169 Washington, Tuesday, January 3, 2023 No. 1, H1)

F. Acknowledgement of Disability Under Amendment XIV § 3 is Prohibited By The Electoral Count Act
The Electoral Count Act, as amended, does not allow for consideration of the qualifications of the President or Vice President Elect. 
3. U.S.C. §15. Counting electoral votes in Congress
(b) Powers of the President of Senate.—
(1) Ministerial in nature.—Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, the role of the President of the Senate while presiding over the joint session shall be limited to performing solely ministerial duties.
(2) Powers explicitly denied.—The President of the Senate shall have no power to solely determine, accept, reject, or otherwise adjudicate or resolve disputes over the proper certificate of ascertainment of appointment of electors, the validity of electors, or the votes of electors.

G. Examination Of Electoral Votes is Limited
To further quote the Act
(d) Procedure at Joint Session Generally.—
(2) Action on certificate.—
(B) Requirements for objections or questions.—
(ii) Grounds for objections.—The only grounds for objections shall be as follows:
(I) The electors of the State were not lawfully certified under a certificate of ascertainment of appointment of electors according to section 5(a)(1).
(II) The vote of one or more electors has not been regularly given.

IV. Petitioner Participated in the Insurrection

A. Standard of Proof
This Court must consider the question of whether the Petitioner committed Insurrection. First, because the underlying issue of this case is to determine whether the Petitioner may serve, only the determination of whether the President is or may be disqualified from office is necessary. Second, the Petitioner opens the door for the Court to examine this question by raising the matter himself. 

B. An Insurrection Did Occur
Trials in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia have found ten individuals guilty of seditious conspiracy as part of the events of January 6, 2021. A conviction on this charge proves that the event was an act of sedition, rebellion and insurrection. 
(Donald J. Trump petition for certiorari, IV. President Trump did not engage in Insurrection, 26.)
(United States v. Rhodes, III, et al., 1-22-cr-15-APM (D.D.C.) which convicted Elmer Stewart Rhodes III,Kelly Meggs, Roberto Minuta, Joseph Hackett, David Moerschel, Edward Vallejo, United States v. Minuta 1:22-cr-15-APM and 
United States v. Nordean, 1:21-cr-175 (TJK) (D.D.C. Dec. 11, 2022) convicting Henry “Enrique” Tarrio, Ethan Nordean,, Joseph Biggs, and Zachary Rehl.)

C. Congress Has Examined the Question 
In addition to referring the Petitioner for Impeachment and Trial by the Senate, the House has examined the circumstances behind the effort to “Stop the Steal” and has identified the President’s tweet to invite Insurrectionists to the Capitol on January 6th. While a tweet may not be considered evidence in a criminal trial, the Court may consider it as part of a bar to qualification rather than beyond a reasonable doubt, which the task of the Special Counsel and others in current and future criminal proceedings.
(House Report 117-663)

D. Actions Under the Klan Act
There exist three cases where Petitioner is being sued under the Ku Klux Klan Act . While the case is still in the preliminary arguments phase, the facts are not in dispute, including the alleged fact of the President’s tweet,  which was included under the analysis of presidential immunity. As this proceeding is not criminal, but a determination of Petitioner’s fitness to serve, such allegations should be considered in this question. Note that the Klan Act itself was enacted to enforce Amendment XIV § 3. This implies that a finding under this lawsuit that Petitioner is liable is a disqualification to serve.  
(Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871 42 U.S.C. § 1985
 Trump v. Thompson, 590 F. Supp. 3d 46 (D.D.C. 2022), Case No. 21-cv-00400 (APM) Case No. 21-cv-
00586 (APM) Case No. 21-cv-00858 (APM)  2. Presidential Immunity, iii. The President’s Challenged Acts 83
 Gerard N. Magliocca, 2021, “Amnesty And Section Three Of The Fourteenth Amendment”  MAGLIOCCA 36:1.https://constitutionalcommentary.lib.umn.edu/article/amnesty-and-section-three-of-the-fourteenth-amendment/ First Ku Klux Klan Act, § 14 (“[W]henever any person shall hold office, except as a member of Congress or of some State legislature, contrary to the provisions of the third section of the fourteenth article of amendment of the Constitution of the United States, it shall be the duty of the district attorney of the United States for the district in which such person shall hold office . . . to proceed against such person, by writ of quo warranto, returnable to the circuit or district court of the United States in such district, and to prosecute the same to the removal of such person from office . . . .”). Members of Congress were excluded because, as we shall see in a moment, each House was fully capable of excluding a member-elect who was ineligible under Section Three. See infra text accompanying notes 124–126. State legislators were not included because they presumably did not pose (or seem to pose) the kind of threat to voting rights that executive officials or judges did. ) 

E. Timing of the Climax of the Insurrection
The January 6th Committee related, but did not connect, the events surrounding the climax of the insurrection. At 2:44 pm, insurrectionist Ashli Babbitt was injured by a member of the Metropolitan Police as she was breaching the door to the Speaker’s Lobby.  Coincidentally, it was at this point that special weapons officers arrested her immediate accomplices. This ended what was the likely aim of the Insurrection. The drama around hanging the Vice President was a diversion. Sadly, those events captured the attention from what was the plainly stated intention. One need only pay attention to the Petitioner’s words: 

And after this, we're going to walk down—and I'll be there with you—we're going to walk down. We're going to walk down any one you want, but I think right here. We're
going to walk down to the Capitol, and we're going to cheer on our brave senators, and congressmen and women. And we're probably not going to be cheering so much
for some of them because you'll never take back our country with weakness.

You have to show strength, and you have to be strong. We have come to demand that Congress do the right thing and only count
the electors who have been lawfully slated, lawfully slated.

I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard. Today we will see whether
Republicans stand strong for integrity of our elections, but whether or not they stand
strong for our country, our country…

…So, we're going to walk down
Pennsylvania Avenue ... and we're going to the Capitol and we're going to try and give —the Democrats are hopeless. They're
never voting for anything. But we're going to try to give our Republicans, the weak
ones, because the strong ones don't need any of our help, we're going to try and give them the kind of pride and boldness they
need to take back our country. So, let's walk down Pennsylvania Avenue. 

Whether these words are protected by the first amendment or as is more likely, an incitement to violence, or as is mostly settled, outside the duties of the President, they betray the motivations of the tip of the spear at the Speaker’s lobby and the Petitioner’s knowledge of these acts.

At this point, messages began pouring in to stop the rally – however the President – who had been watching the coverage from the Executive Dining Room – called off the attack before any of these communications could have reached him. The circumstances indicate that Trump had knowledge of the plot and called a halt once the objective could not be met. Given his remarks earlier in the day, the fate of the Democrats and “weak Republicans” had this assault not been stopped and had been supplemented by “quick reaction forces”  who were “waiting on the outside in case of worst case [sic] scenarios.”  How ironic these words seem in hindsight.
(House Report 117-663, 601) 
(Trump v. Thompson, 4.2.i.)
(House Report 117-663, 515-516)

F. The Motive for the Insurrection
The common misunderstanding is that Petitioner’s motivation was the toxicity of his ego. This is one of the three perfect cover stories in what is a much larger affair (the second being the impossible and frankly laughable drama to “hang Mike Pence” – with the fake gallows obviously overselling the theme.

The first cover story, which likely showed that the President’s opponents will take the easy route, is the effort to steal the election by somehow embarrassing the current President with a declaration from the President of Ukraine that it was investigating the firing of the Prosecutor General in Ukraine, which had been instigated by then Vice President Biden, for his failure to prosecute Burisma – a firm on which Hunter Biden served as a member of the Board of Directors. That firing the prosecutor who was not investigating his son’s company somehow benefited his son would hardly make the Vice President father of the year. As dirty tricks go, this one was ham handed. The “perfect phone call” was effective, however. No one with any electoral experience, and Senators have more than a little such experience, would consider such a stunt cause to remove a sitting president.

Had the issue been confined to the effort orchestrated by acting Chief of Staff Mulvaney to withhold Javelin missiles from Ukraine, and the funding of the Protect the House PAC from overseas sources as a returned favor, the Senate would have been forced to convict. The incident, which was revealed by a whistleblower, false certifications by an appointee at the Office of Management and Budget (because career staff refused), and was only stopped because Pentagon personnel in DoD Comptroller refused to participate.  The ruse that the reason for withholding funds from Ukraine was due to a campaign stunt rather than the actual goal of the operation should have been obvious at the time. 

The related quid pro quo as the dispersal of overseas funds to the Protect the House PAC, for which Lev Parnas and Igor Furman were convicted.  The extent to which members of the congressional majority at the time cooperated with the establishment of the fund is unknown. The desire to keep it that way may have been the motivation for congressional participation in the Insurrection conspiracy.  Time will tell, as Furman and Parnas are cooperating with federal prosecutors.

That this matter was not pursued vigorously was likely because both the justice system and the political system resist criminalizing foreign policy. Petitioner is relying on this reluctance in his claim of presidential immunity.
 (The Trump-Ukraine Impeachment Inquiry Report of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, Part I.)
 (United States v. Furman, No. 14-323(DSD/LIB), United States v. Parnas, 19-CR-725 (JPO) (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 7, 2022).

G. Team Crazy Was Team Russia
The seventh hearing of the January 6th Committee meeting, held July 12, 2022, describes the meeting at the White House on December 18, 2020 with President Trump and a group now known as “Team Crazy. ” This meeting included, aside from the Petitioner, Rudy Giuliani, who participated in the Ukraine conspiracy, Michael Flynn, who as National Security Advisor had worked to remove sanctions from Russia and who had previously been honored by Vladimir Putin., and former Overstock.com CEO Patrick Byrne – who was unknown to White House Counsel Pat Cipollone but is also known as one of Russian Agent Maria Butina’s paramours.  Given the composition of this group and the fact that after this meeting, the infamous Presidential Tweet calling for the January 6th Insurrection was sent on the early morning of December 19th, the possible involvement of the Kremlin in planning the events of January 6th cannot be ignored, and must not be ignored by this honorable Court. Had this fact been stressed in the second Trump impeachment, conviction might have resulted and this case would not have been inevitable.
 (NPR Special Series: House Jan. 6 committee hearings - Here's every word from the seventh Jan. 6 committee hearing on its investigation, https://www.npr.org/2022/07/12/1111123258/jan-6-committee-hearing-transcript)

H. The Secured Documents are part of the Cover-Up
During the hearings leading to the first impeachment, Lt. Colonel Alexander Vindman described how the Zelinsky phone call record, as well as at least one other conversations, were loaded onto NICE, the NSC Intelligence Collaboration Environment at the suggestion of Deputy White House Counsel John Eisenberg. This system was created to prevent the leaking of presidential communications which might be politically embarrassing to the President by introducing a keyword system to access the data.  Any conversations having to do with planning the obstruction of aid to Ukraine would have been loaded onto this system, which is an essential clue to why President Trump retained classified information, rather than the prevailing meme that his motivation was vanity. Ironically, the Special Counsel now possesses all of this material as part of this case.  Had Trump let it flow to the National Archives, it would likely have been lost in the massive number of documents any administration retains by law.
 (Politico: White House ordered ultrasecret system upgraded to prevent leaks.  Daniel Lippman and Natasha Bertrand 10/01/2019  https://www.politico.com/news/2019/10/01/white-house-trump-leaks-code-015194)
 United States of America v. Donald J. Trump, Waltine Nauta, and Carlos De Oliveira Case 9:23-cr-80101-AMC.)

I. The Insurrection Could Not Have Succeeded
The Insurrection was doomed to fail for two reasons. 

First, the reading of the Amendment XII at the heart of the plot was faulty because, even had all the electoral challenges subtracted from Democratic electors succeeded, President Biden still had more votes than Mr. Trump. A majority of the electoral votes accepted, rather than of the total, elects the President. That the plot ignored this fact shows complete incompetence.

Second, had the Babbitt cohort reached their quarry and a Quick Reaction Force limited the number of votes in opposition to Trump available, the rule of law would have held. No military officer, career employee or federal judge would have honored such a tainted result.

This incompetence indicates that the overall conspiracy was either planned by less then stellar minds or by someone who was not familiar with the nuances of the American system. Whether Trump was the brains of the operation or merely a pawn in larger events, he cannot be allowed to return to office.

J. Petitioner Acts as if Holding Office Confers Presidential Immunity
Petitioner has, on three occasions, gotten away with serious crimes, both by obstructing the Special Counsel’s investigation and not being prosecuted for this documented obstruction and by partisan support for his actions during two Senate trials. The existence of the Office of General Counsel memorandum has been used as a get out of jail free card, even though its legal effect has never been tested and likely would not have deterred any federal magistrate from issuing an arrest warrant had one been sworn out. Had one been attempted, the Secret Service would have enforced it, as they will if Trump is either sanctioned for contempt, attempts to flee, or is convicted. Regardless of the final outcome decision of this case, the opinion of the Court must demolish this assumption by either directly ruling on it or in dicta. Doing so will end this matter quickly.

K. A Second Inaugural Is Problematic for the Chief Justice
If Petitioner is granted ballot access without the matter of Amendment XIV § 3, the Chief Justice faces the issue of whether his constitutional oath prevents him from swearing Petitioner in for another term of office without his disqualification being removed by the required majorities of each chamber and whether his role in this duty is simply ministerial. 

L. The Question of Insurrection Must Be Settled Prior to January 6, 2025
Given the weight of evidence against Petitioner, the issue of how his participation in the insurrection is to be acknowledged is essential to the health of the nation, especially given his problematic relationship with Mr. Putin, which is very public, and the continued attempts by his allies serving in Congress to obstruct aid to Ukraine.

V. Five Options Exist For Determining Disqualification
1. This honorable Court may deem Petitioner disqualified for office. By raising the issue in his petition, the former president opened the door for this honorable Court to declare he is disqualified to serve, regardless of ballot access, and must face the required bicameral super-majority vote to remove the disability.

2. This honorable Court can rule that states have the authority to disqualify a presidential candidate by the same means congressional candidates can be disqualified by denying ballot access, although this runs the risk that faithless electors may still elect him president-elect.

3. This honorable Court can rule that the pending case under 42 U.S.C. § 1985 is sufficient to disqualify Petitioner until it is completed, thus requiring congressional removal of this disability.

4. This honorable Court can rule that conviction in either of his current federal cases disqualifies Petitioner, thus requiring congressional removal of this disability.

5. This honorable Court can direct the Ethics Committees of both Chambers of Congress to consider the issue with due haste.

VI. There Is Precedent For The Court To Intervene In The Rules Of Congress
This honorable Court has both construed and invalidated the rules of both the House (Christoffel v. United States 338 U.S. 84 (1949)) and the Senate (United States v. Smith 286 U.S. 6 (1932)). It has also set the boundaries on congressional rulemaking.   

 Under Ballin, the House and Senate may exercise their rulemaking authorities at their discretion provided there is (1) a reasonable relation between the rule’s method and the desired result, and (2) the rule does not ignore constitutional restraints or violate fundamental rights. 3 Case law on when a House or Senate rule transgresses this standard is limited.”  

Amicus counsels that, while it is preferable to defer to Congress regarding its own rules, such separation of powers issues are not resolved.

See “338 U.S. at 95. In her concurrence denying certiorari in Schock v. United States, No. 18-406, slip op. at 1 (U.S. Feb. 19, 2019), Justice Sonia Sotomayor noted that the Court has not resolved whether the separation of powers doctrine is violated by a federal court interpreting internal rules adopted by the House of Representatives to govern its own Members. She stated: Although this question does not arise frequently—presumably because criminal charges against Members of Congress are rare—the sensitive separation-of-powers questions that such prosecutions raise ought to be handled uniformly.”  

(ArtI.S5.C2.1 Congressional Proceedings and the Rulemaking Clause, Constitution Annotated at constitution.congress.gov.)

VII. Intervention Is Unavoidable To Preserve Democracy
There is now a very real question of whether majorities in Congress, which are responsible for setting their own rules and procedures by majority vote, will do so when faced with enforcing constitutional provisions that require a supermajority to overcome. That the Petitioner was able to overcome two impeachment trials shows why this issue must not be regarded as a political question. 

That a majority of the President’s Party acted in concert with a member of the conspiracy behind the insurrection did in fact vote as directed by the Petitioner casts doubt on whether the House of Representatives is competent to make the necessary rules changes.

Conclusion
Petitioner is an Insurrectionists who cannot be allowed to serve as President without satisfying the requirement that his disability must be removed by super-majorities of each chamber of Congress. This honorable Court should declare this is the case or assure a process is created by which such a declaration can be made without political obstruction and that this fact must be noted in counting Electoral Votes. At minimum, it should declare those portions of the Electoral Count Act which prevent recognition of his disability unconstitutional and specify by ruling or dicta that the Office of General Counsel opinion has no legal force and must be overturned.

Tuesday, January 02, 2024

Call us Spiritual but not religious Catholics

As we enter the New Year, it is time to look at why so many Catholics attended only Christmas Mass - and why many don't even do that. The clericalist way to describe them is fallen away.

Some of the fallen away were never truly there. They don't go to Mass because they no longer live with an older generation which asks "which Mass do you go to?" or "do you need to go to confession?" on a weekly basis. The latter is almost a query as to whether you have had "impure thoughts," or more precisely, masturbated.

In times past, people had a belief that having a belief in God was advantageous, but never had true faith. Some of these reputably work in the Vatican or are priests and ministers. There is a field of counseling that is made for these people.

While some who only go to Mass on Christmas, Easter, to weddings and funerals go to Confession beforehand, most no longer do. These Catholics still go to Communion and still have an experience of Grace. In other words, they no longer believe that missing Mass is a sin, mortal or otherwise.

COVID convinced others that not going to Mass was not sinful, because the Church had no problem issuing a "dispensation." If the Church can determine whether or not something is a sin, then that thing is morally neutral, even if beneficial. Many who are no longer there probably never got back into the habit. I would not know, since I am one of these.

There are some for whom not attending is more deliberate. Some of them never attend at all, but have not lost faith in Jesus, are fully catechized and experience the Lord when they receive Communion. They stay away because they have lost faith in the Church. This view used to be called anti-clerical.

Abortion politics is certainly one reason people leave in protest - or stay and ignore the the clergy. Conservative American clergy have so identified with the Republican line (or more accurately the Republicans have aligned with conservative Catholic bishops). 

Pollsters have found evidence that weekly attenders tend to be pro-life Republicans, while less frequent attenders tend to be pro-choice Democrats. This is now almost a truism.

Others disagree with denying women, married people or outed gays ordination or with the bishops who blame the abuse of minors on gay priests. 

Gay priests never abuse children and do not welcome advances from gay teens. It is the asexual priest class, who thinks they are holy for giving up heterosexuality who, because they are often emotionally immature, which are the danger.

Then there are those priests and bishops who defend the rights of errant clergy to fire gay and lesbian Church employees or prohibit the children of gay couples from attending Catholic Schools. The same clerics punished Sisters who supported healthcare reform, deny contraceptive coverage to Church employees and refuse to let Catholic School teachers exercise their rights to collective bargaining.  

These bishops refuse to see the justice of allowing women who cannot safely bear children receive sterilization and punish hospitals who would allow abortion or fetal hospice when a child has no hope of surviving to birth, even though doing so is a serious health risk (both physical and emotional) to the mother.

The same crowd would deny Communion to Catholic politicians who support such sane measures. This is not because such support is sinful. It is not - even doctrinally only facilitating a specific abortion leads to excommunication. They do so because they want a consistent Catholic message in the public discussion. Their own.

These same clerics speak out against Pope Francis in public or simply ignore him when they are told to bless divorced Catholics who have remarried or who are gay. Whenever some whiny bishop who will never become an archbishop or cardinal is sacked or rebuked by the Holy Father for such open or quiet disobedience, an angel gets its wings.

This form of malignant narcissism is why some leave the Church - rather than simply limiting attendance. This is not my approach. I still affirm my Catholicism. I will not be pushed out. My baptism is still valid. Rather, I consider it my duty to stay and denounce hierarchical error and hubris. It's also more fun.

Such protest is an act of Faith in God. It is exercising real faith rather than loyalty to "the Faith." This is the essence of spirituality; doing the right thing for God and our fellows. Such faith requires the belief in an all Loving God; the perfection of love - not perfect obedience. It takes seriously the promise that Jesus is gentle and humble of heart, whose yoke is easy and whose burden is light.

Belief in a humble God takes true faith, as such love and humility is not achievable by us in practice. We can only ask to receive it and see and serve others the way we think Jesus would. This is true spirituality. 

So even when denouncing the actions of some clergy, we must both pray for them and offer our truth-telling as an example for those in the clergy to emulate and find spirituality.

Tuesday, October 03, 2023

I lost the lottery

If you play the lottery, one of two things can happen. You win, and if you did not win, you lose.

Did the kids in school win? Officially, if you believe the propaganda that the money goes to education. It could be true if it went to local school districts directly.

It doesn't.

So who won?

Rich people, whose taxes are not increased because the lottery makes money.

Bond holders. They invest money and get tax free returns. At least their money goes to schools.

Workers? They lost big time. When taxes are too low on the bosses, there is less of a tax penalty for lowering wages and benefits than if taxes were higher. 

When taxes are higher, the government gets the benefit of any savings imposed in workers. Because workers are better off when their pay is not cut, they don't need benefits.

When taxes are lower, low wage workers are more likely to need benefits. They are also more likely to play. So they lose twice.

Someone has to win eventually. Then they become rich and, for their riches, everyone wants a piece. The taxman wins too, but not as much because tax rates are lower for rich people because of the lottery.

Let's do a thought experiment. What if you could get an app that would play every combination for you?

Sounds expensive.

What if it arranged for financing?

Then, if you win, you can pay all your debts.

Why? Because you would have to declare bankruptcy.

Unless you are the only one with the app, everyone who plays using it splits the pot. The amount you borrowed does not go down if the pot is shared.

If you declare bankruptcy to share the debt, whomever lent you the money will have to eat the debt. Unless you borrowed from the government.

Why? You cannot discharge debt you owe them. 

Worse, if you get private finance, this is a joke that is funny once. Very quickly, whomever made those loans would ask Congress to make them nondischargeable. Just like student debt.

Student debt is another form of gambling. You hope you can beat the odds, graduate, and make more than you owe. Including capitalized interest from when you cannot pay. The house wins again - but you may not be able to buy one. This is why school should be. Maybe the lottery should fund college.

Of course, if the government loans you the money, you and everyone else will simply not pay, or the government could give you a payment plan for partial forgiveness.

Sounds like taxes. But the poor would pay because the rich are smart enough not to play the lottery. Because they don't like losing. They will let you do that.

So go ahead and play. I warn you, though. You will almost certainly keep losing. 

Especially to the rich.

Sunday, September 10, 2023

We're 1 Generation from Human Extinction - Unpacking Population COLLAPSE

Monday, July 24, 2023

What is happening and what wants to happen

When I was 20, I thought global warming was not an issue. The joke was on me. If you had told me the world would be like what it is now (I am 60), I would have asked you for what you were smoking.

Climate change has happened. Unless the train of circumstances that heated up Barents Sea are reversed, the Arctic Ocean has changed and the Southwest is under a new weather pattern, at least in the summer. The first thing to go will be agriculture from the region. If it stays hot during the winter (rather than just pleasantly warm), the snow birds will stop coming and retirees will come back north.

I would like to be wrong about this, so we shall see.

In any case, in urban areas and on highways, gasoline vehicles must be banned and replaced with tethered electric cars and trucks with central computer control - including driverless cabs for those who do now with to own cars. Tethers will attach to a roof, which will have grass growing on the top side (with solar panels and irrigation/drainage). Asphalt is as much to blame for warming as gasoline. Rural areas will still use gas or hydrogen, however. We cannot roof over every country road on the planet. Gasoline is still a byproduct of refining oil to make plastic. Any excess should be burned for power at the refinery, rather than distributed. 

The United Nations is totally incompetent to deal with the situation (as well as genocide - including in Ukraine). So is the European Union. Meanwhile, as Trump has been saying, NATO in its current form is not sustainable. All for the same reason. You cannot have a rotating executive. Rotation may work for the Green Party as a deliberative body, but you cannot govern this way.

World government cannot come about while Chinese Peasants are persecuted, the Communist Party rules China and the Dalit are not given full rights and respect in India. Democracy is as much a culture as a from of government.

The best we can do right now is allied government, where the executive is a single person who is elected from among all of the membership (not just the United States) and some form of indirect election is practiced. Likewise, there needs to be an independent legislature, which must be directly elected by the various regions (which should be of approximately equal size.

The US is too big to govern. While such items as civil rights and workers rights need to be national (or by overseen by the whole Alliance), much government funding and spending need to be regional. Regions will be of roughly equal electoral vote size. They need to be big enough so that California is not a region of its own, so the minimum number is seven. Even if California is split.

The Catholic Church needs to get real about sex. There are few, if any, heterosexual priests left. They are now either gay or asexual, so to understand itself, the Church must study Gender (or Queer) Theory. Until it figures itself out, it has nothing to say about anyone else.

Also, Medieval (or imperial Roman) models of governance need to fall away for some kind of democracy - at all levels. This would be a restoration, not an evolution. In ancient times, bishops were actually pastors (so each parish would elect their pastor and have elders).

Trump will not go to prison. If he survives, his two choices are house arrest or the mental health care he so desperately needs. We cannot hate him - and to love him is to see that he gets the care he deserves. However, we should take away his phone.

Those who helped him with the Insurrection and with the Ukraine affair, however, including and especially members of Congress (past and present - I'm looking at you, Nunes) will be held to account and their political careers ended.

The next president (or two) will be South Asian and female and their last names will start with an H.

Unless the GOP shifts from racism and sexism to tax reform, it will not survive. Any such reform must be bipartisan. Right now, we are arguing about pennies and nothing is getting better for far too many people and far too good for all too few.

Making everyone file income taxes is not working. The rich can pay too little and the poor have to pay to much to get needed income supplements.

Credits for health care, childcare and family income (child tax credit), need to come through wages or other government programs (education, unemployment or Social Security). Higher wage and dividend taxes (over  $85K) should be collected by employers as part of a subtraction VAT to fund credits to workers and families and to pay start paying down the debt. State subtraction VAT will fund education and social services, as well as additional child tax and insurance credits for higher cost states).

Incomes on wages and dividends (and interest paid) over $425,000 will still pay a graduated and simplified income tax, but can avoid paying by purchasing no-return tax prepayment bonds. These funds should go only to debt retirement (implying that they will be high enough to balance the budget).

Capital gains and estate taxes need to be replaced by a single rate asset value added tax, which should fund allied, nuclear and naval defense spending and be set to an international rate to prevent tax arbitrage. These taxes would be marked to market at IPO, Option exercise and first sale after inheritance, gift or donation, but be zero rated for sales to broad based employee-ownership or cooperative programs. (I have a whole website about how to make these things work well enough to be attractive rather than to be Capitalism, Jr.).

A goods and services (value added) tax should fund both the employer contribution to Social Security and discretionary civil and domestic military expenditures (aside from strategic nuclear). About 20% should do. These funds should be credited on an equal dollar basis, with the employee tax capped at $85,000 with a $22,000 floor (assumes $11 minimum wage). A GST/Asset VAT will make sure that when rich people borrow from their stocks to buy companies or luxuries or purchase life insurance, they will not avoid tax. Also, make lottery winnings tax free.

States will collect GST/VAT and subtraction VAT and do all compliance audits. The SEC will collect federal asset VAT (state asset VAT on real estate will be collected at closing) and the Bureau of the Public Debt will collect very high rate income taxes. No IRS.

The minimum wage needs to go up and the work week cut to four days of seven hours each (including a half-hour for lunch). There is no other way to keep everyone occupied - and going to school after the age of 16 needs to be considered a job and paid minimum wage (or less if food and housing are provided).

Inflation does not track to low income wages. It chases the median dollar. The median dollar in income hits at about the 90th percentile - about $150,000. We cannot subsidize that much, but people who make more than that should not get percentage wage increases - including within government and government contracting. Cost of living wage increases (not merit) should be given on an equal dollar per hour basis and must be universal.

If we go to Mars, it will be by Space Station, not by a single landing, with the scientists and their families among those who go. Call it JPL in Orbit. For this to work, artificial gravity needs to be worked out. It is the one test that no one seems to want to do. Until it is done, forget Mars or any long-term orbital presence. 

Also, to do Mars (or even the Moon or a long-term orbital station), it NASA needs to be in the same fiscal pot as military R&D and procurement - so that these industries are mostly held harmless by any peace dividend. Until they (and their workers' families - yes, they have families) consent to reform, the War Machine will keep going and demand to be used to kill people.

Unless we develop some kind of gravitational propulsion (call it an unbalanced washing machine drive) or space elevator to pump water (or separated hydrogen and oxygen) into space, it will remain a vanity project. Such piping will likely be inflatable (filled with either Hydrogen or Helium), along the lines of what both Sierra Space and Lockheed Martin are developing as habitats.

American society and empire can either abandon hegemony and inequality or collapse. We cannot explore outer space as warring factions.

China is a dog chasing the Taiwan car. If it catches it, the Communist Party will collapse unless it forbids migration from the island to the country at large. That is doubly true for Hong Kong.

Putin will not last much longer. The question I have is, who will fall first, Trump or Putin?

Sunday, July 23, 2023

Arctic heat is coming our way. And fast!


The Arctic Ocean heat map seems to show that it is the Barents Sea that has warmed the Arctic, which has melted too much in summer, which has given us the new dominant weather patterns in the northern countries. The El Nino is most likely the disturbance of the long term La Nina drought pattern, with the likely mechanism for this disturbance being the Honga Tonga volcano - which changed the Trade Winds that drive Pacific heating. 

The question is, how did the Barents Sea get so warm? Answer that question, and you have cracked global warming (rather than global flooding and drought). Two separate systems.

I don't see Barents as cooling anytime soon - meaning we have reached the tipping point Climate has changed. It is not theoretical - and unless we ban gasoline in urban areas and for highway use - as well as concrete - we are stuck here. The operative question is how many people in the 110 degree weather zone have to die or flea before we do something like this?  

The first thing that will happen is the end to agriculture wherever the 110 degree heat has become the new normal. The only solution to staying there is indoor food plant growth and cloned meat and dairy (although goats and sheep may do good indoors. Growing pigs and cows that way has been a disaster.

Friday, July 21, 2023

The roads to Trump's legal entanglements and a Q&A....


Trump's co-conspirators are going to face hard time. Especially those with ties to Russia.

Trump has no defense against the facts of the case. The argument is about privilege. Once this has been litigated, Trump can only plead no contest. In the end, Insurrection and being bribed by Putin will take precedence.

The Origins of the Rapture


Sin is about harm we do others. We cannot harm God. A god that van be harmed is a mere creature. This whole focus on avoiding Hell makes showing love to others optional, which is wrong. It is essential. Black lives really do matter.

Justification is about group dynamics. So is martyrdom. Christianity started out as a martyrs Church. The Rapture is antithetical to this. It is cheap grace on steroids.

The tribulation is simply life, not a prophesied event. We each meet Christ in the air when we die. Throughout history, prophecy is a form of social commentary about the present, not the future. Dispensationalism is about avoiding the needs if others. It is a toxic concept.

For the sake of argument, if there were a tribulation at the hands of Antichrist, Christians will be the targets. Modern day martyrs. It is a mark of faith and brotherhood to give ones life for Jesus. There is no glory in Rapture.

Monday, July 17, 2023

Are future humans really our problem?


Given breakthroughs in life extension or a very reasonable belief in reincarnation, these problems may be ours, and not just those of our children. The important question for both the present and the past is not as much the technology as the human systems. Will capitalism transform us or kill us? Will we transform it, or kill it? 

Will government, on its own, be able to ban urban and highway use of gas burning cars, replacing them with electric (preferably tethered, rather than battery)? We can tether cars the same way we tether electric trains - and computer control of both (as well as limited access in urban areas) will end automobile deaths. However, until workers are more involved in consumption (as well as production) and government decisions, the comity of capitalists will never escape the power of big oil.

Why Inequality Starts Becoming A Problem Now | Economics Explained


The issue is not just who holds the money, but the control it buys them over other people. The distribution of things is not as important. Social Democracy can fix that piece. Without social democracy, however, capitalism is as fragile as the business cycle - or rather -the fiscal policy driven cycle of speculation and bailout.  

Government spending is the yeast of any society. In social democracy, people getting benefits for education and retirement, as well as household spending by government employees and contractors spread the money out in fairly equal chunks. No business assets are ever acquired without the prospect of household or government consumption (or exports). 

Financing, however, is not the same as investment. When taxes are cut, there is a financial boom, but it may not be in any way linked to actual investment in plant and equipment. Indeed, it probably is not. Financial booms take money out of consumption and put it into speculation. Making a deal becomes more important than making a product. Until this is absolutely clear in our economic discussion, we will continue to make the same mistakes decade after decade.

Monday, July 10, 2023

What is Neoplatonism?


Watch this series!

My comments related to the divine forms emanating from the Nous:

The important thing to realize about the various divine pantheons, from the Sumeric to the Greek and Latin to the Hindu, and the associated ideal types or forms, is that they evolved from astrology, the study of how human nature relates to the cosmos, rather than being the source of astrology. In other words, human behavior and its observation came first. The myths came second. Likewise, the Eden myth came from the description of the original sin - which is blame - and is not the actual cause of that sin. Finally, the Satan, the tempter, started as Lucifer, the tester, who was one of the sons of God found in the book of Job in the Canaanite legends - which are also modeled after human personality. 

This is not to deny the reality of the divine, but to explain how religion needs to not take itself so seriously in the search.

The One of Plotinus has a parallel in the Book of Kings, where Elijah goes to the mountains and the wind rages, but God is not in the wind. The fire burns, but God was not in the fire. The earth quaked, but God as not in the quaking. Then, Elijah heard a small whisper, and he went into the cave and covered his face, lest he die from seeing God. The whisper is the nothingness. The quiet.

Neoplatonism and Christianity


The collection of YouTube videos, of which this one is apart, is essential viewing in the journey to enlightenment and spirituality, although the writings of Bill W. are also important.

Here are my comments on what I have learned so far from the series, as well as my reactions coming from my own journey: 

Aquinas seems to have cribbed Plontius in his descriptions of the Trinity. Sadly for Christian philosophy, the evolution of Judaism was not known to those who criticized Origin or to Augustine. Had they been familiar, the story of Eden would have been seen as an allegory on blame rather than a human origin story, as well as the evolution of Satan and Baal in the distillation of monotheism from the Canaanite and Sumeric pantheons, including the God and the Sons of God in the Book of Job.

What was missed by the neoplatonists and the early church fathers was the radical humility of God, or of the Nous, or even as The One. Indeed, the Psyche (or soul or Holy Spirit or, in Hebrew mysticism, Shekinah), the Nous (or Word) and the One (or He Who Is - YHWH) must be radically humble, because if not, these ideas would be dependent on the actions or good works of their creatures. The One is in need of nothing. Paradoxically, the way to nothing is to be the One to others and to see the One in others through the radical humility of service and charity. This is the radical humility of Christ, who was gentle and humble of heart - who in Matthew 25 has us find him in the least rather than in faith, theosis, theurgy or seeking.

In the modern movement whose spirituality is the near death experience, the return to the Nous, the animation of the love from the Soul and unity with the One is a common feature - that of wholeness in the next life and union with aspects of the Divine. The concept of the life review is not an accounting of personal peccadillo, but of failures and successes in Love.

Accepting the radical humility of the Soul, the Nous and the One is the only way to actually find union with their emenations. 

Tuesday, June 27, 2023

A Future Beyond Capitalism? Socialism Explained.

Thursday, June 08, 2023

Matt Walsh and the Case for Destroying Someone’s Faith