Tuesday, March 04, 2008

Telecom Immunity--Barebones Congressional Felony

The Constitution says, "No ex post facto law ... shall be passed".

No matter the blizzard of bullshit from the 3-branch fascist depotism masquerading as our national govt, there is no such thing as legal retroactive immunity for crimes already committed. No matter the blizzard of bullshit from the corporate media, there is no such thing as legal retroactive immunity for crimes already committed. No matter the blizzard of bullshit from the elite channels of discourse -- political party bosses, law school professors, CEOs, and sundry dignitaries -- there is no such thing as legal retroactive immunity for crimes already committed.

The Constitution does not say, "We don't like ex post facto law, but Congress can go ahead and pass it, and then let the courts sort things out." The Constitution says, "No ex post facto law ... shall be passed".

Any and all retroactive immunity for crimes already committed would require ex post facto law. And ex post facto law is unconstitutional, anti-Constitutional, and blatantly illegal. No ifs, ands, or buts. Got it? No politics tap-dancing around the good ol' boys. Got it? Purely anti-Constitutional and illegal. Got it?

So much for telecom immunity.

Its too late on that one for the fascist slime bags -- from Bush to ever widening circles of other nazis -- who socially engineer the society's cross-pressures so that the fascist predators can keep on butchering ordinary people for profits and power with only a few of us stepping out of the matrix to shout about it.

It's too late for the chief fascist slime bag, Bush, to use telecom immunity to cover his own ass in the illegal wiretapping that he ordered long before the 9/11 attacks -- attacks in which he still appears to be one of the co-villans.

Oh, yeah, right -- the Constitution is just a GD piece of paper. The fascist slime bags -- in all their corporate and govt glory -- are the deciders. They decide who is accountable and who is not. They decide who lives above the law and who does not. They decide what laws apply to them and what laws do not.

But, just for a few minutes here, let's suppose that somebody hands us back our Constitution on a silver platter. You know, somebody who does all the work for us, so that we don't have to miss an evening of Drivel With The Stars.

Now we've got ex post facto law right out the window, where it belongs.

Next thing you know -- even with our Constitution ready for justice again -- our Criminal Congress cranks up to pass an ex post facto law to cover the chief fascist thug's ass AND to keep the criminal telecoms from being ripped to financial shreds by an outraged citizenry.

What happens in the legal arena when the criminal rat-bastards and rat-bitches of Congress pass that ex post facto law?

Ah, it's simplicity its very own self. Because of the Constitutional provision, "No ex post facto law ... shall be passed", the people have a Constitutional right to be governed by law that is not ex post facto.

The moment that Congress passes an ex post facto law, every Member and Senator voting AYE has committed a felony. Felony forfeits legislative immunity, as in the Constitutional provision, "... They shall, in all cases, except treason, felony, and breach of the peace, be privileged from arrest. ..."

The felony they've committed is defined in the federal statute, Title 18, US Code, Section 241 -- conspiracy against rights. It's a short, tough law. 18 USC 241 reads --

"If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; or -- If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises of another, with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so secured -- They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death."

This law defines a statute conspiracy against rights. The law's specified imprisonment of up to ten years for a non-death incident makes the violation of this law a serious crime -- that is, violation of this law is a felony.

So the Criminal Congress passes the ex post facto law, seemingly to make legal fat-cat-cherished telecom immunity. Presidential Usurper Bush signs the unconstitutional bill, striking another blow for anti-law jurisprudence and his high crimes legacy.

Now we have a felony conspiracy against rights, in violation of 18 USC 241, done by a majority of the United States Congress and the leader of the free world -- fascist slug that he is. But here comes the newly regained Constitution. The whole pack of fascist thugs are criminally prosecuted, convicted, fined 10 years of salary, and imprisoned for ten years.

Ah, Constitutional realities as pipe dreams.

Why are the anti-Constitutional illegalities of ex post facto and criminal conspiracy against Constitutional rights so difficult for the the do-nothing American people to grasp?

Oh, horrors, if we confront the massive illegality, we'd have to stop giving away our political responsibilities to the politician liars and criminals. No more "let Mikey do it". We'd have to start doing political things on our own, even orgainize with other people outside political party politics. What a bring down.

Politics on our own would clearly be in conflict with the social engineering of the matrix. We might have to go jobless, homeless, give up our raves and music collections, forfeit our children's educations, watch the Joneses get way ahead of us, be chased around by the FBI. No, no -- we can't go around giving up our whole lifes.

But we sure as hell can sit idly by and watch our nation's life be taken away by the Congressional rat-bastards and rat-bitches, by fascist thugs in the Bush Regime and in the federal judiciary, by CEOs in the fascist corporations, and by the presidential candidates vetted by the superrich for Election 2008.

All hail the electronic vote-counting corruption machine, the central banking mega corruption machine, the Iran war, the North American Union, and the Amero. Blow echo taps for justice, freedom, rights, and democracy.

Do-nothing Americans UNITE. Get out the vote for the Diebold selection of Election 2008. Whoop up how you're the great-great-grandson of a dyed-in-the-wool Democrat. Smile about how Republican economics has given you a big up-scale house here and retirement property in the mountain meadows of Panama.

Ignore the felony conspiracy against our soldiers' rights that makes every soldier's death in Iraq a felony murder. Ignore that the co-conspirators in those felony murders include Senators McCain and Clinton. Write endless commentary on felon-in-waiting McCain's POW patriotism, and on felon-in-waiting Clinton's sisterhood prancing, and on wannabe-felon-in-waiting Obama's great black hope, and on wannabe-felon-in-waiting Ron Paul's great libertarian hope. Put down Ralph Nader again. Really get into the details of this super-great Diebold selection. Get real smug about how we're the only nation that's got democracy right.

Snuggle into those matrix cocoons with all the cognative dissonance you can gather up.

What in the hell is wrong with you people? Are you crazy?

-----------------------

Update -- Thu 13 Mar 2008

TELECOM IMMUNITY LAW AS EX POST FACTO


My recent piece, "Telecom Immunity--Barebones Congressional Felony", has been widely criticized as not allowing for laws of pardon, amnesty, or the repeal of earlier criminal law. Some critics have insisted that I am ignorant of the technical meanings of ex post facto, as given by Justice Chase in the long standing SCOTUS decision in Calder v. Bull, 1798.

However, my critics apparently have not considered the nature of 'immunity'. (I've no reason yet to alter any of my positions in "Barebones".)

Immunity is quite different from pardon or amnesty. Webster gives the legal senses of 'immunity' as --

1. Exemption from any natural or usual liability; 2. exemption from obligation, service, duty, or liability to taxation, jurisdiction, etc., 3. special privilege.

The law that would establish retroactive and on-going immunity from the crimes committed by the telecom corporations in the past or in the future, in their illegal wiretaps, would not repeal or lessen the laws that make unwarranted wiretaps illegal. And the immunity law would certainly not be able to mollify the many facets of Constitutional law on which unwarranted wiretaps become illegal. No federal statute law can alter the Constitution.

What telecom immunity law would do is to establish special privilege for the telecom corporations. It would set them above the law. And that would be unjust and oppressive, as are all ex post facto laws.

No one is above the law -- not King John of Magna Carta times, not GW Bush, and not the telecom giants who broke our laws pertaining to wiretaps.

In Calder v Bull, Justice Chase gives four categories of law as the meaning of ex post facto. Retroactive telecom immunity does not fit into any of those four categories. However, retroactive telecom immunity is caught by Justice Chase's caveat to the four categories -- "All these, and similar cases, are manifestly unjust and oppressive".

Any law creating retroactive and ongoing special privilege above the law for telecom corporations would have to be included in Justice Chase's galaxy of unjust and oppressive laws.

And so I hold to my basic positions as given in "Barebones".

"There is no such thing as legal retroactive immunity for crimes already committed."

"Any and all retroactive immunity for crimes already committed would require ex post facto law. And ex post facto law is unconstitutional, anti-Constitutional, and blatantly illegal. No ifs, ands, or buts."

"Because of the Constitutional provision, "No ex post facto law ... shall be passed", the people have a Constitutional right to be governed by law that is not ex post facto."

"The moment that Congress passes an ex post facto law, every Member and Senator voting AYE has committed a felony. Felony forfeits legislative immunity, as in the Constitutional provision, "... They shall, in all cases, except treason, felony, and breach of the peace, be privileged from arrest. ..."

"The felony they've committed is defined in the federal statute, Title 18, US Code, Section 241 -- conspiracy against rights. It's a short, tough law."

"Now we have a felony conspiracy against rights, in violation of 18 USC 241, done by a majority of the United States Congress and the leader of the free world -- fascist slug that he is. But here comes the newly regained Constitution. The whole pack of fascist thugs are criminally prosecuted, convicted, fined 10 years of salary, and imprisoned for ten years."

"Ah, Constitutional realities as pipe dreams."

------------------------------------

© 2008 by Stephen Neitzke
AAIGMBTY

2 Comments:

At 3/08/2008 10:03 AM, Blogger Alex said...

Hmm. You have no understanding of how criminal statutes actually operate, and a fundamental misunderstanding of how it interacts with 5th and 14th amendment due process. When you decriminalize something, all crimes as yet unprosecuted fall to the wayside unless you specifically and explicitly include words to save their nature as crimes.

This is an amnesty law, the sort of which routinely gets passed. Laws which _expand_ due process rights go into effect all the time.

Ex post facto law has four specific consequencs:
1) It may not criminalize past behaviors
2) It may not aggravate the consequences of existing criminal prosecution by increasing the penalties
3) It may not alter the rules of evidence to make conviction more likely
4) It may not alter the rules of criminal procedure to make conviction more likely

 
At 3/13/2008 5:34 AM, Blogger Stephen Neitzke said...

zlex --

Please read my "Update -- Thu 13 Mar 2008." The philosophy of law has been a personal emphasis area of mine for the past 35-plus years. Your trollish ad hominens and didactic presumptions don't work on me. Better save them for other targets.

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home