It’s just about how good they are about concealing it.

The TRUST Myth

We’re told we can trust our leaders. Their words affect our daily lives and when repeated by our media, have profound effects on everything from grocery and gas prices to world peace.

However, there’s a very small number of people in the United States who can lie with near total impugnity. None of us can lie about our boss or to our customers without being promply fired. But if you’re one of the 635 on Capitol Hill (clearly not the best and brightest 635 in America either….), and as long as you’re on the clock, you can say anything you want about anything or anybody.

Must be nice….

The Senators and Representatives shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.
— United States Constitution (Article I, Section 6, Clause 1)

And they’d NEVER abuse that privilege, right?

“If you like your doctor, you can keep you doctor. If you like your plan, you can keep your plan.”
— President Barack Obama, PolitiFact ‘Lie of the Year’

Obama knew Republicans would be hard pressed and/or gutless trying to prove “high crimes and misdemeanors” here as presidents were not included in the Clause, so he just repeated this whopper over three dozen times.

We had politicians on the floor of the Senate accusing a presidential candidate of not filing income taxes (knowing he did), and after the election one was called on the mistruth to which he responded, “Well, he didn’t win, did he?”

Americans have to live with the daily ramifications of falsehoods spoken and written by House and Senate politicians, echoed by both legacy and social media. Imagine how much better life could be if the elected were required to be honest….

The Only MEN ARE SLOBS Myth

There are probably hundreds of instances where women declare men slobs, pigs, etc. Husbands and boyfriends are the butt of such declarations on women’s talk shows, op-ed and social media posts, and are never called on it.

That’s because women know and consciously deflect from an ugly truth: they can be easily outed as mockable projection hypocrites if their behavioral tendencies were exposed and publicly acknowledged.

Go to any department store and look at the women’s clothing and shoe aisles. One will see blouses and dresses strewn on the floor under the hung garments. Women just throw garments anywhere but back on the racks where they found them. Shoes, instead on being put back in place after being tried on, are just left on the floor to be walked around or tripped over.

Laura has also decribed the horrors of using a women’s public restroom.

Shit, piss and menstraul fluid literally splattered on and around toilet seats, soiled femine hygene products left on the floors or stopping up toilets… yeah, it’s fuckng gross and the same women who punchline men as slobs will NEVER tell you how disgusting they are behind closed stalls.

The Myth About ACADEMICS

There is this perception that teachers and professors have the last word during any discussion. If one has any doubt, their academic credentials are thrown back in your face in an attempt to shut down any disagreement one may have with their conclusions. But why must we take their conclusion as the final word?

Because we’ve been trained to accept their word.

Teachers have the ultimate power, by issuing grades from first grade through college, to certify or destroy an academic record that has profound implications for an employment career. Since their grades are as simple as right or wrong, the implication is they know more than the student which most of the time is correct.

However in recent years, teachers (who are never given the opportunity to be vetted by parents) enter the classroom, not with the mission to educate children with the tools needed to function in society but with personal agendas that may be at odds with the values with parents. But because they are teachers with the power to destroy the academic record of any child, those agendas have been legitimized.

Parents are given no proof of the proficiency of any teacher but are supposed to accept they are good teachers simply because they’re employed by a school. We have no prior assurance teachers are actual decent people. But again because they are teachers, parents are not allowed to question their competence and sanity even when they repeatedly behave in deviant manners.

The LAWYER Myth

Given the lofty compensation for their emergency services (they’re mostly only hired when bad things happen), one would think lawyers are the ultimate professionals. Cinematic and television portrayals collectively sure give that impression.

And where’s the proof?

When looking for a lawyer, you’re presented with a headshot (usually taken when he or she was much younger). You’re to be impressed by the law school attended, their degrees, their years since passing the bar exam, and years in a legal area of expertice. But there’s one piece of very important information you won’t see in a lawyer’s bio.

When a professional sports team is looking for a new coach, the first metric their fans look at are the wins and losses. That’s the easiest way to gauge if that coach candidate is worth consideration. However with lawyers, you will NEVER see the wins and losses of any law firm or individual attorney on any website.

So how do you know if the hundreds of dollars per hour, or contingency, is going to a good lawyer or a bad one?

You won’t.

Ask an attorney for the number of their wins and losses and see what happens. Note the grammar in their response for a quick clue.

The DOCTOR Myth

Again because of their level and years of education, we’re told it’s extremely problematic to ever question the conclusion of a medical professional. But doctors and lawyers share one commonality in said professions.

They don’t perform law or medicine. They “practice”.

That long-standing word description alone should be pause for concern as the common definition is it’s a “method of learning by repetition”. Do you really want someone learning when your finances, freedom, health or life is on the line? Like lawyers, you’re to assume high-priced doctors are good at what they do despite your not given any documentation to back it up.

How many patients have they cured? How many have sued them for a misdiagnosis or negligence? How many patients have they lost?

Despite the high compensation demanded for their services, neither offer a guarantee of success.

If you don’t ask, they won’t tell you. If they do respond, they’ll probably hide behind HIPPA so they still won’t tell you.

The HEALTHY FOOD Myth

Just read the ingredients on any food product you purchase at your market of choice and you’ll be left dumbfounded because, chances are, you can’t even pronounce some of the chemicals added to what we consume on a daily basis.

It might surprise you to learn that many food additives found in bread, baked goods, and candy manufactured in the United States are banned or restricted in Europe and other parts of the world because of potential health risks. U.S. consumers generally assume that items on grocery store shelves have been vetted for safety, but a loophole in the approval process of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) means that 99 percent of new food chemicals aren’t evaluated before they are added to products.
— Everyday Heath

While the excuse may be these chemicals are added for visual and palate aesthetics or preservation, many of these additives have quite negative short and longterm health ramifications. High fructose corn syrup, maltodextrin, monosodium glutamate are some of the most widely used culprits. Funny how when you see drug commercials that reveal those pesky, possible negative side effects (that inconveniently include death), we’re never given similar warnings when it comes to the ingredients added to our food.

Are they trying to kill us?

The HOUSING SHORTAGE Myth

For anyone listening to news reports about the affordability and/or availability of homes, disregard all the metrics given as there’s one very important factor the media leaves out.

Realtors.

They set local and regional market prices based on their personal commission demands. They are the ones assuring hallucinating sellers how valuable their neglected or damaged homes are. There are more protections for buying a used car than a home purchase worth hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Why are the homes neglected or damaged? Because some people bought over-their-head and after mortgage, bills, and daily expenses, had little money left, let alone for routine maintenance. When the inevitable happens and repairs are required, handyman cheap appears to be the remedy of choice and shoddy workmanship will be discovered belatedly by subsequent owners.

If you have the misfortune of searching for a home, there’s one constant: the condition of the homes you’ll see range from tolerable to you-must-be-high. From experience it’s safe to say 98% of the homes you’ll tour are in some way damaged. To a seller and realtor, the buyer is a mark. They want your money and conscience is in very short supply.

Unless you have the wealth to build from ground up you’ll be choosing from poorly maintained, insect and/or rodent infested, mold and/or water damaged homes with inflated prices that will help an entitled seller hit the lottery and the greedy realtor receive that generous commission. If that house was initially listed at an realistic price with honest verbal and pictorial descriptions (big IF), it’ll most likely be scooped up quickly by another realtor/broker who’ll put the minimum into that house and flip it at a hefty markup. It’s the optional ethics of realtors that make home prices unaffordable for most buyers, not to mention the ripple effect of jacking up the property taxes of all those around that home.

Also be wary of the typical descriptions of houses found online: “meticulously maintained”, “nestled in”, “cozy”, “spacious” and other glowing adjectives that will be fodder for instant disappointment when you visit the property. Getting honest disclosures from realtors (required by law in some states) about the house is like pulling teeth. You’ll only be told what you know to ask. Then it’s a question of how much potential money you’re willing to tolerate or invest in that house after buying that expensive shack.

Despite all you’re told, there is no housing shortage.

There IS a shortage of houses that are worth the asking price.

The QUALITY Myth

Speaking of overpriced, there was a time in America if you were to spend a little more money on an item , you were assured of receiving something of higher quality that would last for many, many years.

Those were the days.

Cars actually had steel frames and bodies that could withstand a simple bump and could inflict even more damage to whatever it came in contact with. The left saw that as unfair, so all cars were subsequently constructed with lighter materials so damage would be more equitable.

Just look at some of the 60’s era kitchen appliances you can still find in homes currently for sale.

Today, the more you spend on anything, you’ll purchase the inferior in order to get you to repeat that sad cycle. Any product or service you don’t buy often will be used against you. The quality will be questionable at best to assure multiple repeat visits that will never fix the problem. Whether we’re talking about an appliance, store, auto mechanic, finding someone who’s first mission isn’t to rip you off is like seeking the Holy Grail.

As this appears to be the current business model, not sure when our money will be respected again.

The MEDIA Myth

We’re told to trust the media, and who says that the most?

The media.

Without those who consume their product, their overinflated salaries don’t happen. News anchors must come off as authorities on any given topic and when the inevitable happens and they get something very wrong, apologies and retractions are as brief and short as possible. To make matters worse, whether we’re talking about the news or entertainment industries, these people truly believe they are smarter that the American people whose ignorance on any given topic should be solely blamed on… the media.

Our job is to control what people think.
— Mika Brzezinski, 2/22/17

Note the use of terms used when describing the American people: “average”, “everyday”, “ordinary” people. Think of the narcissistic arrogance and sense of privilege it takes to constantly look at others in that fashion. It gives too many the license to misinform and/or manipulate because they believe they know what’s best for the public, and for those they prefer and deem protectable.

Many of today’s journalists also believe if it’s something they’ve never heard of, it never happened. What could go wrong with that thinking?

Also be wary whenever a journalist cites an “expert” to justify a conclusion. More times than not like “anonymous sources”, those experts are not named and if so, the number is as few as possible. That “source” can also be an academic (see: above), or based on past incidents, can be made up altogether.

Arrogance crosses into the entertainment industry where television and movie celebrities believe they’re deep thinkers and know it all simply because of where they work, not to mention those who work for them who don’t have the guts to risk their employment and tell these entertainers when they’re wrong. As a result, embarrassingly misinformed musings are distributed to the masses.

It has been brought to my attention that, in my support of Palestine, I have inadvertently re-posted articles, and/or statements, that have contained misinformation and falsehoods. I am aware how sharing inaccurate content can cause confusion and distress; for this I am deeply sorry. I will certainly endeavour to be more diligent in future to verify anything I share online.
— Guy Pearce, actor

“Inadvertently”….

For the most part, disregard their opinions unless you put them in the parody column.

When it comes to the world of broadcast sports, on-air pundits could be the worse as too many believe they’re also comedians instead of analysts. Their jokes and segments aren’t funny, and we’re to embrace their condescending belief that eye candy is necessary to keep men interested.

Stop.

There are other examples of myths that will inevitably come to mind as life continues.

Due to a system they’ve set up, lawyers command exorbitant fees for their services and offer no guarantee of success. They’re portrayed as a higher class than the rest of us. One has to pass an exam in order to be admitted to most state bar associations in order to “practice” law in those states. Federal and state legislatures have voluntarily deferred legal status to state bars.

But there’s one major issue: bar associations are NOT official government agencies. Bar associations are nonprofits. If that sounds incredible and unbelievable, search for your state bar association and you’ll see a dot org in the URL after their name. Lawyers pay dues to be a member of a state bar. The bar has more of an obligation to protect lawyers than protect the public from lawyers.

Did you know that lawyers, in some states, are required to report (to a state Bar of Overseers) any fraud or illegal activities other lawyers are committing that violates their so-called “Rules of Professional Conduct”? When was the last time you’ve ever read a news report of a lawyer busting another lawyer? It very seldom happens so lawyers can hold their clients and opposition to standards they ignore for themselves while charging hundreds of dollars an hour for their time or attaching a generous percentage (contingency) against something they had no involvement in creating.

I was curious to what the Founders may have written in the Constitution regarding any rule or law that said you needed to have a lawyer with regards to a legal proceeding. I didn’t find anything, however the clear disdain they did have for lawyers is documented: the Founders wanted lawyers nowhere near the government process and for logical reasons. It’s a travesty that the very protection they put in place to protect the American people from lawyers… disappeared.

I DID find the following illuminating essay by William-Arthur Sassman II on Linkedin regarding the fraudulent status of lawyers in America.

ARE LAWYERS AND ATTORNEYS LICENSED TO PRACTICE LAW? ABSOLUTELY NOT!!!

Below, you’ll read an exhibit from a lawsuit that will explain in some detail the answer to that question and why no attorneys ever call-in to dispute that statement. (And, yes, at least a few attorneys do listen to Freedom’s Questions.)

Lawyers and Attorneys Are Not Licensed To Practice Law
Lawyer Deceptions
By Ben Gates August 03, 2006

THE NATURE OF LAWYER-CRAFT IN AMERICA AS PER THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT;

The practice of Law CAN NOT be licensed by any state. (Schware v. Board of Examiners, 353 U.S. 238, 239)

The practice of Law is AN OCCUPATION OF COMMON RIGHT! (Sims v. Aherns, 271 S.W. 720 (1925))

The “CERTIFICATE” from the State Supreme Court ONLY authorizes to practice Law “IN COURTS” as a member of the STATE JUDICIAL BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT, can ONLY represent WARDS OF THE COURT, INFANTS, PERSONS OF UNSOUND MIND (SEE CORPUS JURIS SECUNDUM,VOLUME 7, SECTION 4.)

“CERTIFICATE” IS NOT A LICENSE to practice Law AS AN OCCUPATION, nor to DO BUSINESS AS A LAW FIRM!!!

The “STATE BAR” CARD IS NOT A LICENSE!!! It is a”UNION DUES CARD”. The “BAR” is a “PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION”;
1. like the Actors’ Union, Painters’ Union, etc.
2. No other association, EVEN DOCTORS, issue their own license. ALL ARE ISSUED BY THE STATE.
3. The State Bar is a NON-GOVERNMENTAL PRIVATE ASSOCIATION – and dues must be current to sustain membership.

The State Bar is; an unconstitutional Monopoly. AN ILLEGAL CRIMINAL ENTERPRISE; Violates Article 2, Section 1, Separation of Powers clause of the Constitution.

There is NO POWER OR AUTHORITY for joining of Legislative, Judicial, or Executive within a state as the BAR is attempting. BAR members have invaded all branches of government and are attempting to control de jure government as agents of a foreign entity!

It is quite simple to see that a great fraud and conspiracy has been perpetrated on the people of America. The American Bar is an offshoot from London Lawyers’ Guild and was established by people with invasive monopolistic goals in mind. In 1909 they incorporated this TRAITOROUS group in the state of Illinois and had the State Legislature (which was under the control of lawyers) pass an unconstitutional law that only members of this powerful union of lawyers, called the ABA, could practice law and hold all the key positions in law enforcement and the making of laws. At that time, Illinois became an outlaw state and for all practical purposes, they seceded from the United States of America.

The BAR ASSOCIATION then sent organizers to all the other states and explained to the lawyers there how much more profitable and secure it would be for them, as lawyers, to join this union and be protected by its bylaws and cannons. They issued to the lawyers in each state a charter from the Illinois organization. California joined in 1927 and a few reluctant states and their lawyers waited until the 1930’s to join when the treasonous act became DE FACTO and the Citizen’s became captives. Under this system, the lawyers could guarantee prejudged decisions for the privileged class against the lower class.

This was all made possible by the AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION to favor the right and have unlawfully substituted them in place of Constitutional Laws. The Constitution was written in plain English and the Statutes passed by Congress were also in plain English, with the intent of Congress how each law should be used and not the opinions of various Judges as the codes list. Any normal person can read the Constitution and Statutes and understand them without any trouble.

The public in California was shocked to learn that the State Government has no control or jurisdiction over the Bar Association or its members. The state does not accredit the law schools or hold Bar examinations. They do not issue state licenses to LAWYERS. The Bar Association accredits all the law schools, holds their private examinations and selects the students they will accept in their organization and issues them so-called license but keeps the fees for themselves. The Bar is the only one that can punish or disbar a Lawyer. They also select the lawyers that they consider qualified for Judgeships and various other offices in the State. Only the Bar Association or their designated committees can remove any of these lawyers from public office. The State Legislature will not change this system as they are also a designated committee of the Bar.

On August 21, 1984, Rose Bird, Chief Justice of the California State Supreme Court, another of the Bar Associations Judicial Committee’s, stated in essence that the Bar should determine the legality of all initiatives before they were allowed to go on the ballot. This is contrary to both State and Federal Constitutions, as well as the Laws of this Nation instituted By and For the People as a Sovereign UNITY of Independent States of We The People, not a fraudulent Corporate entity of Lawyers. This is a tremendous amount of power for a PRIVATE union that is incorporated and headquartered in Illinois to hold over the Citizens of California or any other state. The only recourse is through this initiative process and vote by the people.

After the Founding Fathers had formed the Constitution, outlining the laws as to the way our government was to be run, Thomas Jefferson said, in essence, “This proves that plain people, if given the chance, can enact laws and run a government as well as or better than royalty and the blue bloods of Europe.” The American people must stop thinking that lawyers are better than they are and can do a better job than they can before the courts of America. Under the Common Law and the Laws of America, no where is it expressly given for anyone to have the power or the right to form a Corporation. Corporations are given birth because of ignorance on the part of the American people and are operating under implied consent and power which they have usurped and otherwise stolen from the people. By RIGHT AND LAW THEY HAVE NO POWER, AUTHORITY OR JURISDICTION, and must be put out of business by the good Citizens of America in their fight for FREEDOM.

The U.S. Constitution GUARANTEES to every state in this union a REPUBLICAN FORM of government. Any other form of government is FORBIDDEN. No public officer or branch of government can be limited to a RULING CLASS of any kind, or the states become ARISTOCRACIES and NOT republics. Also, the lawyers have made themselves 1st Class Citizens, where many public offices and branches of government are open to lawyers only. All other people are limited to only two branches of government and to only certain offices in those two branches of government, making all people who are non-lawyers into 2nd class subject citizens.

In a nation with 1,327,910 licensed attorneys and growing, can you name ONE that offers a money-back guarantee like legitimate businesses that care about customer satisfaction?

When the courts belong to the people, as the United States Constitution REQUIRES, (Article IV, Section 4, we the people, will NEVER rule against themselves.) In these Unconstitutional courts foreign tribunals (hoodlum centers), “men” in black dresses, that are Unconstitutional ROBES OF NOBILITY. (Article 1, Section 9 and 10) dispense a perverted ideology, where the people are terrorized by members of the BLACK ROBE CULT (lawyers and lawyer judges in the courtrooms).

The legislative branch of government does NOT have the Constitutional Power to issue Court Orders or any other kind of Orders to people, as a fiction court or a court/corporation for profit and gain cannot reach parity with a lawful man. ONLY presidents and governors have the Constitutional Power to grant PARDONS, but lawyers and lawyer-judges are unconstitutionally granting PARDONS with “immunity from prosecution.”

Citizens are not permitted to act like people in the courts. The Citizen (2nd class) is told that he does not know how to fill out fancy lawyer forms; that he is not trained in the law; that he does not know court rules and procedures; etc. This is Unconstitutional “lawyer system,” only HEARSAY SUBSTITUTES (lawyers) NOT under oath, have access to the fiction/for profit and gain courts, even though ONLY sworn testimony and evidence can be presented in court. Anything else is Bill of Attainder, NOT permitted under the U.S. Constitution (Article 1, Sections 9 and 10). The U.S. Constitution does NOT give anyone the right to a lawyer or the right to counsel, or the right to any other HEARSAY SUBSTITUTE. The 6th Amendment is very SPECIFIC, that the accused ONLY has the right to the ASSISTANCE of counsel and this ASSISTANCE of counsel CAN BE ANYONE THE ACCUSED CHOOSES WITHOUT LIMITATION.

With that, everyday terms we’ve also heard like “statute of limitations” are also unconstitutional. If you think about it, who would be best protected by such a statute created by the law profession that would have malfeasance or illegal activity not revisited if belatedly discovered?

The affected elite and/or lawyers…?

The 14th Amendment is very concise and clear.

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

There is nothing that says if an act is not detected and/or acted upon within a certain time frame, it’s like it never happened. The Constitution makes no mention of a “statute of limitations”. This is just another bar creation we’ve all been fraudulently conditioned to accept.

LAWYERS and LAWYER-JUDGES: Created Unconstitutional “lawyer system” pre-trial “motions” and “Hearings” to have eternal EXTORTIONISTIC litigation’s, which is BARRATRY and also is in violation of the U.S. Constitution, and Article 1, as this places defendants in DOUBLE JEOPARDY a hundred times over. Defendants only have a right to A TRIAL (singular), NOT TRIALS (plural.)

When a criminal is freed on a TECHNICALITY, HE IS FREED BECAUSE OF A FIX and a PAY-OFF, as a defendant can only be freed if found innocent BY A JURY NOT BY ANY “TECHNICALITY.” Whenever a lawyer is involved in a case directly or indirectly, as a litigant or assisting in counsel, ALL LAWYER-JUDGES HAVE TO DISQUALIFY THEMSELVES, AS THERE CANNOT BE A CONSTITUTIONAL TRIAL and also there would be a violation of the conflict of interest laws, along with the violation of separation of powers and checks and balances, because “OFFICERS” OF THE COURT ARE ON BOTH SIDES OF THE BENCH. These same LAWYER-JUDGES are awarding or approving LAWYER FEES, directly and indirectly, amounting to BILLIONS OF DOLLARS annually, all in violation of conflict of interest laws. As long as there are lawyers, there will never be any law, constitution or justice. There will only be MOB RULE, RULE BY A MOB OF LAWYERS.

CASE “LAW” IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL:

As CASE “LAW” IS ENACTED BY THE JUDICIAL BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT.

When a lawyer-judge instructs, directs, or gives orders to a jury, the lawyer-judge is TAMPERING WITH THE JURY. He also tampers with testimony when he orders the answers to be either “Yes” or “No.” The lawyer-judge also tampers, fixes, and rigs the trial when he orders anything stricken from the record, or when he “rules” certain evidence and the truth to be inadmissible. This makes the trial and transcript FIXED and RIGGED, because the jury does not hear the REAL TRUTH and ALL THE FACTS. Juries are made into puppets by the lawyers and lawyer-judges. All lawyers are automatically in the judicial branch of government, as they have the Unconstitutional TITLE OF NOBILITY (Article 1, Section 9 and 10), “Officer of the court.” Citizens have to be elected or hired to be in any branch of government but non-lawyer Citizens are limited to only 2 of the 3 branches of government. Lawyers as 1st class citizens, can be hired or elected to any of the three branches of government. Lawyers, “Officers of the Court,” in the Judicial Branch, are Unconstitutionally in 2 branches of government AT THE SAME TIME whenever they are hired or elected to the executive or legislative branches. This is a violation of the separation of powers, checks and balances, and the conflict of interest laws.

District attorneys and State’s attorneys have taken over the Grand Juries FROM the people, where the people are DENIED ACCESS to the grand juries when they attempt to present evidence of crimes committed in the courtrooms by the lawyers and lawyer-judges. The U.S. Constitution, being the Supreme Fundamental Law, is not and CANNOT be ambiguous as to be interpreted, or it would be a worthless piece of paper and we would have millions of interpretations (Unconstitutional amendments) instead of the few we have now. That is why all judges and public servants are SWORN TO SUPPORT the U.S. Constitution, NOT interpret it.

Under INTERNATIONAL ORDERS: ALL LAWYERS, whether they left law school yesterday or 50 years ago, are EXACTLY THE SAME. All lawyers have to file the same motions and follow the same procedures in using the same Unconstitutional “lawyer system”. In probate, the lawyers place themselves in everyone’s will and estate. When there are minor children as heirs, the lawyer-judges appoint a lawyer (a child molesting Fagin) for EACH CHILD and, at times, the lawyer fees EXCEED the total amount of the estate. An OUTRAGEOUS amount of TAX “MONEY” is directly and indirectly STOLEN BY LAWYERS. Money that is budgeted to County Boards, School Boards and other local and federal agencies eventually finds its way into the pockets of lawyers, as ALL of these agencies are “TRICKED” and “FORCED” into ETERNAL EXTORTIONISTIC LITIGATION.

What’s interesting was one comment (from a butthurt lawyer) on Linkedin was adamant against the writer because HE couldn’t find a link for a case mentioned included in the post. We found it; how much would he charge for incorrect advice? Also interesting was the silence from the lawyer class that has profiles on the platform.

It would be nice if a non-lawyer politician would look into correcting this.

Unfortunately this will not happen any time soon because too many politicians are lawyers, hundred of thousands of cases would have to be revisited to verify Constitutionality, and worst of all; the opulent lifestyles of campaign donors would be put in financial peril.

We can’t have that, right?

Imagine a United States government that wasn’t infected by Clintons or an Obama. How would the nation morph from slavery to freedom without a Lincoln? Like people in general, there are good, there are some who aren’t and the Founders knew it.

While many enthusiastically misinterpret the line from William Shakespeare’s Henry the Sixth, “The first thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers”, there’s always been a suspicion when it comes to the self-serving motivations of those in the profession. Consider part of the 13th Amendment to the United States Constitution that is curiously missing.

In the winter of 1983, archival research expert David Dodge, and former Baltimore police investigator Tom Dunn, were searching for evidence of government corruption in public records stored in the Belfast Library on the coast of Maine.

By chance, they discovered the library’s oldest authentic copy of the Constitution of the United States (printed in 1825). Both men were stunned to see this document included a 13th Amendment that no longer appears on current copies of the Constitution. Moreover, after studying the Amendment’s language and historical context, they realized the principle intent of this “missing” 13th Amendment was to prohibit lawyers from serving in government. In June of this year (1991), Dodge uncovered the evidence that this missing 13th Amendment had indeed been lawfully ratified by the state of Virginia and was therefore an authentic Amendment to the American Constitution.

Kinda’ makes one wonder who removed it and why….

If the evidence is correct and no logical errors have been made, a 13th Amendment restricting lawyers from serving in government was ratified in 1819 and removed from US Constitution during the tumult of the Civil War. Since the Amendment was never lawfully repealed, it is still the Law today. The implications are enormous.
— The Missing 13th Amendment

Today, the idea of a constitutional controversy about the royals may seem kind of silly, but in 1812, the United States was fighting the British and had a rocky relationship with France. The fear of both nations using noble titles as bribes, along with pensions from a foreign government, was persistent. And both the Senate and the House easily passed the “Titles of Nobility Amendment” and passed it on to the states. By late 1812, a total of 12 states had approved the 13th Amendment and ironically, it needed a 13th state to become ratified. As the War of 1812 escalated, the TONA faded away as an issue and was never ratified.
— Constitution Center, 12/6/16

The “nobles” and “royals” in question were lawyers or those who could afford their services, and there didn’t seem to be much love for them. All you need do look at recent events to invoke memories of stories where lawyers always tend to take more care of themselves than their clients.

Yahoo will pay up to $85 million to settle a class action lawsuit over its massive data breach, reports the Recorder, a legal publication. That includes $50 million for compensation for up to 200 million affected users plus another $35 million for lawyers’ fees and expenses. People who already have credit monitoring and certify they plan to keep it for at least a year would be eligible for $100, according to the settlement.
— Fast Company, 10/24/18

So, why would the Founding Fathers and their predecessors be so wary of those in the law profession?

In Colonial America, attorneys trained attorneys but most held no “title of nobility” or “honor”. There was no requirement that one be a lawyer to hold the position of district attorney, attorney general, or judge; a citizen’s “counsel of choice” was not restricted to a lawyer; there were no state or national bar associations. The only organization that certified lawyers was the International Bar Association (IBA), chartered by the King of England, headquartered in London, and closely associated with the international banking system. Lawyers admitted to the IBA received the rank “Esquire” — a “title of nobility”.

“Esquire”; a title many lawyers today bestow upon themselves simply because… they’re lawyers.

Any lawyer can take on the title esquire, regardless of what type of law they practice. Family lawyers, personal injury attorneys, and corporate lawyers all have the right to use esquire as a title. As a title, esquire, meaning shield bearer, originated in Great Britain and France as a term of nobility in the Middle Ages. It applied to the squire of a knight, who hoped to acquire a noble rank as he rose to knighthood himself. In The United States, however, the constitution prohibits noble titles.
— Dolman Law Group

It hasn’t stopped them because they’re special.

“Esquire” was the principle title of nobility which the 13th Amendment sought to prohibit from the United States. Why? Because the loyalty of “Esquire” lawyers was suspect. Bankers and lawyers with an “Esquire” behind their names were agents of the monarchy, members of an organization whose principle purposes were political, not economic, and regarded with the same wariness that some people today reserve for members of the KGB or the CIA.

Article 1, Sect. 9 of the Constitution sought to prohibit the International Bar Association (or any other agency that granted titles of nobility) from operating in America. But the Constitution neglected to specify a penalty, so the prohibition was ignored, and agents of the monarchy continued to infiltrate and influence the government (as in the Jay Treaty and the US Bank charter incidents).

Therefore, a “title of nobility” amendment that specified a penalty (loss of citizenship) was proposed in 1789, and again in 1810. The meaning of the amendment is seen in its intent to prohibit persons having titles of nobility and loyalties to foreign governments and bankers from voting, holding public office, or using their skills to subvert the government.
— American History from Revolution to Reconstruction and Beyond

“Infiltrate” and “subvert”. Interesting choices of wording.

Now while our media, political class, and academia glorifies the profession (and don’t get us wrong; there ARE some good lawyers out there), not all during the early colonial days were enamored by those who practiced.

The [Plymouth] colony’s first trained lawyer, Thomas Lechford, did little to instill enthusiasm. He was disbarred for trying to influence a jury. Anti-lawyer sentiment was pervasive elsewhere as well, and the “ancient English prejudice against lawyers secured new strength in America.” The framers of the Fundamental Constitutions of the Carolinas in 1669 declared it a “base and vile thing to plead for money or reward.” Connecticut and Virginia during a portion of the seventeenth century prohibited lawyers from practicing. Early lawyers were often laymen helping friends or women serving the legal interests of absent husbands.
— Kermit L. Hall, The Magic Mirror: Law in American History

In fact, arguments have been made against any lawyer being able to hold public office… ever.

What follows is a case to Amend the Constitution to Prohibit Lawyers from holding elective public office. The Amendment shall read:

No Person who holds, or has held, a license to practice law; nor any person who has represented any entity (other than himself) in a court of law in these United States, may be elected to any public office.

What a wonderful world this would be….
— Herb Alpert, Lou Adler, Sam Cooke

Note the language in almost any piece of legislation written in “legalese” and then “nonprofit” entities like the ACLU, Southern Poverty Law Center, etc. (intentionally structured so they don’t pay taxes) that sue the government to prevent enactment of laws passed by the people’s representatives they don’t approve of.

Meanwhile, elite colleges and universities churn out more and more lawyers, many advertise on television seeking customers to pile onto class action suits like the one against Yahoo!, where they reserve the bulk of settlements for themselves and the remaining change for their clients. While the media is lauding the fact that less than 40% of Congress today are lawyers, that’s still an impressive representation of those whose early instincts were how to deceive a jury and free those who were clearly guilty, shield the elite from the ramifications all of us would face, target businesses with suits that can result in opulent rewards for themselves, and while in office, write legislation complete with loopholes that can financially help friends and harm enemies.

Back when President Obama was implementing Obamacare, his spokesman promised, “Members of Congress will not receive anything that is not available to the public.” Indeed, Obamacare explicitly requires Congress to live under the same rules as everyone else, by kicking members and staff out of the Federal Employees’ Health Benefits Program and leaving them to enroll in health insurance through the law’s exchanges. Contrary to assurances and in violation of federal law, the Obama administration shielded lawmakers by granting Congress several types of special treatment unavailable to the public. Obama took these steps because he knew Congress would have quickly revamped or even repealed Obamacare if lawmakers had to live under its terms.
— Washington Examiner, 9/5/17

Bad lawyers can become judges; obviously also problematic. Way too many judge wannabes are all too willing to throw the innocent in jail in favor of their potential lucrative and powerful upward mobility.

The New England Center for Investigative Reporting found no case in Massachusetts where a prosecutor was disbarred for professional misconduct since 1974, when the state Board of Bar Overseers was created to hear complaints against attorneys. Only two public reprimands for professional misconduct were found in that 42-year span, and they came without fines or other punishment.

At least seven prosecutors whose behavior prompted courts to reverse convictions went on to higher posts. Some became judges and district attorneys.
— WGBH, 4/3/16

It’s also rare that judges face the music.

U.S. District Judge Alcee L. Hastings was convicted by the Senate yesterday of engaging in a “corrupt conspiracy” to extort a $150,000 bribe in a case before him, marking the first time a federal official has been impeached, removed from office for a crime he had been acquitted of by a jury, and stripped the 53-year-old jurist of his lifetime, $89,500-a-year position.
— Washington Post, 10/21/89

Alcee Hastings is currently a United States Congressman.

The 45th president, Donald J. Trump, is NOT a lawyer, achieving more than those who’ve preceded him and cashed-in on their prior service, and look at how those with that oh-so-important legal pedigree are taking offense to his many successes that diminish their worth.

The bottom line is, according to the United States Constitution, there should be NO lawyers on Capitol Hill or any state or local government.

Government was meant to be run by the people, using verbiage and common sense that shouldn’t include legalese needing deciphering. Obviously lawyers would sue us all if their existence today in government was threatened but do you really think they could muster enough states to amend the Constitution?

Let’s hope one day we find out.

h/t Lisa S. Belanger JD