MEGATRENDS: Legal Opinion:    
 Legal Opinion:0 comments
4. There are specific reports about the deep involvement of (not only) American banks in the money laundering industry. Perhaps the largest such entity (in the successorship of BCCI) is AIG (American International Group), the world’s largest insurance conglomerate based in New York. See report by this author at


including details how the criminal elite had its hands in profiteering in the magnitude of several billion dollars from its precise pre-knowledge of the staged inside terror attacks

(for this aspect, see the entire site [link])

on September 11, 2001.


5. It is a carefully hidden secret of the legal profession to what great extent American district attorneys and judges (at the state and the federal levels) are dependent on fixers in the political establishment. Other cultures describe such structures with the word „corruption”. In other words, the notions of „independent courts” and the „rule of law” are not more than myths. The reality of the matter is that the „rule of law” derived from British legal theory has been subverted and perverted into a rule of thuggery and crime.

6. The terrorism we are witnessing is synthetic and self-made by uncontrolled intelligence agencies and their myriad interconnections with global crime. See

? Tarpley, Webster G., 9/11 Synthetic Terror, Terror Made In USA, The Myth of the 21st Century, 2005

7. The seedbed for terrorism is the terroristic perversion of law into crime in the American Empire. This is a seedbed that has been carefully cultivated by legions of treacherous lawyers for over a century.

8. The procedural principle behind the law of the opium republic is „plea bargaining” and the right of the prosecutor to „nol pros” (i.e. to not prosecute) crimes. The prosecution of crimes is highly selective, targeting minorities and drug end users and protecting the governing elite and global drug pushers such as, reportedly, Carlyle Group and the alleged Bush-Clinton Crime Syndicate.

9. The entire system of appointments, promotions and loyalties is 100% politically controlled. There is to all practical effect no controlling independent decision-making personnel in the court systems of the U.S.A. including the highest court, the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington, D. C.

10. Since its creation in 1870 under President Grant during that ultra-Republican era, the U.S. Justice Department has had the partisan function of a private law firm in the disguise of a public agency working for the benefit of the ruling moneyed elite. This role first became manifest to history during the period of the great strikes that lasted until President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s „New Deal”.

11. This was a now mostly forgotten period when the U.S.A. was torn in a bloody class war lasting for decades almost like South Africa was more recently torn by apartheid. It was the time of forging the high plutocracy as America’s governing force behind the curtain of ancient democracy. The result were the present American courts of plutocracy with secret strings and trap doors – not in the books.


12. The partisan plutocrat role of the U.S. Justice Department persists until today and has merely grown more and more extreme, to the point of subverting the U.S. Constitution through the legal back door of protecting insidious and treasonable government crime in the highest places.

13. The plutocracy itself has gradually turned away from legitimate business and has adopted the noxious practices that have brought all empires down – crimes of the worst proportion, such as global narcotics trade, arms trade, war mongering, the laundering of trillions of blood money every year through banks, insurances, the Pentagon black budget.

14. Politicians with their need for hundreds of millions $$ of „campaign financing” are pawns in the game of the global elite. The principle of democracy is played in the long-term favor of the moneyed elite alone.

15. The American legal system especially holds politicians who play the game exempt and immune from any meaningful criminal prosecution. These politicians are, in substance, not democratic for they are like princes of old who were not accountable to their citizens.

16. President Nixon tried to stop criminal prosecution against him for the Watergate affair by firing the special prosecutor Archibald Cox. Then, however, Nixon could no longer keep up with the pressure and resigned from office. As a result of this experience, Congress passed a law providing for an „Independent Counsel”. Much has been written about this law. Kenneth Starr (a nephew of one of the founders of the reported AIG-CIA money laundering empire and corporate counsel of alleged Clinton bribers such as the Lippo Group) let himself be used to make a farce of this law and the institution of the Independent Counsel. The law thus was not extended and expired in 1999. This brought a fatal tendency in the American legal development to a head. The law itself was brilliant and would have been highly successful – if it were not for the corrupt clique into whose hands the execution of the law was given.

17. At the end of the Clinton era, an audit reported in December 2000 revealed that several trillion (yes, tr…) U.S. dollars were missing from the Pentagon budget. There is strong suspicion that this money was embezzled over years from the American people by their alleged worst enemy, the reported Bush-Clinton Drug & Crime Empire. No prosecutor has ever given a hoot for this, which is a scandal that is as huge as it is under-reported. Instead, tens of millions of $$ were spent for a dead-end sham prosecution of Clinton’s trumped-up sex scandal.

18. There is a key distinction of constitutional value: Whether the head of state is beneath or above the laws. The traditional constitution of the U.S.A. used to be that the Presidents are subject to the law. Since the Bush-Clinton-Bush era, it appears that this constitutional key factor has reversed; and now the President is above the law like an emperor. In European constitutional dogma this is termed „absolutism”.

19. The American experiment seems to show that absolutism of this type is compatible with democratic elections. The only requirement is that the candidates are fixed (Bush-Kerry) and the election methods are rigged (in 2000 and 2004).


40. In this situation since 2003, there is a test case: The Valerie Plame leak case under supervision of a Special Prosecutor (note: not an „Independent Counsel” under the expired statute) in Chicago, U.S. District Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois Patrick Fitzgerald.

41. There are jurisdictional objections that prosecuting a sitting president violates the Constitution because the Constitution limits proceedings to impeachment only; and only once a president is impeached can he be made subject to a regular grand jury proceeding.

42. In the case of George W. Bush, this argument may not hold water since it is doubtful to say the least whether George W. Bush was ever elected as President in accordance with the Constitution, and especially if he was elected in 2004. It is to my mind quite evident that Bush was not the winner of the 2004 elections, and that he is a pretender in the White House without viable standing in constitutional law as a „President”. This could be a workable and valid rebuttal to any and all constitutional objections per the foregoing; and it could well be Bush’s downfall if that is what America’s owners and hidden oligarchs want.

43. Details of the grand jury proceedings in Chicago are just slowly transpiring. It will be interesting to watch this case develop as a case with major constitutional ramifications in light of all of the above.

44. Legally, it would be simple for the President to replace the Special Prosecutor with a candidate of his liking (not an „Independent Counsel” per the expired law). The central question is whether Bush will get permission to do this or not.

45. The fact that the prosecution exists would tend to indicate that Bush will not get permission of intervene. That assumption raises the question if Bush would become a rebellious stooge, and what might happen then. We shall see as the case unfolds.

46. We rest assured that the true holders of power will never face a court, in keeping with the unwritten law of American history. If this expectation were to be disappointed then we would be living through events worth the name „revolutionary”. Such court will be that of public opinion, if any.



Your Name:
Your URL: (or email)
For verification, please type the word you see on the left:

[< Back] [MEGATRENDS] [PermaLink]?