Tax/Financial Scammer Winston Shrout Nabbed and Headed for Prison

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/fugitive-and-tax-fraud-promoter-captured-and-set-serve-his-10-year-prison-sentence
Department of Justice
Office of Public Affairs

Attorney Professional Conduct

The below links guide attorney behavior. The Court can sanction lawyers who violate the rules of professional conduct.

4-3. ADVOCATE

RULE 4-3.1 MERITORIOUS CLAIMS AND CONTENTIONS A lawyer shall not bring or defend a proceeding, or assert or controvert an issue therein, unless there is a basis in law and fact for doing so that is not frivolous, which includes a good faith argument for an extension, modification, or reversal of existing law. A lawyer for the defendant in a criminal proceeding, or the respondent in a proceeding that could result in incarceration, may nevertheless so defend the proceeding as to require that every element of the case be established.

RULE 4-3.2 EXPEDITING LITIGATION A lawyer shall make reasonable efforts to expedite litigation consistent with the interests of the client.

RULE 4-3.3 CANDOR TOWARD THE TRIBUNAL (a) False Evidence; Duty to Disclose. A lawyer shall not knowingly: (1) make a false statement of fact or law to a tribunal or fail to correct a false statement of material fact or law previously made to the tribunal by the lawyer; RRTFB September 19, 2019 (2) fail to disclose a material fact to a tribunal when disclosure is necessary to avoid assisting a criminal or fraudulent act by the client; (3) fail to disclose to the tribunal legal authority in the controlling jurisdiction known to the lawyer to be directly adverse to the position of the client and not disclosed by opposing counsel; or (4) offer evidence that the lawyer knows to be false. A lawyer may not offer testimony that the lawyer knows to be false in the form of a narrative unless so ordered by the tribunal. If a lawyer, the lawyer’s client, or a witness called by the lawyer has offered material evidence and the lawyer comes to know of its falsity, the lawyer shall take reasonable remedial measures including, if necessary, disclosure to the tribunal. A lawyer may refuse to offer evidence that the lawyer reasonably believes is false. (b) Criminal or Fraudulent Conduct. A lawyer who represents a client in an adjudicative proceeding and who knows that a person intends to engage, is engaging, or has engaged in criminal or fraudulent conduct related to the proceeding shall take reasonable remedial measures, including, if necessary, disclosure to the tribunal. (c) Ex Parte Proceedings. In an ex parte proceeding a lawyer shall inform the tribunal of all material facts known to the lawyer that will enable the tribunal to make an informed decision, whether or not the facts are adverse. (d) Extent of Lawyer’s Duties. The duties stated in this rule continue beyond the conclusion of the proceeding and apply even if compliance requires disclosure of information otherwise protected by rule 4-1.6.

RULE 4-3.4 FAIRNESS TO OPPOSING PARTY AND COUNSEL A lawyer must not: (a) unlawfully obstruct another party’s access to evidence or otherwise unlawfully alter, destroy, or conceal a document or other material that the lawyer knows or reasonably should know is relevant to a pending or a reasonably foreseeable proceeding; nor counsel or assist another person to do any such act; (b) fabricate evidence, counsel or assist a witness to testify falsely, or offer an inducement to a witness, except a lawyer may pay a witness reasonable expenses incurred by the witness in attending or testifying at proceedings; a reasonable, noncontingent fee for professional services of an expert witness; and reasonable compensation to a witness for the time spent preparing for, attending, or testifying at proceedings; (c) knowingly disobey an obligation under the rules of a tribunal except for an open refusal based on an assertion that no valid obligation exists; (d) in pretrial procedure, make a frivolous discovery request or intentionally fail to comply with a legally proper discovery request by an opposing party; (e) in trial, state a personal opinion about the credibility of a witness unless the statement is authorized by current rule or case law, allude to any matter that the lawyer does not reasonably believe is relevant or that will not be supported by admissible evidence, assert personal knowledge of facts in issue except when testifying as a witness, or state a personal opinion as to the justness of a cause, the culpability of a civil litigant, or the guilt or innocence of an accused; (f) request a person other than a client to refrain from voluntarily giving relevant information to another party unless the person is a relative or an employee or other agent of a RRTFB September 19, 2019 client, and it is reasonable to believe that the person’s interests will not be adversely affected by refraining from giving such information; (g) present, participate in presenting, or threaten to present criminal charges solely to obtain an advantage in a civil matter; or (h) present, participate in presenting, or threaten to present disciplinary charges under these rules solely to obtain an advantage in a civil matter.

RULE 4-3.5 IMPARTIALITY AND DECORUM OF THE TRIBUNAL (a) Influencing Decision Maker. A lawyer shall not seek to influence a judge, juror, prospective juror, or other decision maker except as permitted by law or the rules of court. (b) Communication with Judge or Official. In an adversary proceeding a lawyer shall not communicate or cause another to communicate as to the merits of the cause with a judge or an official before whom the proceeding is pending except: (1) in the course of the official proceeding in the cause; (2) in writing if the lawyer promptly delivers a copy of the writing to the opposing counsel or to the adverse party if not represented by a lawyer; (3) orally upon notice to opposing counsel or to the adverse party if not represented by a lawyer; or (4) as otherwise authorized by law. (c) Disruption of Tribunal. A lawyer shall not engage in conduct intended to disrupt a tribunal. (d) Communication With Jurors. A lawyer shall not: (1) before the trial of a case with which the lawyer is connected, communicate or cause another to communicate with anyone the lawyer knows to be a member of the venire from which the jury will be selected; (2) during the trial of a case with which the lawyer is connected, communicate or cause another to communicate with any member of the jury; (3) during the trial of a case with which the lawyer is not connected, communicate or cause another to communicate with a juror concerning the case; (4) after dismissal of the jury in a case with which the lawyer is connected, initiate communication with or cause another to initiate communication with any juror regarding the trial except to determine whether the verdict may be subject to legal challenge; provided, a lawyer may not interview jurors for this purpose unless the lawyer has reason to believe that grounds for such challenge may exist; and provided further, before conducting any such interview the lawyer must file in the cause a notice of intention to interview setting forth the name of the juror or jurors to be interviewed. A copy of the notice must be delivered to the trial judge and opposing counsel a reasonable time before such interview. The provisions of this rule do not prohibit a lawyer from communicating with members of the venire or jurors in the course of official proceedings or as authorized by court rule or written order of the court.

RULE 4-3.6 TRIAL PUBLICITY (a) Prejudicial Extrajudicial Statements Prohibited. A lawyer shall not make an extrajudicial statement that a reasonable person would expect to be disseminated by means of public communication if the lawyer knows or reasonably should know that it will have a substantial likelihood of materially prejudicing an adjudicative proceeding due to its creation of an imminent and substantial detrimental effect on that proceeding. (b) Statements of Third Parties. A lawyer shall not counsel or assist another person to make such a statement. Counsel shall exercise reasonable care to prevent investigators, employees, or other persons assisting in or associated with a case from making extrajudicial statements that are prohibited under this rule.

RULE 4-3.7 LAWYER AS WITNESS (a) When Lawyer May Testify. A lawyer shall not act as advocate at a trial in which the lawyer is likely to be a necessary witness on behalf of the client unless: (1) the testimony relates to an uncontested issue; (2) the testimony will relate solely to a matter of formality and there is no reason to believe that substantial evidence will be offered in opposition to the testimony; (3) the testimony relates to the nature and value of legal services rendered in the case; or (4) disqualification of the lawyer would work substantial hardship on the client. (b) Other Members of Law Firm as Witnesses. A lawyer may act as advocate in a trial in which another lawyer in the lawyer’s firm is likely to be called as a witness unless precluded from doing so by rule 4-1.7 or 4-1.9.

RULE 4-3.8 SPECIAL RESPONSIBILITIES OF A PROSECUTOR The prosecutor in a criminal case shall: (a) refrain from prosecuting a charge that the prosecutor knows is not supported by probable cause; (b) not seek to obtain from an unrepresented accused a waiver of important pre-trial rights such as a right to a preliminary hearing; (c) make timely disclosure to the defense of all evidence or information known to the prosecutor that tends to negate the guilt of the accused or mitigates the offense, and, in connection with sentencing, disclose to the defense and to the tribunal all unprivileged mitigating RRTFB September 19, 2019 information known to the prosecutor, except when the prosecutor is relieved of this responsibility by a protective order of the tribunal.

Statutory Construction, Juries, and Staying Out of Trouble (rev. 1)

Why Patriots Get Into Legal Trouble

Patriots often make huge mistakes in their estimation of the meaning and applicability of laws of any and all kind, from the Constitutions of the US and States, through the statutes of legislatures, to administrative rules. As a consequence, they run afoul of government and find themselves in trouble. Many of their errors come from not knowing the rules of statutory construction and interpretation while thinking that they have perfect ability to read and comprehend. Many suffer from cognitive delusion, overestimating their own ability and underestimating the ability of law makers and jurists.

I have provided four links in item 1 below to an education on the rules of statutory construction/interpretation, the item 2 link to a Florida Bar Journal on Florida Common Law Jurisprudence. I encourage all with an interest in law to read the articles at those links, and to use the other links for reference.

A CASE IN POINT – COMMON LAW / CITIZEN GRAND JURIES.

A few years ago, a court in Dixie County Florida sentenced septuagenarian Terry Trussell to over 8 years in prison for simulated service of process – serving a Citizen Grand Jury indictment to the local sheriff.

On Sat, Jul 23, 2016 at 5:02 PM, Bob Hurt <bob> wrote:

Terry Trussell just got sentenced to 105 months in prison for his citizens grand jury actions, which the government and a jury of 6 considered crimes.

Trussell and his enablers and supporters believed that they had the right, descended from the Magna Carta, to form a common law grand jury to petition for redress and do the job that the real grand jury would not do, and thus to operate the common law grand jury outside the control of the Chief Judge of the Circuit. Trussell learned the hard way that no such right exists. He died in prison.

The US and Florida Constitutions acknowledge the power of, but do not specifically authorize grand juries. Yet, grand juries have been connected to courts throughout their history in English and American law. Chapter 905 of the Florida Statutes delineate the powers and duties of Florida grand juries. Florida Statute 2.01, one of the first laws enacted by the Florida Legislature, provides this:

2.01 Common law and certain statutes declared in force.—The common and statute laws of England which are of a general and not a local nature, with the exception hereinafter mentioned, down to the 4th day of July, 1776, are declared to be of force in this state; provided, the said statutes and common law be not inconsistent with the Constitution and laws of the United States and the acts of the Legislature of this state.

History.—s. 1, Nov. 6, 1829; RS 59; GS 59; RGS 71; CGL 87.

The foregoing make it crystal clear that Florida Statutes Chapter 905 supersedes corresponding provision of English statute and common laws regarding grand juries. Thus, Florida law, by providing for formal grand juries, excludes and disallows a separate, spurious “common law grand jury” or “citizen grand jury” put together by people of a local community. A basic grasp of the rules of statutory construction would have made this clear, had Trussell studied them.

WHAT TO DO ABOUT CROOKED GOVERNMENT

If the citizenry feels the spunk to create their own grand juries outside the reach of the courts and the prosecutors, then they ought to feel spunky enough to do it right.

  1. DO NOT listen to your all-knowing chums, for they will get you in trouble.
  2. Beware of the Dunning-Kruger Effect (see link below) in yourself or your advisors.
  3. Start by finding and reading law related to the issue.
  4. Continue by finding binding appellate court opinions regarding the issue.
  5. Call your county’s Bar association, get a referral to an attorney competent in your area of concern, then pay the attorney his hourly rate for a written opinion regarding your rights/powers in the issue. If you act according to the opinion and get hauled before the court, you can show the judge that you followed the opinion of an expert in the law and therefore did not intend to commit a crime.
  6. File a declaratory judgment lawsuit asking the court to declare your rights/powers in the issue, then behave accordingly.

Had Terry Trussell and his compatriots followed the above commonsense procedure, they would have long abandoned their dreams of a common law grand jury. The would have realized that they should use the political process for improving Florida’s grand jury system.

WHAT TO DO ABOUT YOUR DUNNING-KRUGER PATRIOT MYTH MONGER FRIENDS

Patriot Myth Mongers typically suffer from the Dunning-Kruger effect, grandly overestimating their competence in law, history, litigation practice, government, etc. Many are scammers who sell their cockamamie legal theories via books, memberships, and lectures. And many truth-hungry patriots waste time, attention, and money on frivolity, nonsense, and “cow plop” disguised as legal truth. See Problems for examples.

If you were to ask me what to do about them, I’d tell you to disconnect from them and put much distance between you and them because associating with them or following their teachings will get you in trouble and make you look like an idiot.

FIXING THE JURY SYSTEM

Florida’s early constitutions permitted private right to prosecute criminal defendants, acknowledged the power of petite juries to judge both fact and law, and acknowledged the power of grand juries to investigate all felony crimes.

After the Civil War era, Florida’s constitutions gave prosecution rights only to State Attorneys, and acknowledged the power of petite juries to judge only the facts, but not the law, and of grand juries to investigate capitol crimes.

State officials have taken those changes to mean petite juries may determine only the facts of a case, with judges determining the law, and grand juries may investigate only capitol crimes (albeit the related statute 905.20 permits grand jurors to investigate any offense of which they have knowledge within the county).

I have theorized that the foregoing changes occurred because the 15th Amendment gave Negroes the right to vote, which meant Negro men would sit on juries, and that meant the Negro jurors would automatically vote for Negro defendants and against Caucasian defendants because of their inherent racial prejudice, and naturally, Negroes would jump at any chance to prosecute Caucasians for any imagined offense. In other words, sitting on juries would give Negroes a way finally to get even with Caucasians for mistreatment during and since slavery. I believe this put fear into the minds of the Caucasian men in government that Negro jurors would turn trials into a laughing stock, so they intentionally stripped juries of important powers.

The people of the land can use the political process to restore full jury powers – to eliminate judicial and prosecutor interference in grand jury proceedings, to allow private prosecution, to allow the citizenry to present evidence of crimes to grand juries, and to let petite juries judge both law and fact.

Culling and Training of Prospective Jurors

People of good sense in government intuitively know that the citizenry has a huge responsibility to gain the knowledge necessary to understand the ideals of good government and the importance of an educated, intelligent electorate to the advancement of good government and civilization.

Unfortunately the USA population includes about 80 million people too stupid to graduate from high school, many of whom have the right to vote. Axiomatically, the vast majority of them, and many millions nearly as stupid as them, will make stupid choices at the polls, and stupid decisions as jurors. Therefore, they should not have the right to become electors or jurors.

The court clerks, in selecting jurors, cull out those too ill or feeble to serve. For petite jurors, the judge culls out biased jurors. So we already have rules showing that some electors should not and may not sit on the jury. But even more electors should be culled from the jury pool.

Electors should demand that clerks administer IQ tests to all prospective jurors, and cull out those with IQ below 90 or 100.

Electors should also demand that the clerks administer training courses in which prospective jurors learn the ideals of good government, the constitutions of the US and the State, and the power of petite juries to nullify bad or inscrutable law and of grand juries to investigate any and all crimes.

PRIVATE RIGHT OF PROSECUTION

Electors should further demand restoration of the private right of prosecution and acknowledge the power of all grand jurors to receive evidence from crime victims and other citizenry and to indict according to the evidence. Finally, electors should demand that private parties may prosecute any indicted defendant in the event the government prosecutor declines to prosecute. Private prosecuting attorneys should undergo additional training and testing to minimize waste of court resources.

Helpful Links

  1. Rules/Canons of Statutory Construction/Interpretation
  1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statutory_interpretation
  2. http://www.ncsl.org/documents/lsss/2013PDS/Rehnquist_Court_Canons_citations.pdf
  3. https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/97-589.pdf
  4. https://law.uakron.libguides.com/federallaw/canons

Florida Common Law Jurisprudence

https://www.govinfo.gov/collection/constitution-annotated – SCOTUS opinions about the US Constitution.

https://www.govinfo.gov/browse-a-z – browse for US Code, CFR, opinions, etc.

https://constitution.org/ – Huge repository of law, Constitution, historical documents

http://leg.state.fl.us – Florida Constitution, Laws, and Statutes

https://www.flrules.org/ – Florida Administrative Code

https://scholar.google.com/ – Case law (court opinions)

http://fly.hiwaay.net/~becraft/ – See Problems for Patriot Myth Monger fake law/history

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect – Dunning-Kruger Effect

###

(No, I’m not a lawyer)

Statutory Construction, Juries, and Staying Out of Trouble

Why Patriots Get Into Legal Trouble

Patriots often make huge mistakes in their estimation of the meaning and applicability of laws of any and all kind, from the Constitutions of the US and States, through the statutes of legislatures, to administrative rules. As a consequence, they run afoul of government and find themselves in trouble. Many of their errors come from not knowing the rules of statutory construction and interpretation while thinking that they have perfect ability to read and comprehend. Many suffer from cognitive delusion, overestimating their own ability and underestimating the ability of law makers and jurists.

I have provided four links in item 1 below to an education on the rules of statutory construction/interpretation, the item 2 link to a Florida Bar Journal on Florida Common Law Jurisprudence. I encourage all with an interest in law to read the articles at those links, and to use the other links for reference.

A CASE IN POINT – COMMON LAW / CITIZEN GRAND JURIES.

A few years ago, a court in Dixie County Florida sentenced septuagenarian Terry Trussell to over 8 years in prison for simulated service of process – serving a Citizen Grand Jury indictment to the local sheriff.

On Sat, Jul 23, 2016 at 5:02 PM, Bob Hurt <bob> wrote:

Terry Trussell just got sentenced to 105 months in prison for his citizens grand jury actions, which the government and a jury of 6 considered crimes.

Trussell and his enablers and supporters believed that they had the right, descended from the Magna Carta, to form a common law grand jury to petition for redress and do the job that the real grand jury would not do, and thus to operate the common law grand jury outside the control of the Chief Judge of the Circuit. Trussell learned the hard way that no such right exists. He died in prison.

The US and Florida Constitutions acknowledge the power of, but do not specifically authorize grand juries. Yet, grand juries have been connected to courts throughout their history in English and American law. Chapter 905 of the Florida Statutes delineate the powers and duties of Florida grand juries. Florida Statute 2.01, one of the first laws enacted by the Florida Legislature, provides this:

2.01 Common law and certain statutes declared in force.—The common and statute laws of England which are of a general and not a local nature, with the exception hereinafter mentioned, down to the 4th day of July, 1776, are declared to be of force in this state; provided, the said statutes and common law be not inconsistent with the Constitution and laws of the United States and the acts of the Legislature of this state.

History.—s. 1, Nov. 6, 1829; RS 59; GS 59; RGS 71; CGL 87.

The foregoing make it crystal clear that Florida Statutes Chapter 905 supersedes corresponding provision of English statute and common laws regarding grand juries. Thus, Florida law, by providing for formal grand juries, excludes and disallows a separate, spurious “common law grand jury” or “citizen grand jury” put together by people of a local community. A basic grasp of the rules of statutory construction would have made this clear, had Trussell studied them.

WHAT TO DO ABOUT CROOKED GOVERNMENT

If the citizenry feels the spunk to create their own grand juries outside the reach of the courts and the prosecutors, then they ought to feel spunky enough to do it right.

  1. DO NOT listen to your all-knowing chums, for they will get you in trouble.
  2. Beware of the Dunning-Kruger Effect (see link below) in yourself or your advisors.
  3. Start by finding and reading law related to the issue.
  4. Continue by finding binding appellate court opinions regarding the issue.
  5. Call your county’s Bar association, get a referral to an attorney competent in your area of concern, then pay the attorney his hourly rate for a written opinion regarding your rights/powers in the issue. If you act according to the opinion and get hauled before the court, you can show the judge that you followed the opinion of an expert in the law and therefore did not intend to commit a crime.
  6. File a declaratory judgment lawsuit asking the court to declare your rights/powers in the issue, then behave accordingly.

Had Terry Trussell and his compatriots followed the above commonsense procedure, they would have long abandoned their dreams of a common law grand jury. The would have realized that they should use the political process for improving Florida’s grand jury system.

WHAT TO DO ABOUT YOUR DUNNING-KRUGER PATRIOT MYTH MONGER FRIENDS

Patriot Myth Mongers typically suffer from the Dunning-Kruger effect, grandly overestimating their competence in law, history, litigation practice, government, etc. Many are scammers who sell their cockamamie legal theories via books, memberships, and lectures. And many truth-hungry patriots waste time, attention, and money on frivolity, nonsense, and “cow plop” disguised as legal truth. See Problems for examples.

If you were to ask me what to do about them, I’d tell you to disconnect from them and put much distance between you and them because associating with them or following their teachings will get you in trouble and make you look like an idiot.

FIXING THE JURY SYSTEM

Florida’s early constitutions permitted private right to prosecute criminal defendants, acknowledged the power of petite juries to judge both fact and law, and acknowledged the power of grand juries to investigate all felony crimes.

After the Civil War era, Florida’s constitutions gave prosecution rights only to State Attorneys, and acknowledged the power of petite juries to judge only the facts, but not the law, and of grand juries to investigate capitol crimes.

State officials have taken those changes to mean petite juries may determine only the facts of a case, with judges determining the law, and grand juries may investigate only capitol crimes (albeit the related statute 905.20 permits grand jurors to investigate any offense of which they have knowledge within the county).

I have theorized that the foregoing changes occurred because the 15th Amendment gave Negroes the right to vote, which meant Negro men would sit on juries, and that meant the Negro jurors would automatically vote for Negro defendants and against Caucasian defendants because of their inherent racial prejudice, and naturally, Negroes would jump at any chance to prosecute Caucasians for any imagined offense. In other words, sitting on juries would give Negroes a way finally to get even with Caucasians for mistreatment during and since slavery. I believe this put fear into the minds of the Caucasian men in government that Negro jurors would turn trials into a laughing stock, so they intentionally stripped juries of important powers.

The people of the land can use the political process to restore full jury powers – to eliminate judicial and prosecutor interference in grand jury proceedings, to allow private prosecution, to allow the citizenry to present evidence of crimes to grand juries, and to let petite juries judge both law and fact.

Helpful Links

  1. Rules/Canons of Statutory Construction/Interpretation
  1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statutory_interpretation
  2. http://www.ncsl.org/documents/lsss/2013PDS/Rehnquist_Court_Canons_citations.pdf
  3. https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/97-589.pdf
  4. https://law.uakron.libguides.com/federallaw/canons

Florida Common Law Jurisprudence

https://www.govinfo.gov/collection/constitution-annotated – SCOTUS opinions about the US Constitution.

https://www.govinfo.gov/browse-a-z – browse for US Code, CFR, opinions, etc.

https://constitution.org/ – Huge repository of law, Constitution, historical documents

http://leg.state.fl.us – Florida Constitution, Laws, and Statutes

https://www.flrules.org/ – Florida Administrative Code

https://scholar.google.com/ – Case law (court opinions)

http://fly.hiwaay.net/~becraft/ – See Problems for Patriot Myth Monger fake law/history

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect – Dunning-Kruger Effect

###

(No, I’m not a lawyer)

CFPB Sues CFLA for Scamming Mortgagors, and…

CFPB v CFLA Complaint 20190906

As the above-linked complaint shows, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) sued Certified Forensic Loan Auditors (CFLA) and its owner Andrew Lehman, and its so-called securitization auditor Michael Carrigan in federal court for violating the Consumer Financial Protection Act and its supporting regulation, Regulation O, by charging advance fees for foreclosure rescue services, and for selling worthless services like securitization audits.

It seems to the Maven of Mortgage Attack that the CFPB read the CFLA Scam Report of March 2019 and decided to act on it by trying to put CFLA out of the business of scamming troubled mortgagors. THANK YOU, CFPB!

Another Freedom of Speech misunderstanding

https://legalinsurrection.com/2019/06/verdict-jury-awards-gibsons-bakery-11-million-against-oberlin-college/

Here’s a story showing a gross misunderstanding of the freedom of speech and a horrible college student body tort that the college administrators wrongfully endorsed. Employees of family-owned bakery local to Oberlin college caught three Negro Oberlin students trying to steal goods from the bakery store, and called the police. Antagonistic, race-baiting Oberlin and student activists engaged in public protests and boycott efforts that defamed the bakery as racists and dramatically reduced bakery income. College officials claim they only allowed students to exercise their right to freedom of speech, and had nothing to do with damaging the bakery’s business.

The bakers sued Oberlin college and won a ruling that Oberlin College committed libel and disrupted the bakery’s business, AND an award of $11 million in compensatory damages. A punitive damages trial might yield more money for the bakery’s owners.

While it remains possible that an appellate panel will overturn all or part of the trial court’s ruling and award, the college administrators could and should have put a stop to the damaging student protests. The US Constitution does not protect otherwise protected speech when the speakers intend to use it as an instrument of libel and business disruption. The right to free speech comes with commensurate responsibility, a fact that delusional, contemptible, vociferous demonstrators typically fail to consider.

Time for a terminology change – “INVADER,” not “illegal or undocumented alien or… immigrant”

I write to encourage all of you to change your terminology when you refer to “undocumented alien,” or “illegal immigrant”. From now on, use the term “INVADER” to refer to any non-US-Citizen without a visa or residence permit inside the United States or its territories.

INVADERS include the trickles or floods of Ibero-Americans, Caribbean Islanders, Africans, Mid-Easterners, and others entering the USA and its territories, particularly across land borders, afoot, or by a vehicle like car, truck, boat, or aircraft.

They are not mere undocumented aliens or illegal immigrants. They are INVADERS who INVADE or INVADED the USA and its territories by the process of INVASION.

You will see from the definitions below that to invade means to encroach, possibly under arms. An invasion is an unwanted or unlawful entry into your personal space, your home, your community, your land, your state, or your nation.

The US Constitution provides the following references to invasion:

Article I Section 8, Clause 15 – Powers of Congress

15: To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

Article I Section 9, Clause 2 – Powers prohibited to Congress (and therefore to the Judicial and Executive branches)

2: The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.

Article I Section 10, Clause 3 – Powers prohibited to States

3: No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any Duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.

Article IV Section 4 – US guarantees to States

The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.

Many people, particularly Democrats, seem to think that people the world over have the natural, God-given right to settle wherever they wish, including inside the USA without permission of Government. AND, US law, pursuant to treaty, protects so-called refugees by allowing them to enter the USA to escape persecution in their homeland. Wikipedia provides this data:

The United States Refugee Act of 1980 (Public Law 96-212) amended the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 by defining a refugee as any person who is outside his or her country of residence or nationality, or without nationality, and is unable or unwilling to return to, and is unable or unwilling to avail himself or herself of the protection of, that country because of persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion.

The annual admission of refugees is set to a 50,000 cap per fiscal year, but in an emergency situation, the President may change the number for a period of twelve months. The Attorney General is also granted power to admit additional refugees and grant asylum to current aliens, but all admissions must be reported to Congress and be limited to 5,000 people.

That means the government of the alien refugee’s home country persecutes the alien refugee or refuses to punish those who would persecute the alien refugee. It does NOT mean an alien has the right to become a refugee in order to better his economic or social or political status. Such putative refugees are in fact INVADERS.

The American mantra for INVADERS should be this: if you want to enter the USA to improve your economic or social condition, to get a well-paying job, to avoid hardship, etc., GO BACK TO YOUR HOMELAND and USE YOUR POLITICAL POWER TO IMPROVE IT.

The USA cannot absorb more than a trickle of refugees or lawful immigrants without subjecting the nation to forceful change of American culture into a distinctly alien culture. Americans should NEVER invite more immigrants than US culture can absorb without change. NEVER FAIL to understand this principle: REFUGEES ARE INVADERS. They are jumping to the head of the line of lawful immigrants, sidestepping normal statistical controls over immigration. They are tricking the system, and therefore bringing about unwanted changes to our American culture, for refugees almost never intend to become true Americans, learning literacy in English, and folding into American culture. In fact, they almost universally intend to warp American language and culture, not to mention government corruption, to match that of their homelands. We see clear examples of this in the Muslims who have become members of Congress and insist on wearing Muslim garb to press others with their cultural convictions. In due course, Muslims, particularly Muslim refugees will, given the opportunity, change governments of their communities, states, and the United States from limited constitutional republics into Islamic caliphates ruled by Shari’a law.

History shows that INVADERS, whether or not by force of arms and military conquest, do in fact accomplish the same result by gradual invasion as by sudden invasion, IF they invade in large enough numbers. Either way, American society cannot absorb the invaders without a change in culture and government. Invaders always bring the practices of graft, corruption, and lawlessness from their homelands into the USA, and they ALWAYS seek to make the USA like their homeland to gratify their feelings of nostalgia.

Universally, we must tell them: “STAY in your homeland and reform your government, your religion, and your culture so that they become more advanced and civilized. DO NOT bring your homeland backwardness, your homeland language, your homeland culture to the United States of America. We do not need or want the changes with which you intend to infect us, our culture, our language, and our governments.”

YES, I include Islam in the array of cultures Americans do not need or want. Why? Because Islam as both a religion and political force is brutal and corrupt – AND, its adherents seek to impose medieval social regulations upon people of the community through primitive and irrational “Shari’a law.” Shari’a is absolutely incompatible with the principals of a limited constitutional republic and with American culture. Wikipedia provides this:

Traditional theory of Islamic jurisprudence recognizes four sources of sharia: the Quran, sunnah (authentic hadith), qiyas (analogical reasoning), and ijma (juridical consensus). Different legal schools—of which the most prominent are Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi’i, Hanbali and Jafari—developed methodologies for deriving sharia rulings from scriptural sources using a process known as ijtihad. Traditional jurisprudence (fiqh) distinguishes two principal branches of law, ʿibādāt (rituals) and muʿāmalāt (social relations), which together comprise a wide range of topics. Its rulings are concerned with ethical standards as much as with legal norms, assigning actions to one of five categories: mandatory, recommended, neutral, abhorred, and prohibited. Thus, some areas of sharia overlap with the Western notion of law while others correspond more broadly to living life in accordance with God’s will.

In the modern era, traditional laws in the Muslim world have been widely replaced by statutes inspired by European models. Judicial procedures and legal education were likewise brought in line with European practice.While the constitutions of most Muslim-majority states contain references to sharia, its classical rules were largely retained only in personal status (family) laws. Legislators who codified these laws sought to modernize them without abandoning their foundations in traditional jurisprudence. The Islamic revival of the late 20th century brought along calls by Islamist movements for full implementation of sharia, including hudud corporal punishments, such as stoning. In some cases, this resulted in traditionalist legal reform, while other countries witnessed juridical reinterpretation of sharia advocated by progressive reformers. Some Muslim-minority countries recognize the use of sharia-based family laws for their Muslim populations. Sharia also continues to influence other aspects of private and public life.

The role of sharia has become a contested topic around the world. Introduction of sharia-based laws sparked intercommunal violence in Nigeria and may have contributed to the breakup of Sudan. Some jurisdictions in North America have passed bans on use of sharia, framed as restrictions on religious or foreign laws. There are ongoing debates as to whether sharia is compatible with democracy, human rights, freedom of thought, women’s rights, LGBT rights, and banking.

In spite of the Constitution’s putative protections of the states against alien invasions, Democrats seem to LOVE having millions of alien invaders flooding into the country. Why? Because they know that all the children born to those alien invaders will presume US Citizen status and register to vote, AND virtually all of those invaders will vote for Democrat candidates. In other words, Democrats want the alien invasion in order to win elections and turn the US Government into a socialist/communist enterprise that robs from the responsible, productive people of the land in order to give subsistence to the relatively irresponsible and non-productive invaders.

Looking back at the provisions in the US Constitution regarding alien invasion, AND at the nature of the mostly non-militant invasion by border jumpers and so-called refugees, it becomes crystal clear that the governments of neither the Several States NOR the United States have fulfilled their constitutional duty to protect the territory of the US, the States, and American communities from culture-destroying, government-wrecking INVASION by ALIEN INVADERS from wretched third-world countries.

Part of the reason for this failure lies in the apparent heart-breaking plight of the invaders who just want a better life for themselves and their children than they had in their homelands.

WE should recognize the reality that the low intelligence and the citizen-incompetence of those invaders constitute the central reason that the invaders had miserable lives back in their home countries. If they had the ability to create an advanced civilization back home, they would have. Instead of ousting the criminals from government in a violent rebellion, they want to bring their mentality of civil incompetence and corruption here to the USA and foster here the same kind of criminal governments under which they suffered at home. For that reason, if no other, we must slam the door in their faces and deny them entry into the USA now and forever.

The United States, average IQ 98 with the UK as the 100 IQ standard, contains about 80 million people with IQ below 85, the minimum level required to graduate from High School. Their numbers increase daily with the influx of refugees from low-IQ lands. The average IQ of Mexico is only 88, of Haiti, Honduras, and Nicaragua is only 81, and of Guatemala is only 77. The brightest people of Ibero-America and the Caribbean islands stay there to run businesses and government. The dregs of society try to escape to the USA. We do not get their best and brightest as refugees.

Stupidity is a life-long genetic disease. Stupid children inherit their stupidity from their stupid parents. The USA does not need more stupid people. Stupid people gravitate to crime and welfare abuse to get by because they cannot compete for the better jobs and mates. Stupid people have very low value of productivity. They become a net drain on the infrastructures and productivity of the more intelligent, productive people of the land. Our near-socialist governments hand out billions of dollars annually in various forms of welfare, and spends a fortune on health care, criminal justice, prisons, and wasted education on the stupid. Instead of imposing a ban on the procreation of stupid children by stupid parents and a ban on the immigration of stupid people from corrupt 3rd world lands, the leftist liberal “bleeding hearts” of the US and state governments seem to invite burgeoning of the lowest possible class – the abjectly irresponsible and unproductive, all through legalized plunder of the responsible and productive people of the land. Such support for the stupid could come through charitable donations, but Democrats who foster welfare know that intelligent people will not hand out charitable gifts to those who waste it or do not really need it or act arrogantly like they have a God-given right to it.

You might not know it, but the US President has the power right now to slam the borders shut, and deny entry to all immigrants, including invaders like refugees. Congress delegated that authority to the President in 8 USC 1182(f) (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1182):

“Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.”

Also read this analysis of the federal power over invading aliens:

https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/article-1/section-8/clause-4/aliens

I know of only two ways to stimulate government into taking action to stop the present invasion dead in its tracks: CHANGE the way we talk about it and DEMAND that our President and Congress and Judiciary STOP it.

  1. To begin with, we must call the invaders what they are: INVADERS. We must STOP calling them by other terms. They are INVADERS, not immigrants, not illegal immigrants, not undocumented aliens, and not undocumented workers. They are INVADERS. We must use this terminology, INVADERS, in all emails we write, in all discussions with friends, family, associates, adversaries, and in all articles we write. We must take extreme offense at the use of any other terms in reference to the invaders and their invasion other than INVADE, INVADER, INVADERS, and INVASION, just as Negroes typically take offense at a white person for referring to them as niggers. We must insist that all participants in public dialogue referring to illegal/undocumented aliens/immigrants MUST refer to them “INVADERS.” We insist on the term INVADER as a term of alarm and shock, because invade, invader, and invasion are the ONLY acceptable terms for the aliens who enter or remain in US territory unlawfully, or for their unlawful entry or residence in US territory. By changing our terminology, we turn all public discourse on the topic into a politically persuasive tool to encourage action by government to stop the invasion for it makes them perceive the invaders as dangerous enemies to the US and State interests. Make no mistake in thinking about this. The invaders are a dire danger to the citizens of the USA.
  2. Second, we must demand of our governors, legislators, and the President a total halt to the invasion and an accelerated ejection of all invaders from the US and its territories forthwith.
  3. Third, we must deny US citizenship to anchor babies. We must demand a constitutional amendment to declare that no child born to invaders and other non-US-Citizens in the USA becomes a US Citizen by birth. The Constitution should mandate that all ALL such children become US Citizens ONLY through the naturalization process.
  4. Forth, we must aggressively inform the President of his power to terminate the invasion under 8 USC 1182(f), and demand that he use it, for it seems apparent from his public comments that he thinks he can block and eject invaders only through a declaration of national emergency. For reference, also see Trump v. Hawaii, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump_v._Hawaii.

Definitions of invade:

From Babylon English
invade

in·vade || ɪn’veɪd
enter for conquest or plunder, occupy; penetrate; intrude; infringe, encroach

From Oxford (En)
invade

v.tr. (often absol.)
1 enter (a country etc.) under arms to control or subdue it.
2 swarm into.
3 (of a disease) attack (a body etc.).
4 encroach upon (a person’s rights, esp. privacy).
Derivatives:
invader n.
Etymology: L invadere invas- (as IN-(2), vadere go)

From WordNet
invade

invade
v 1: march aggressively into another’s territory by military
force for the purposes of conquest and occupation;
“Hitler invaded Poland on September 1, 1939” [syn:
{occupy}]
2: to intrude upon, infringe, encroach on, violate; “This new
colleague invades my territory”; “The neighbors intrude on
your privacy” [syn: {intrude on}, {obtrude upon},
{encroach
        upon}]
3: occupy in large numbers or live on a host; “the Kudzu plant
infests much of the South and is spreading to the North”
[syn: {overrun}, {infest}]
4: penetrate or assault, in a harmful or injurious way; “The
cancer had invaded her lungs”

From Merrian Webster 10th dictionary
invade

transitive verb
1 : to enter for conquest or plunder
2 : to encroach upon : INFRINGE
3 a : to spread over or into as if invading : PERMEATE <doubts invade his mind> b : to affect injuriously and progressively <gangrene invades healthy tissue>

From Webster’s Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913)
Invade

Invade \In*vade”\, v. t. [imp. & p. p. {Invaded}; p. pr. &
vb.
   n. {Invading}.] [L. invadere, invasum; pref. in- in + vadere
   to go, akin to E. wade: cf. OF. invader, F. envahir. See
   {Wade}.]
1. To go into or upon; to pass within the confines of; to
enter; — used of forcible or rude ingress. [Obs.]
Which becomes a body, and doth then invade The state
of life, out of the grisly shade. –Spenser.
2. To enter with hostile intentions; to enter with a view to
conquest or plunder; to make an irruption into; to attack;
as, the Romans invaded Great Britain.
Such an enemy Is risen to invade us. –Milton.
3. To attack; to infringe; to encroach on; to violate; as,
the king invaded the rights of the people.
4. To grow or spread over; to affect injuriously and
progressively; as, gangrene invades healthy tissue.
Syn: To attack; assail; encroach upon. See {Attack}.
Invade \In*vade”\, v. i.
To make an invasion. –Brougham.