The Supreme court” has now “heard arguments” in the Obamacare case and it is no secret that the court is “divided”. There are 4 liberal “justices” on board 3 “conservatives” against, and 2, “swing votes”. So now 330 million people wait to find out what they “must” do.
I am not going to waste your time or mine going over cooked up absurd legal arguments that the federal government has funneled everyone into “having to make”. That is just playing their game. If you want that, there is plenty of that available on the web by countless “legal analysts” and on Fox or CNN or Newsweek etc.. Of course Obamacare is unconstitutional. All anyone has to do is go look at Art. 1 Sect. 8 of the constitution to see that. I want to talk about things that are much more FUNDAMENTAL. Things that can ACTUALLY make a difference if you understand them.
First, everyone simply ACCEPTS that the supreme court has the RIGHT to “decide” this issue for the whole country. Without getting into a big discussion about the power of “judicial review” let me just ask you:
Have you ever agreed to allow some group of 9 people you have never met or had a chance to vote for, who can never be fired, “decide” whether Obamacare OR ANYTHING ELSE can be imposed on you?
I doubt it. I know I haven’t. People never even question THIS. Legal analysts that the MEDIA and government/education system give you never question THIS. Do you see the box they have ALREADY put you in before the game even begins? lol. YOU HAVE ALREADY CONCEDED THE MOST IMPORTANT ISSUE WITHOUT ANY DISCUSSION OR FIGHT. I will leave the topic of “judicial review” for another day. But I have another simple question for you.
WHERE DOES THE SUPREME COURT GET THE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO MAKE A DECISION THAT IS NOT UNANIMOUS?
Have you ever thought about that? I mean c’mon, 5 to 4? That is ridiculous. It is already ridiculous enough that in a “free country” where the people “are in charge” that just 9 unelected people could ever make such a decision. But it is beyond ABSURD that such a decision could be made by just ONE VOTE CHANGING ON THE COURT?? Well they can do that because the CON stitution is “silent” on it. So they just make their own rules up about it. Does this sound like a republic to you?
YET STILL THE PEOPLE DO NOT NOTICE OR QUESTION.
Surely, IF we are going to be ruled by some star chamber of unelected untouchable oracles then at least all of their decisions that create more government or limit the people or the individual STATES’ rights NEED TO BE UNANIMOUS and EVERYTHING about their deliberations NEEDS TO BE PUBLIC!
Yet the people are so brainwashed they don’t even see how silly the entire construct that is IMPOSED ON THEM is, and how antithetical to any sense of a free republic IT IS. They actually think their system is the HEIGHT of freedom because they have been TOLD that it is. This is the 1984 world we live in. Slavery is Freedom. lol.
So what does the “holy constitution” the great “protector of the peoples’ rights” say about these issues? NOTHING. That’s right not a damned thing. Go look. The entire section creating the “judicial branch” is only a few sentences. Go read it.
Think about that. I have already showed you that the number of justices being set at “9” is just a number made up by Congress. It isn’t set in the constitution. Now I am telling you that the “manner” of deliberation and the “method” for “determining” a “decision” is also not discussed in the constitution. That’s right. Nowhere mentioned.
Think about it. In a criminal trial the 12 man jury has to be unanimous in order to convict just ONE person of shoplifting! Yet our great system of a “free republic” allows a split verdict by those 9 “juror/judges” to BIND 330 million for “all time”.
Beyond the unanimous decision that is required by a jury to convict, there are OTHER analogies in the law that show the 5 to 4 “rule” that the “esteemed” institution has put in place is a sham.
There is something called a “judgment as a matter of law”. It is a standard that is used when a court determines that “no reasonable juror” could find against the party. Lawyers and judges use the phrase, “reasonable minds could not differ” as a short hand way to discuss it. Get it?
That standard is used to grant a motion that ends the case WITHOUT a trial. It is called a summary judgment in most jurisdictions and in federal court. Yes you CAN be denied a jury trial. Did you know that? Well despite what you “were taught” in your government indoctrination center, YOU ARE NOT entitled to a trial by jury. Again, it is just a power the courts have seized. It is not IN the constitution.
The point is this. Look at the standard that is used to do that. “Reasonable minds could NOT DIFFER”. But look at the STANDARD that the holy supreme court uses as it “protects” the people.
By definition in a 5 to 4 or 6 to 3 or 8 to 1 decision, reasonable minds ACTUALLY DIFFER, since the justices DON’T agree. Yet DESPITE that disagreement, they still IMPOSE the “decision” on 330 million people for all time.
Certainly no REASONABLE system can have justices differing. That makes NO SENSE. If it is un-reviewable and we are all going to be bound, then AT A MINIMUM in order to UPHOLD a law, the decision needs to be UNANIMOUS, just like for a criminal trial, and just like the “as a matter of law” standard. Don’t you see that? If ONE justice thinks it is UNconstitutional, then it should be struck down. That is the ONLY thing that makes sense.
Virtually ALL CONTROVERSIAL supreme court cases are SPLIT, not unanimous. So virtually all of the mischief could have been avoided. It is not an accident that unanimity is NOT required.
Think about Obamacare. AT BEST even the collaborator polling propagandists have to admit that the country is DEEPLY divided. And of course the COURT is “supposedly” divided. So there would be NO chance for a binding decision. The issue wouldn’t be “decided” for all times by whether “justice” Kennedy got some action the night before. Do you see how you have already given up your most important RIGHTS by playing inside THEIR GAME? lol
Oh but there is still more.
Now think about this. In order to get a “constitutional amendment” the “people” are required to go through this complex process that takes years and requires all of these “SUPER MAJORITIES”. Not a mere majority. It is basically IMPOSSIBLE for the PEOPLE TO GET WHAT THEY WANT SLIPPED INTO THE CONSTITUTION.
Yet the oligarchs only have to pack the court with ONE EXTRA GUY and BAM we’re all stuck. Lol. What does it take for you to see that the system is RIGGED? You are being played.
They will give you whatever level of abuse you “the people” will accept. Your rights are not protected by the constitution. The obligation to protect the peoples’ rights is in THE PEOPLES’ hands. They have abdicated, so those who seek power have filled that void. It isn’t complicated.
And if what I have said already is not sufficient to show you what a FRAUD the system is let me make one more point to demonstrate how absurd the arbitrary “best of 9” standard is.
Is there anything in the constitution that would prevent the supreme court from making a rule that said a 1 to 8 decision was “binding”?
Do you see what I am asking? What if 8 justices vote that Obamacare is NOT constitutional, and ONE votes that it IS constitutional. Is there anything IN THE CONSTITUTION that prevents the supreme court from determining that it IS therefore CONSTITUTIONAL SINCE AT LEAST one justice voted for it?
The answer is NO. There is NOTHING in the constitution that would prevent that because there is nothing in the constitution that describes ANY of the process. So “using their logic”, we the people “AGREED” to that as well. Lol
Do you see that if you take their argument to its logical extreme about “separation of powers” and the supreme court being able to “make its own rules” for how it deliberates and decides a case, and if you simply look at the constitution, there is nothing “unconstitutional” about that 1 to 8 rule? The only reason they don’t do stuff that blatantly is because the sleeping fools might actually catch on TO THAT, lol. So they pretend the whole thing is this “established” system with fancy robes and all sorts of formality and your honor this and your honorableness that. Lol.
They have convinced the people that IT IS NORMAL that if just one MORE justice says yes, well, too bad so sad, thanks for playing, now you’re all bound. lol
To be fair to the framers, even Jules Verne didn’t have a wild enough imagination to visualize a day when the federal government would even discuss legislation as absurdly BEYOND any of their powers as Obamacare. Still you might want to go read this and this that I wrote about our great founding to give you a perspective on our REAL founding.
Look if we’re going to have an untouchable star chamber “making decisions” for the whole nation “for all times” then we need to AT LEAST have group of say 25 or 50 judges up there representing all sorts of groups. There can’t be any discrimination you know!! AND ALL OF THEIR DELIBERATIONS NEED TO BE PUBLIC. Then they have to give ONE unanimous decision. I mean at this point, I could probably live with that concept. And doing that would not require a “constitutional amendment” so it should happen TOMORROW. lol
With that type of court they could only agree if there REALLY WAS NO CONTROVERSY. Get it?
As it is, the whole thing is a laughable sham. Yet the pundits and experts all sit around discussing ridiculous points like whether Kennedy and Roberts are each getting enough fiber and how that might “affect their decision”. Laughable distractions. The MEDIA makes sure the public never gets wise to the whole game. And they RICHLY reward all of their collaborators who help to cover it all up with bs that sounds impressive to a dumbed down populace.
Look my fellow inmate, I have tried to tell you, there is never any REAL questioning of the SYSTEM ITSELF BECAUSE the system cannot withstand ANY REAL scrutiny,
As long as the people think that someone else or something else is going to be sure they get their justice they will get no justice. It is up to the PEOPLE to INSIST on their OWN JUSTICE.
Step one is for the people to learn how to SEE and UNDERSTAND the game they have been put into so they can start to DEMAND justice. That’s what this site is FOR.
Hopefully you now see what a joke the idea of a “split” supreme court “decision” is on Obamacare or ANYTHING else, and how pathetic it is that a country of supposedly “free men” has been reduced to a bunch of helpless children.
I hope you have learned something. Maybe you are starting to see the scale of the scam. As I always say, never under estimate the power of a SINGLE QUESTION my friend.
This reporter certainly learned the power of a single question when she asked this man his name. His answer reminds me a lot of some legal arguments I have read. Actually he is MORE COGENT than most supreme court opinions, lol. Enjoy.
That’s all for now, my brainwashed Brethren. Take care, live in the light and tell someone about the truth about the law.