Gog and Magog

Supreme Court Says Bribery is Fine

Over the past several years I’ve bemoaned the fact that virtually not a day goes by where my faith in Humanity isn’t shaken to the core.  Each morning when I read the headlines that the Main Stream Media won’t touch, I shake my head and pinch myself to make sure I’m not hallucinating.  99 out of 100 times, I’m not.

This week is no different.  Coming off the Orlando shooting, and then the startling news that the Brexit vote was allowed to take place and the “leave” vote was actually successful, one might expect a lull in the news stream. NOPE.  The headlines are still coming fast and furious.  So let’s start with the Supreme Court.

Bob McDonell was elected Governor of Virginia and took office in 2010. In January of 2014 McDonnel and his wife, Maureen, were indicted on federal corruption charges for receiving improper gifts and loans from a Virginia businessman. They were convicted on most counts by a federal jury on September 4, 2014. McDonnell, the first Virginia governor to be indicted or convicted of a felony, was sentenced on January 6, 2015 to two years in prison, followed by two years of supervised release. He has been free on bond during the appeals process, which upheld his convictions on July 10, 2015.

The Supreme court took up his case on the basis of asking a question most of us would instantly know the answer to…should it be legal for Politicians to take bribes and then repay those bribes with favors that the office could provide?  Most of you would say “Hell no!”.  But not our Supreme Court. Oh no indeed. They overturned McDonnel’s conviction.

Governor Robert McDonnell accepted nearly $200,000 in cash and luxury goods, including a Rolex watch and flights in a private jet, in exchange for using the Governor’s office to help a business. The Supreme Court today held that although the Governor and his aides took action-with state resources-on behalf of the business, those actions do not go far enough to constitute ‘official actions’ without prosecutors proving still more, creating an additional hurdle before corrupt conduct is considered illegal,” explains Noah Bookbinder, the executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW). “This narrow reading of the law will seriously impede law enforcement’s efforts to clamp down on corruption. The Supreme Court essentially just told elected officials that they are free to sell access to their office to the highest bidder. If you want the government to listen to you, you had better be prepared to pay up.”

We’re very disappointed that the court took such a narrow view of what amounts to bribery under the law,” says Scott Nelson, an attorney who did the legal work on an exceptionally strong amicus brief that was filed in regard to the McDonnell case by Public Citizen and Democracy 21. “This ruling opens the way for corporate executives and wealthy individuals to undermine our democracy by buying influence at the state level.”

So there ya have it folks. Another absolutely insane ruling by our Supreme Court which allows money to funnel into political coffers for the sole reason as to repay those bribes with special favors. Why do you think they ruled like that?  I’ll tell you exactly why… HILLARY.

There’s books and movies flying all over the place about Hillary and her so called foundation. There’s direct links between foreign nationals giving her foundation millions and then those very nations getting special deals, especially out of the State Department.  This ruling is nothing more than laying a precedent they can point to, when it becomes abundantly clear to all that Hillary used the State Department as her own little playground, and the Foundation as the money sponge.  When the scope of it is finally realized there’s going to be calls for her indictment over such things. Yet they’ll use the McDonnel ruling to show that it’s okay to take “gifts” and even influence specific business deals because of them.

Can you believe it?  I can. Now do you see why Justice Scalia just happened to die?  Antonin Scalia would NOT have let McDonnel’s case be overturned. So, he had to go.  “They” knew that if they got rid of Scalia, there’d be a chance to put in another puppet Justice, one that would not allow a movement on Obama care, abortion and especially immigration.   Consider the questions that the Washington Post put out on February 15th…

You have a Supreme Court Justice who died, not in attendance of a physician. You have a non-homicide trained US Marshal tell the justice of peace that no foul play was observed. You have a justice of the peace pronounce death while not being on the scene and without any medical training opining that the justice died of a heart attack. What medical proof exists of a myocardial Infarction? Why not a cerebral hemorrhage?”

“How can the Marshal say, without a thorough post mortem, that he was not injected with an illegal substance that would simulate a heart attack…”
“Did the US Marshal check for petechial hemorrhage in his eyes or under his lips that would have suggested suffocation? Did the US Marshal smell his breath for any unusual odor that might suggest poisoning? My gut tells me there is something fishy going on in Texas.”

As if that wasn’t enough to explode my head, we see an article out of the “Express” which is one of the UK’s biggest daily papers saying that through secret negotiations, the foreign ministers of France and Germany are due to reveal a blueprint to effectively do away with individual member states in what is being described as an “ultimatum”. Under the radical proposals EU countries will lose the right to have their own army, criminal law, taxation system or central bank, with all those powers being transferred to Brussels.

The EU was the elitist socialists test tube. They wanted to show the world that things work better from a central command, where individual states lose their sovereignty. Their desire for it to stay together is very strong, and with the UK voting to leave, you can bet on a few things. First they’ll punish Britain as hard as they can. Then they’ll provoke them by basically saying “Look at what you fools did in the name of so called Freedom. You’ve ruined yourselves”. Meanwhile they will try and cobble the EU together as a STATE.  Yes, you read that right. They’re going to say that MORE control is the solution to things. I’ve listened to Guy Verhofstadt who is a Belgium liberal, tell the EU in Brussels that they need to make the EU into its own state, with its own ARMY.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TRetILyYgyoa

 
Basically they’re trying to push the idea that Brussels didn’t have enough control over the member nations  and it was because of that lack of TOTAL control, they have the issues they have.  May you live in interesting times, comes to mind.
We’re going to see a push-pull across Europe like we haven’t seen before. The “people” of many of these nations are going to want independence, and the “leaders” are going to push for an ever more controlled “State”.

There are other headlines I could comment about, but my mind is already blown for this letter. Just understand that for what ever reason, the year 2016 and going into 2017 has the ability to bring us some tremendous upheaval. I’d say we’re well on our way.  Be safe.