Our 2020 Reichstag Moment

J-6 and all that jazz

Agamben wrote and I think it frames my questions well -

A jurist whom I once had some esteem, in an article just published in an aligned newspaper, tries to justify with arguments that would like to be legal the state of exception once again declared by the government. Taking up again without confessing the Schmittian distinction between the commissary dictatorship, which aims to preserve or restore the current constitution, and the sovereign dictatorship which instead aims to establish a new order, the jurist distinguishes between emergency and exception (or, as it would be more precise, between state of emergency and state of exception). The argument actually has no basis in law, since no constitution can foresee its legitimate subversion. For this reason, with good reason in his writing on political theology, which contains the famous definition of the sovereign as the one "who decides on the state of exception", Schmitt simply speaks of Ausnahmezustand , "state of exception", which in the German doctrine and also outside it has imposed itself as a technical term to define this land of no one between the juridical order and the political fact and between the law and its suspension.

Tracing the first Schmittian distinction, the jurist affirms that the emergency is conservative, while the exception is innovative. "The emergency is used to return to normality as soon as possible, the exception is instead used to break the rule and impose a new order". The state of emergency "presupposes the stability of a system", "the exception, on the contrary, its undoing which opens the way to a different system".

The distinction is, according to all evidence, political and sociological and refers to a judgment of personal evaluation on the state of affairs of the system in question, on its stability or on its disintegration and on the intentions of those who have the power to decree a suspension of the law. which, from the juridical point of view, is substantially identical, because in both cases it is resolved in the pure and simple suspension of the constitutional guarantees. Whatever its purposes, which no one can claim to assess with certainty, the state of exception is only one and, once declared, no instance is envisaged that has the power to verify the reality or gravity of the conditions that have it determined. It is no coincidence that the jurist has to write at some point: "That today we are facing a health emergency seems indubitable to me." A subjective judgment, curiously issued by someone who cannot claim any medical authority, and to which it is possible to oppose others certainly more authoritative, especially since he admits that "discordant voices come from the scientific community", and that therefore it is ultimately to decide request those who have the power to decree the emergency. The state of emergency, he continues, unlike that of exception, which includes indeterminate powers, "includes only the powers aimed at the predetermined purpose of returning to normality" and yet, he immediately concedes, such powers "cannot be specified in advance" . It is not necessary to have a great legal culture to realize that,

The jurist's argument is doubly specious, because not only does it introduce as juridical a distinction that is not such, but, in order to justify at all costs the state of exception decreed by the government, he is forced to resort to factual and questionable arguments that go beyond his skills. And this is all the more surprising, since he should know that, in what is for him only a state of emergency, constitutional rights and guarantees have been suspended and violated that had never been questioned, not even during the two world wars. and fascism; and that this is not a temporary situation is strongly affirmed by the rulers themselves, who never tire of repeating that the virus not only has not disappeared, but can reappear at any moment.

It is, perhaps, for a residue of intellectual honesty, that, at the end of the article, the jurist mentions the opinion of those who "not without good arguments, maintain that, regardless of the virus, the whole world still lives more or less permanently in a state of exception "and that" the socio-economic system of capitalism "is unable to face its crises with the apparatus of the rule of law. In this perspective, he concedes that "the pandemic infection of the virus that holds entire societies in check is a coincidence and an unforeseen opportunity, to be seized to keep the submissive population under control". It is legitimate to invite him to reflect more carefully on the state of the society in which he lives and to remember that jurists are not alone, as they have unfortunately been for some time now,

My thought continues since J-6 2020 to ask Why will the Coup end? What force can end the Coup? How does the Coup arise only to go away 4 years later? Where is evidence the Coup is leaving even with Jill Biden presiding? Who is in charge to leave? Not the VP who is a candidate for the Presidency. Not Big Nurse Jill speaking for Dementia Joe, once the elected head of the Asylum on the Potomac, to polite applause of a Cabinet busy dismantling of the stage set for the award winning Presidential movie Can’t Even Remember My Name. WHAT is this process of changing power called an Election since the officers of soldiers are with the Democrats? JillJoe Biden (At the heart of First Lady Jill Biden, PhD, and President Joe Biden's marriage is genuine friendship, says intuitive astrologer Rachel Lang.) and 4 Cabinet members are President. The Vice President running for the Executive office is out of the loop since Jill Biden has taken her place.

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/silent-insurrection-general-milleys-hand-january-6

Democrats grew anxious as over 140 House Republicans planned to contest the election results during the electoral college certification that day. Milley was then deeply engaged with a circle of confidants including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer, former Obama National Security Advisor Susan Rice, and former Defense Secretary Robert Gates, among others—all of whom shared a unified disdain for President Donald Trump.

At a House Oversight Committee hearing in April addressing the 3-hour and 19-minute delay in mobilizing the D.C. National Guard on January 6, Colonel Earl Matthews, one of four Department of Defense witnesses, testified about an “irrational” fear among a “clique” of senior military officers concerning the potential misuse of the National Guard by the president. He indicated that these concerns were influenced behind the scenes by Milley, who often made disparaging remarks about the president and regularly referred to his fear of a so-called potential “Reichstag moment.”

Then from a view of money self organizing like a parasite in a host

In 1860 – Congress was adjourned Sine Die – Lincoln could not legally reconvene Congress.

In 1861, President Lincoln declared a National Emergency and Martial Law, which gave the President unprecedented powers and removed it from the other branches. This has NEVER been reversed. 

In 1863, the Lieber Code was established taking away your property and your rights. 

From 1864-1867, Several Reconstruction Acts were passed forcing the states to ratify the 14th Amendment, which made everyone slaves.

In 1865, the capital was moved to Washington, D.C., a separate country – not a part of the United States of America.

In 1871,The United States became a Corporation with a new constitution and a new corporate government, and the original constitutional government was vacated to become dormant, but it was never terminated. The new constitution had to be ratified by the people according to the original constitution, but it never was. The whole process occurred behind closed doors. The people are the source of financing for this new government.

In 1917, the Trading with the Enemy Act (TWEA) was passed. “This act was implemented to deal with the countries we were at war with during World War I. It gave the President and the Alien Property Custodian the right to seize the assets of the people included in this act and if they wanted to do business in this country they could apply for a license to do so. By 1921, the Federal Reserve Bank (the trustee for the Alien Property Custodian) held over $700,000,000 in trust. ”Understand that this trust was based on our assets, not theirs. 

In 1933, 48 Stat 1, of the TWEA was amended to include the United States Person because they wanted to take our gold away. Executive Order 6102 was created to make it illegal for a U.S. Citizen to own gold. In order for the Government to take our gold away and violate our Constitutional rights, we were reclassified as ENEMY COMBATANTS.” 

In 1933, there was a second United States bankruptcy. In the first bankruptcy the United States collateralized all public lands. In the 1933 bankruptcy, the U.S. government collateralized the private lands of the people (a lien) – they borrowed money against our private lands. They were then mortgaged. That is why we pay property taxes.

From a speech in Congress in The Bankruptcy of the United States Congressional Record, March 17, 1993, Vol. 33, page H-1303, Speaker Representative James Anthony Traficant Jr. (Ohio) addressing the House states: “...It  is an established fact that the United States Federal Government has been dissolved by the Emergency Banking Act, March 9, 1933, 48 Stat. 1, Public Law 89-719; declared by President Roosevelt, being bankrupt and insolvent. H.J.R. 192, 73rd Congress m session June 5, 1933 Joint Resolution to Suspend the Gold Standard and Abrogate the Gold Clause dissolved the Sovereign Authority of the United States and the official capacities of all United States Governmental Offices, Officers, and Departments and is further evidence that the United States Federal Government exists today in name only.

The receivers of the United States Bankruptcy are the International Bankers, via the United Nations, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. All United States Offices, Officials, and Departments are now operating within a de facto status in name only under Emergency War Powers. With the Constitutional Republican form of Government now dissolved, the receivers of the Bankruptcy have adopted a new form of government for the United States.