Earlier this month I wrote about the Robert v. Austin case filed by a legal team led by Andrew L. Schlafly, Todd Callender, David Wilson and Lisa McGee (link to article: C0VlD l9 hoax goes to court). The case was profoundly important because it confronted the judiciary with questions that cut to the core of human dignity and liberty. The courts would have to hear evidence and rule about whether individuals who received C19 shots could be regarded as chattel property with no human or constitutional rights.
Petition denied
The question is profoundly chilling and it may seem surreal, but the law is far from clear in this respect. According to the 2013 Supreme Court ruling in the Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., gene modified organisms may legally be regarded as synthetic species. Gene modification renders such organisms property of patent holders who own the intellectual property rights over the newly synthesized genes. The implication of that decision is that genetically modified humans could be the property of MRNA technology patent holders.
Given the importance of these questions, one would expect the judiciary to hear the petitioners' arguments, examine the evidence and remove any ambiguities with a clear endorsement of human dignity and a categorical proscription of ownership of any individual. But district and appellate courts repeatedly refused to hear the evidence and dismissed the case, as ordered by the US Defense Department. But the petitioners pursued their cause to the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS). On January 5, a panel of judges began their deliberations about whether to hear the case or not. Such deliberations can go on for weeks, but it took only 3 days for them to reach their decision: "petition denied."
How the judiciary is being sabotaged
The American people are taxed more heavily than medieval serfs to fund the institutions of their government so that they could, among other things, adjudicate such important questions as whether some Americans are in fact slaves or not. In this sense, the courts' refusal to hear Robert v. Austin is an egregious failure of the system. In my article, C0VlD l9 hoax goes to court, I laid out part of the explanation: that the U.S. is presently operating under a covert, hybrid totalitarianism. Further to the adoption of globalist public health emergency laws, an extensive turn-key absolutism has been engineered within legitimate government structures. It goes into effect when either the US Health and Human Services Secretary, or the head of the World Health Organization declare a pandemic and is not subject to challenge by any democratic institution of government.
Bribing judges
But the sabotage of the US judiciary has been much more extensive than that. As professor Jonathan Turley pointed out, there has been an open debate in legal and academic circles about using bribery to influence judges. In 2022, a Georgetown law professor openly encouraged more "aggressive" measures targeting the justices. Seton Hall Law Assistant Dean Brian Sheppard called for Congress to "buyout" Supreme Court justices.
Sheppard proposed that offering them "large sums of money could be effective without harming the integrity of the institution... Congress should offer substantial buyouts to any Supreme Court justices who retire when they reach 10 years of service on the High Court. The five justices who have already exceeded that number should be eligible for the payment if they retire within one year. To overcome the considerable allure of ideological power, the sum should be in the millions." He further suggested that "If Congress cannot be persuaded to pass a buyout plan, then President Biden might be able to gather sufficient discretionary funds for that purpose with money under his control."
Can anybody in their right mind actually believe that offering bribes to judges wouldn't impact their integrity? I don't think anyone is that dumb, but it seems that we have well and truly reached the 2+2=5 state of things. Ignorance is strength. War is peace. Slavery is freedom. Corruption is integrity.
You can take silver, or you can have lead instead!
When bribes are being offered by people in power, declining the bribes always comes at a considerable personal risk. For judges who defend their personal and professional integrity, there are stronger methods of persuasion. Recall, in 2020, judge Esther Salas was assigned to handle a Jeffrey Epstein-related money laundering class action lawsuit brought against Deutsche Bank. But only a few days after she was assigned to the case, someone dispatched an assassin to Ms. Salas' home. She survived the assassination attempt because she stepped out for a random errand, but the assassin killed her son and wounded her husband.
This almost certainly wasn't an isolated case. The botched assassination and the subsequent "suicide" of the assassin made it too obvious to ignore, but the practice of bribing or threatening judges is almost certainly a widespread, routine business. Recall, in 2013 the NSA whistleblower Russell Tice testified as follows in a dialogue on the "Boiling Frogs radio podcast with Sibel Edmonds and Peter Collins":
"They [NSA] went after - and I know this because I had my hands literally on the paperwork for these sort of things - they went after high-ranking military officers; they went after members of Congress, both Senate and the House, especially on intelligence committees and on the armed services committees and ... judicial. But they went after others too. They went after lawyers and law firms. All kinds of - heaps of lawyers and law firms. They went after judges. One of the judges is now sitting ont he Supreme Court that I had his wiretap information in my hand. Two are former FISA court judges. They went after State Department officials. They went after people in the executive service that were part of the White House..."Mr. Tice said NSA also targeted antiwar groups, civil rights groups, multinational corporations, banking and financial firms, NGOs and Red Cross and added this disturbing bit:
"This was in the summer of 2004. One of the papers that I held in my hand was to wiretap a bunch of members associated with, with a 40-something-year-old wannabe senator from Illinois... that's the President of the United States now."Of course, Tice was referring to Barack Obama. In a different interview, Tice also mentioned that the Secretary of State, General Colin Powell had been targeted. Powell earned eternal disgrace for giving false testimony about Saddam Hussein's mobile biolabs to United Nations Security Council in order to justify US invasion of Iraq.
Who is actually in charge?
The institutions of the system may have been created for the right reasons, but they have been systematically corrupted and sabotaged for a long time. It is little wonder that in a system where every person in position of power, from the US President down, is a potential target of blackmail or assassination, we are operating in a very different system from the one that has been advertised to us. The facade of effective checks and balances and equal justice for all are fictitious, there only to lull us into slumber and passive acquiescence to covert rule of clandestine forces behind the throne. Who might those forces be? I have answered that question in an article I published during the pandemic, but which I will revisit next.
Reader Comments