January 6th, 2024
Dear Voters,
Founding fathers debated establishing an Aristocracy having to convince the
Constitutional Convention at large the pure merits of Democracy itself. The
unchanged compromise the Electorial College, our figleaf to ensure that the
Dukedoms don't require a New Magna Carta (States v. Federal Executive).
Precisely because there will always exist amongst the public the foolish,
uneducated, indigent, and misinformed. ("The masses are asses.")
Before I go any further, may I disclaim and explain that I am only a humble
youth sports referee who has been sanctioned by the USSF by way of the Colorado
Soccer Association, since 2015 to referee youth soccer. I only speak for myself,
but I also call them like I see them, and
if you read my entire blog I haven't
said but two critiques of the primary subject (Donald J. Trump, the Individual;
Trump, the 500 businesses, et. al.; Trump, the political organization; and the
former Trump Administration [all referring to himself honorifically, albeit fair
enough, as in President Carter, President Trump, et. al.] also by the transitive
powers the supporters, for any reason, of the above), here
The Subject.
How would I explain The Subject to children under the age of fourteen? And
aren't we all children, at some level, even after we grow up?
Well, in refereeing we keep an eye for a poor sport. Someone when tackled
correctly, then tugs at a jersey to get the ball back, but also then just goes
after the same player with aggression, off or on the ball.
A poor sport doesn't know how to work it out on the feild and let
his or her soccer do the talking.
A poor sport doesn't accept a loss as a loss.
A poor sport will attack the referee for doing proper duties.
A poor sport believes in and will if possible, cheat.
No matter how we come to the final tally, the score is the score. It is why
people like sports, the clarity, the winners, the losers. Life is constant
interdependent compromise when you grow up. But also, it's about being a good
sport and a good teammate, even if everything is really just shades of grey.
If you don't comprehend loss, how do you learn? On the field, losing, how do you
shift on the fly with tactics to turn it around? If you have a poor season what
greater lessons can you gain?
Good sports accept a win like a loss, learning, growing and developing into the
sport, it just feels better, and we must risk loss for the thrill of the win!
The reason we thank the referees is to show grace and honor those who are trying
to keep things safe and fair.
The Subject is a notorious bad sport.
Here is just one pattern of deceit to follow:
Said the 2016
election was rigged when he was scared of losing in the summer of 2016, and then won. Ok, so
then it wasn't rigged? (Except
Cambridge Analytica
and
Russia.) Classic cheaters mentality, the refs are on the take, and paranoia,
'everyone is against me.'
Lost outright in 2020 election, and then told
the Big Lie, people, our countrypeople,
still believe this version of events
to this day despite a
genuine lack of evidence
to the
contrary. Yet;
The Subject
forged false documents
to present
false electors
to falsely
replace true electors on January 6th, 2021 (
hereafter J6);
pressured election officials at every level in
seven swing states;
pressured the VP to go along with the electors swap; and install The Subject for a
second presidential Adminsitration.
Like a poor sport, The Subject, himself, is prone to denying loss, thus
preventing positive lessons from happening, acheiving honest growth or permanent
learning. Further himself speaks foully, calls
ad hominem names
and
taunts opponents.
Oh and
o boy does the subject himself lie, for
whatever reasons.
The Subject writ large has shown they will not just complain about the Referees,
but they will body check them during the game. All seven, even the three who
dissented, of the Colorado Supreme Court Justices have been threatened by The
Subject, oh yes I included supporters and militia in the Subject itself.
Let's go deeper into poor sportsmanship. If everything is crooked, then:
-it gives permission for my team to play by other rules, probably with impunity
-if we lose, then it was for some nefarious reason, or specific call, but never
our fault
-we can short circuit anything at any time, because the ends justify the
means... Winning is everything! (Referees always win, always lose and always
tie, on every game, we just keep score.)
-the referees, regulators, judges, enforcers, prosecutors are
ad hominem
in the wrong, (especially when our team loses [us-v-them mentality]).
This is a negative self-fulfilling spiral of poor sportsmanship.
Some people are saying Himself isn't fit for office, in part
because he suffers from early dementia.
The Subject often demonstrates no honest sense of
earthly Law and Order. Himself, once again must be examined;
He was born superwealthy having been granted an allowance of $1,000,000 per
annum by Frank, his father, when he was only 1 years old. That's $17,000,000 a
year today, and although some went to rent,etc., it would truly distort your
perspective on humanity. Paying for what you want, getting most everything at
one level or another that you desire, it would be hard not to at the outside
appear selfish. But we have ample evidence that he is in fact a
Dangerous Narcissist. The United States Presidency is a selfish device, whereby he plans to
literally pardon himself, should he lose the argument he has presented to the DC
District Court and amici curiae (in part or albeit whole), in Colorado Supreme
Court that the Presidency of the US is a Kingship, whereby
criminal immunity is granted for prior crimes, crimes not impeached and
convicted by the Senate for removal during Adminsitration, or even crimes
after occupancy of office?! (However, remember that in
Nixon, accepting the pardon admits crimes
and misdemeanors existed.)
The Subject is a
proven cheater
(I digress into simplification that The Subject is pronoun [royal?] "he"):
He has been found in
default judgement of Fraud in the
NY Business trial.
He is indicted in
Georgia under the RICO statues, which were designed to encircle interstate organized criminals, for amongst
other things the previously mentioned false electors that were waiting like
false barons to usurp the royal court upon countenance of coronation.
Let's be clear, had the false electors scheme been fait accompli, had J6 worked
and installed The Subject for another four years as Chief Executive Officer of
the United States of America, it would represent a "violent coup."
Now lets' turn to J6 itself. If The Subject writ large the hominem, himself,
granted aid or comfort to what is correctly defined by the Colorado Supreme
Court as "insurrection." (yes, I read the whole thing: lower court ruling,
appeals, co. supreme court ruling, dissents, and the current appeals to the sup.
ct. usa.)
If not
inciting a riotous insurrection, then giving aid and comfort to
those he "love(d)"
is clearly, under the plain self-executing language of the Fourteenth Amendment,
specifically under the third section, a
disqualifcation of The Subject from the Colorado ballot.
Going further, The Subject is one of the more often
sued entities and person(s) around. Remember
Trump Taj Mahal,
Trump University, et. al.? There is a very good reason even a public servant like Joe Biden
will put their assests into a double blind trust upon becoming VP or President
(note to the Court: or Supreme Court Justice, allows for fewer recusals). It
allows one to honestly be removed from any interests that may compete in direct
conflict with eachother that your perview, authority or provision of authority
allows total command and control over despite your ownership interests at an
asset level. Yes it appears as a bully pulpit, an organized Administration to
execute faithfully the laws of the USA, and the Veto pen, but break down the
Federalist walls, destroy the Washingtonian Executive precedent of peaceful
transition of power, don't divest yourself from financial interests, and we have
Royalty! Instead,
sic semper tyrannis, and now witness the
NY Fraud trial crucifixion. (Further, to the court, What if The Subject is
found guilty of Emoluments violations? That constitues a High Crime and/or Misdemeanor!)
No other businessperson without political experience will ever go into politics
again, if they have
common sense.
When someone says "I'm overregulated."
The answer is, "What rule or law did you want to break?"
If you change or break all the rules, even just "
on day one," then you have always changed the rule. The Subject can't be
trusted.
The Subject, in particular it's ancillary parts, function in a
call and response manner
whereby one part (the left knoweth not the right [in criminal organizations,
this is called "plausible deniability"]) will partake in
threatening,
intimidating
or even
violent actions
to disrupt or even destroy opponents, while the other one happened to be on
vacation, absent the crime. These are called bullies.
When you fight outright in soccer you get a Red Card, and are no longer allowed
to play. Playing is a joy and privilege. So too, the Presidency, it is not a
civil right enshrined in the Constitution. (One of the arguments in the
amici was that access to the presidential ballot is a right of life, liberty and
pursuit of happiness, which it clearly isn't.)
When confronted with facts, The Subject often prefers the argument ad hominem
"
gas lighting," eg. blame the victim, your wrong about that fact, et. al., is often
presented in lieu of factual evidence. Secondarily, beware the tu quoque
projection.
Let's turn to The Candidacy of The Subject:
He has in speeches explained;
He will
pardon himself.
He will pardon
J6 criminals, including cop killers.
He will
eviscorate the civil service, and install
cronies.
He will gut the
justice department, appoint partisans,
and hope to appoint two more Supreme Court judges that agree the Dobbs decision
was not judicial activism, the president of the United States is not textually
an officer, and the judge can hold
seance with Jefferson, Adams and Hamilton to divine original law. In this way The Subject may bully with false "law and order." Especially if
we cannot agree on plain English definitions.
He is not
The Law and Order Candidate;
Has previously stated that rather than enforce and uphold his sacred
Presidential oath,
a deeper oath than applies for Congress, to defend the Constitution, he would
suspend
it for his personal device.
Take him seriously, he has stated clearly, publicly and in plain English that he intends to be a
dictator. That is fascism, children.
His replacement of civil and legal service will become a virtual aristocracy
granting novel, unique and individual privilege over the public interests. A
virtual Aristocracy, what they then do after four years of power to enshrine
their version of a civil and legal service and hold onto power would then be
anyone's guess?
Has stated they will open
concentration camps to manage the immigration problem
(that means putting people in death camps).
All of the above means Donald John Trump was born an American King, and wants to
die officially a King. ('L'Etat c'est moi.')
I am grateful the
Supreme Court of the USA has taken up the writ of certiorari, hope they find our poor little State did her best, and pray they can find
True Legitimacy, maybe an honorable legacy. I pray for judicial common sense.
Amongst the fallacious and specious arguments The Subject has tendered:
(1) The presidency isn't an office (even though it is mentioned 25 times in the
Constitution and Bill of Rights, as such.) the president isn't an officer of the
United States (It was pretty much like others in their Appeal, a Texas
Sharpshooter fallacy of what do words mean?).
(2) J6 wasn't insurrection (it was painfully obvious from the co. sup. ruling
the definition was met).
(3) The US President holds a lighter not deeper oath to the Constitution?
(Twisted logic. If anything, Section Five of the Fourteenth Amendment informs us
that to Uphold the Constitution specifies acknowledgment of that specific branch
of what the governments duties are in Legislating!)
(4) Because he wasn't convicted and removed by The Senate, his Articles of
Impeachment, the trial they bore in re: J6, and the crimes they lay bare, (as if
it isn't WYSIWYG) then he isn't ineligble under that language. Further that
because he hasn't been convicted specifically of the federal crime of
insurrection, then he qualifies for a second term. But after reading thoroughly,
it is clear in fact although some States may rightfully disqualify "Trump" from
ballots, if elected himself will need an approval of two-thirds of both houses
of Congress when having been impeached and removed by congress, convicted of
high crimes and misdemeanors, or of a crime, and as remains to the Supreme
Court, if indicted. Further, the Supreme Court should comment on the process,
because if they cannot pass the 2/3 threshhold for the victor, do they then
examine promotion of the VP or the Challenger next, and then do they have to
approve by 2/3 if the winning VP or Challenger opposite is also a seditionist,
insurrectionist, traitor, or found guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors
(having taken oath to Constitution previous)? The Court can conceive of their
peril in this decision when imagining one of the convicted leaders, possibly
having taken an oath as a military officer before J6 occurred, of the convicted
J6er running for President in a future context, of that person winning National Presidential Elections. The Court also has to validate
a process for states like Michigan, Maine, Colorado, et. al. to determine how a
Presidential Candidate Disqualification occurs in all instances. Say what you
want but The Subject has brought the nation to fresh unchartered ground.
(5) The Subject Himself didn't participate in the whatever it was, but wasn't an
insurrection, even though he is in
Federal
and state courts, despite the
Maine
and
Colorado
findings, and all for the same activities that
the organizers of the J6 now find themselves behind bars for exactly those crimes.
In fact when we read the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution it is clear
that just as Section One is a sheild, so too Section Three is. It allows for
process of impeachment, but it also specifies the requirements for presidency,
including not having engaged in, given aid or comfort to insurrectionists.
Pretty much the statement, 'I will pardon all J6 criminals,' already meets this
self-evidentiary self-executing standard, without conviction. In normal families
this is called, "words mean what words mean." (People can sometimes not believe
their eyes when they witness violence, or their ears when they hear politically
violent rhetoric.)
The argument that Section Five makes any enforcement of a sheild action by
Congress necessary defies the meaning of self-executing sheild. Following the
Thirteenth Amendment, passed with the Fourteenth and Fifteenth after the Civil
War, the institution of Slavery is illegal, and only Acts of Congress are
necessary to continue to enforce that, should new forms of slavery arise or the
definitions somehow transgress ancient fashion. In fact the blanket Fifth
section of the Fourteenth clearly prescribes that any future conflicts with any
of the lettered parts be legislated by Congress. Section Three's requirement
concerning Seditionists and Insurrectionists was not a dead letter.
Further, elements of The Subject
in fact coordinated the J6 events, with Donald J. Trump honorary spokesperson and guest lecturer. He provided
aid and comfort
to
domestic terrorists. (
My original response.)
He is guilty.
So, Voters, I round towards my conclusions. Please be aware that The Subject
will probably, even after appeal, be a convicted NY fraudster, possible
convicted felon, possibly forced off ballots by honest operation of law, by the
time we go to the National Polls, all because he did some bad things. Is this
who you want representing our great nation?
Now we are witnessing how Society operates in a lawful, orderly, and self
executionary manner.
Thank the Supreme Court for accepting, please consider the above logic from 'the
street.'
Please, voters and citizens from states who have already experienced the
fraudsters-- AZ, GA, MI, NV, PA, WI, et. al.
"Trump rigged the 2016 elections;" Those who are the early
voters-- IA, NH, SC, NV, Virgin Islands, MI, ID, MO, et. al.
"Trump tried to steal the 2020 election;" Fellow Voters,
please, consider anybody's Adminsitration other than The Subject,
"Trump wants to become a fascist dictator! Watch out he may try to steal or rig again, and probably will not accept the
results if he loses fairly!!"
Or, in plainest English, even though this isn't exactly how it works, but to the
Supreme Court, too, "Vote 'No' on Trump."
Or as one little American
soccer player once chanted to me "No Emperors, No Kings, that's just the way of
things!" I have great hope in the future, as the self-evidentuary nature of good
sportsmanship and the results of good teamwork will in the end win.
Courtesy Stephen Colbert, his copyrights on this image
