Is There A Legal Remedy To Our Corruption Problem?

a reply to: anonentity

The system is so evolved and carefully crafted that is very difficult to tell corruption from non-corruption. There is no difference between being corrupt and being a good citizen because the system requires good citizens to be corrupt themselves, even if they ignore they are, for the whole thing to work. No cure.

a reply to: Direne

If you have a corrupted system, taking it to the streets in the form of protest is just a way of kicking a dead beast hoping it will work for you. You have to let it die and start something that works. At the moment it is Trump this Biden that, Klaus this Putin that. It is the same boring system repeating itself and taking your energy. The MSM is the mouth of this system stop listening to the garbage when it collapses just make sure you have a lifeboat organized.

originally posted by: anonentity
a reply to: Direne

If you have a corrupted system, taking it to the streets in the form of protest is just a way of kicking a dead beast hoping it will work for you. You have to let it die and start something that works. At the moment it is Trump this Biden that, Klaus this Putin that. It is the same boring system repeating itself and taking your energy. The MSM is the mouth of this system stop listening to the garbage when it collapses just make sure you have a lifeboat organized.

Let it die...I'm not so sure if I agree in principle, which is to say that I think a reform toward true constitutional government, accompanied by a firm prosecution of the majority of corrupt officials who refuse to retire, could also work, I would tend to agree with your assessment that such an undertaking is unlikely to occur organically, or as a grass roots type movement. Lots of reasons for that, some of which you touched on, but I would assume on that we agree. Not impossible, but unlikely.

The bigger concern I see is in the practical application of such an endeavor. Namely that the vacuum created by the absence of such power structures will not take long to be filled. It's a safe bet that as soon as those centers of power are no longer viable, one or more interested third parties will rush in from the wings and seize those same reins of power. This could be any number of geopolitical factions, or perhaps even some juggernaut coalition of a number of those factions. The outcome of such a scenario is highly unlikely to be beneficial to the American people, or the world.

These factions wait in the shadows for this opportunity to present itself, and if it does, we may not get our country back from whoever takes it. From that perspective, military activity might be better if it were benevolent, though that is also a risky scenario of course. Lot's of reasons for that too, which I'll not list here for the sake of keeping it somewhat brief.

That's not to say that they would participate in such activities. More likely they would secure their properties and protect the homeland from invasion while we 'figured it out', but that's just my semi-educated guess.

On the other hand, every soldier takes an oath on enlistment or commission to support and defend the US Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, so that is something that all military personnel are sworn to protect by oath. They might become involved at some point, depending on established protocols. I'm not sure what those are, so I'm not sure how that is supposed to play out or whether or not it ever would play out in that fashion. It is something to consider, however.

I stumbled on this Newsweek article reading through another thread here, that provided a little more information on possible domestic military activity situations.

www.newsweek.com...

From the article:

NORTHCOM stresses in almost everything it produces for public consumption that it operates only in "support" of civil authorities, in response to state requests for assistance or with the consent of local authorities. Legally, the command says, the use of federal military forces in law enforcement can only take place if those forces are used to suppress "insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy." A second test also has to be met, that such disturbances "hinders the execution of the laws of that State, and of the United States within the State," that is, that the public is deprived of its legal and constitutional protections. Local civil authorities must be "unable, fail, or refuse" to protect the civilian population for military forces to be called in, Pentagon directives make clear.

This is independent confirmation that the military likely has plans in place to deal with our corruption problem. Whether that will actually happen, and whether that would actually be a good idea or not aside, this scenario has been studied and planned for. There IS a legal remedy to our corruption problem, though it is not exactly a pretty or desirable one. Alternatively, leaving these maniacs in charge to burn down the world because they don't get to run the game they want frankly looks a lot worse.

a reply to: TheBadCabbie
I believe Kue stated that the Military is the only way. If
those commissioned for such an undertaking stay true to
their “OATH” this could be an answer. A risky one. If the
military were to have access to NSA’s files all the evidence
needed would be at their disposal. Military tribunals taking
care of all the corrupt individuals and removing all the
possessions of those convicted placed in a fund to be used to solve some of
our basic problems. Such as our homeless and sick Vets and all the
homeless for that matter. Putting some effort into re-education,
rehabilitation. No just putting them in a house.

a reply to: TheBadCabbie

Have you read the Declaration of Independence?
Have you read the US Constitution?

The means and authority, for correction of corrupt and tyranny are laid plain for all to see. In simple words easy to understand, no interpretation required.

Go ahead and check it out;

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the ppolitical bands which have connected them with another

That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed
That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish itand to institute new Government


Charters of Freedom 🇺🇸

United We Stand, The Rest Is, Not An Option!

a reply to: ADVISOR

You raise a valid point. Revolt may not necessarily be desirable, but it is enumerated as an inherent right by our earliest legal documents.

That being said, I'm fairly certain that it's not so cut and dried as that. You can't just hold up a copy of the Declaration Of Independence and will away any bureaucrat who stands in the way of your revolution. There are also laws against treason, sedition, and insurrection, which would almost certainly be brought to bear against any would be revolutionary, as soon as any violent action were taken. Perhaps before.

There are other risks to this approach of course, like the good possibility that a well meaning revolutionary effort might be hijacked by an interested third party who has other goals in mind.

On the other hand, a well organized movement that could stave off disruption could certainly achieve that goal, and could solve this corruption problem if properly orchestrated. Such an operation need not necessarily even be violent, in theory.

I think it's likely to be engineered by interested third parties within the next twenty years if something isn't done about this corruption problem, or a benevolent movement doesn't take action first. If the fascist elements can run both sides of an engineered rebellion, they are almost certain to consolidate their power in the process. You can see the social engineering promoting it already. For about ten years or so now, in my opinion.

As highlighted in the Revolving Door Research Project', corrupted government officials is easy to resolve, as long as there is no revolving door.

A recent article about said subject matter, has been published and is quite informative.


DoD’s Kendall says ‘revolving door’ is too thick



Well, as far as revolving door go, we should just remove the system entirely and make career parasite politicians an automatic trip to Gitmo.

Term limits, is the best solution to that problem.