Details

Published: 24 August 2023

Criminalizing the U.S. Constitution

Leer en Español

The United States has a big problem. Its version of democracy is being deconstructed. Free speech, a prerequisite of democratic rule, is being restricted. Honest and competitive elections are being interfered with. This is being achieved through the utilization of the state’s police powers, which include its legal system. The law is being maliciously reconfigured, perversely interpreted, and conspiratorially applied to achieve the previously mentioned ends. Donald Trump’s fourth indictment is part of that end.

The Left and Trump haters from the Right may propagate to others that this only deals with the 45^th president and his allies for their “wrongful” acts. Judging from empirical evidence and historical references, this is not the case. Trump’s third indictment focused squarely on redefining freedom of expression along ideological filters of acceptability, obstructing the political path of a candidate in a presidential election, and exercising, de facto, political persecution. The exact patterns of the past, tell us with certainty that this war on Trump is being waged as part of a broader objective.

The overarching goal is the deconstruction of the American sociopolitical system, which would consequently also overhaul its economic model. The specific path requires the opposition’s domestication, establishing norms of self-censorship, and controlling election results. This is something that dictatorships practice well. It should be well noted that all tyrannical regimes violate natural and human rights by using their legal systems. In other words, Cuba, Venezuela, Russia, and China all send people to jail using their laws and courts. Additionally, they also allow for the presence of defense attorneys to assure a proper optic image of “due process.” 

Read more: Criminalizing the U.S. Constitution

Details

Published: 03 August 2023

Trump Indictment III: Free Speech and Fair Elections?

Rigging an election is a form of theft, and there are many ways to achieve this.

Leer en Español

The latest indictment against former president Donald J. Trump, the third one, is not just consolidating the fact that the U.S. now has a two-tiered judicial system. Its architects, the Biden administration, which every passing day reminds us that it is a regime more than a government, are focusing their war on the American republic in the realm of free speech and fair elections. The pursuit of a one-party, pseudo-democratic, soft authoritarian model is unmistakable.

Through Special Counsel Jack Smith, Biden’s Department of Justice (DOJ)-selected prosecutor, a Washington, D.C., federal grand jury (America’s most left-wing legal venue) charged Trump with four criminal counts relating to the 2020 presidential election on Tuesday, August 1. These are: (1) conspiracy to defraud the United States; (2) conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding; (3) obstruction of and attempt to obstruct an official proceeding; and (4) conspiracy against the civil rights of Americans. They all relate to Trump’s challenges to the 2020 presidential election. These accusations are as dangerous to the underlying principles of a free society as they are absurd as far as legal theory goes.

The basis for the alleged acts of “fraud,” as per the accusers, is that when Trump said the election was stolen, he knew that it was not. In other words, Biden’s DOJ claims that the former president was making statements that he knew were false. “These claims were false, and the defendant knew they were false,” reads part of the document, but “repeated and widely disseminated them anyway." Additionally, the accusation states, among other things, that Trump “spread lies that there had been outcome-determinative fraud in the election and that he had actually won.” 

Read more: Trump Indictment III: Free Speech and Fair Elections?

Details

Published: 10 July 2023

The Power of the Imponderable

 "The 11^th of July Popular Uprising (11J) of 2021 marked a watershed moment for the communist dictatorship in Cuba."

Leer en Español

Hannah Arendt argued that the totalitarian mode of exercising power was structured to reduce humans to objects. This was not just an effect of the non-democratic operative model. It was a methodical necessity to maximize control and curtail political action against it. In The Origins of Totalitarianism (1951), Arendt equated spontaneity with freedom. Once a regime manages to crush popular spontaneous activity, humans, by becoming atomized entities, are dehumanized and serve the political power as tools. From a practical standpoint, once political action regains the ability to act spontaneously in public, the totalitarian regime is in trouble.

The 11^th of July Popular Uprising (11J) of 2021 marked a watershed moment for the communist dictatorship in Cuba. It is true that opposition to Cuban communism has been an ongoing phenomenon. Since 1959 until this day, Cubans have incessantly charted courses of liberation, both by violent and nonviolent means. Thousands have died and hundreds of thousands have served prison terms fighting for Cuba’s freedom. However, the Castro regime had never confronted mass popular demonstrations, from one point of the Cuban archipelago to the other, like that eventful midsummer Sunday in 2021.

Castro-Communism was caught completely off guard. Over seventy-two localities in Cuba witnessed popular demands for the end of socialism and tyranny. The Marxist dialectical motor of history had suddenly deviated from the Leninist script. This revealed two important facts. One, the Cuban people, despite having suffered over six decades of communist counterculture inculcation, were decidedly calling for deep-rooted systemic change. In other words, no more communism run by an oligarchic clan. This meant that Marxist, godless propaganda was no match for universal truths and principles that subscribe to a transcendental order. The Cuban people were exercising their natural rights and appealing to the preeminent morality of natural law. 

Read more: The Power of the Imponderable

Details

Published: 17 June 2023

Dissecting the Trump Documents Indictment

“No one is above the law” is a phrase that once had depth in the U.S. It has become a lame cliché

Leer en Español

Few who believe in a free society can challenge the notion that the rule of law and uniformity in its application are systemic staples of a democracy. “No one is above the law” is a phrase that once had depth in the U.S. It has become a lame cliché. There is an adage that is gaining momentum among observers of American democracy. “No one should be below the law, either.” This addition to the popular statement reflects the legal climate in America today. The recent indictment of former President Donald J. Trump on 37 charges exemplifies the crisis in U.S. jurisprudence. This fact poses an overarching threat to the republican model of government.

The perception that there is currently a two-tiered justice system in the U.S. is fast becoming self-evident. The legal terrain is now a war front. Ideological enclaves of American leftism offer far-left activists the proper human fodder to get prosecution validations via grand jury schemes that they would not get in most of the country’s other court localities. These are the American version of “revolutionary tribunals.” Judicial districts in places like Washington, D.C., New York City, and San Francisco, for example, are being exploited to undermine the principle of a fair trial and the common law tradition, which relies on precedent.

The charges against Trump contain 31 counts of alleged willful retention of national defense information. The others are single counts for supposed conspiracy to obstruct justice, withholding documents, concealing and plotting to conceal documents, hiding a document in a federal investigation, and making false statements. The underlying premise of the Biden administration’s Department of Justice (DOJ) action against Trump, deals with the handling of presidential records, who they belong to, and whether there was malicious intent by the former president, who happens to be the lead opposition leader and a 2024 presidential candidate.

Since 1978, the Presidential Records Act has served as the guidepost that delineates what is U.S. government property and what are personal records of a former president. The items at hand include memos, letters, notes, emails, and other written communications during a president’s tenure as the chief executive and that of his staff. The law seeks to establish norms and is enforced by the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA).

Read more: Dissecting the Trump Documents Indictment