A legal eagle thread

Okay. I'll play, but I won't sugarcoat the law for you. Let's look at the way things really are versus what you've been taught. For example, if you went to school they told you there are three separate, co - equal branches of the government: Executive, Legislative and Judicial. B.S. There are many branches of the government and other entities that govern your life. Here is a sampling:

Executive - Executes the laws - Presidents and governors are executive officials
Legislative - "Congress" which is the Senate and the House of Representatives - Collectively they are called "Congress," but members of the House are referred to as your congressman / congresswoman / congressperson (depending upon what it PC at the time)
Judicial - Judges and the judicial branch has the trial courts, courts of appeal and the United States Supreme Court

Then you have the REAL players in the game:

The News and Entertainment Media - The news and entertainment media develop headlines for the politicians to respond to then the news and entertainment media create the characters that vie for your votes and / or support / attention The news and entertainment is the political propaganda arm of the government

Regulatory Agencies - While federal regulatory agencies are supposed to come under the purview of the President of the United States, the only power a president usually extends is to go through the motions of appointing the officers of such agencies. After that the regulatory agencies pass their own laws, create their own standards and prosecute people according to those laws - which are written by people you and I did not vote for and who are not accountable to the electorate.

Private Companies - There are private corporations that the government contracts with and those entities create their own laws, have their own courts and operate above the government of the United States. One such example is the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). The IRS is a private collection agency that collects "taxes" from the subjects inside the United States. Their only client is the United States government, but it is such a complex clusterph^(%, it would take a thread just to understand how they operate.

In short these are but a few of the things one would need in order to understand the laws of this country.

In order to explain that you, you have to understand how the courts are set up.  Whether state or federal, the hierarchy is about the same.  You have:

Trial courts

Courts of Appeals (Appellate courts)

Supreme Court


Whether civil or criminal courts they follow that general hierarchy.  A case begins in a trial court and once appealed, it goes to an appeals court and if one party or another wants to appeal that, it goes to a supreme court.  To make this more understandable I will concentrate on the federal level since that is what is most relevant.  Here is a link to understanding the federal courts:

www.justice.gov/usao/justice-101/federal-courts
  

All of us need to check in a few times every month to see how this thread is progressing for those who want to know how to really do legal research. Many of you have NO IDEA how many trolls there are that think they understand legal research, but argue way out of their league and mislead a lot of people.

In the judicial system, there are different tiers of courts whether we talk state or federal level. Trial courts and the places where lawsuits and prosecutions begin. Either side can appeal to an appeals court and, if a federal / constitutional issue is to be decided, it can ultimately end up in the United States Supreme Court regardless of whether the original suit or prosecution started out in state or federal court. The United States has original jurisdiction in a limited number of instances and those can be found in the United States Constitution, Article III Section 2. Simple enough? It wasn't for me either when I first began learning this stuff.

Rather than give you a wall of text, this link will tell most of what you need to know:

people.howstuffworks.com/judicial-system.htm

Thank you for weighing in on this. I have to be at work shortly, but I'm going to try and make a point here:

It is imperative that all of those who hope to make some kind of difference understand the basics of the law and history. In the first place you have disinformation agents that will work on you from a psychological perspective, always trying to get you indoctrinated into NEW WORLD ORDER ideology. If you aren't as smart as they are when it comes to understanding BASICS, then have the advantage in both converting you and also making you look bad in any exchanges you have with them when you try to help educate the public.

From an understanding point of view: It is necessary to have a proper world perspective on our laws and to know how our system of jurisprudence came to be so that you can follow the progression of our downfall. It will also help you to understand the strategies used by the enemies of America as they tear down our Republic. Just as Satan knows how to quote, misquote and misapply Scripture in order to corrupt people, so do the enemies of America know how to B.S. their way through this subject to con you into working against your own best interests.

From a legal point of view: It is necessary to understand what constitutes best evidence in order to have a firm grounding in what should be legal in order to promulgate a coherent legal argument. Knowing the proper things about history will help you understand how the enemies of America deliberately corrupted our form of government. I'd like to quote a couple of founders on how you should apply an understanding of the law:

"The unity of government which constitutes you one people is also now dear to you. It is justly so, for it is a main pillar in the edifice of your real independence, the support of your tranquility at home, your peace abroad; of your safety; of your prosperity; of that very liberty which you so highly prize. But as it is easy to foresee that, from different causes and from different quarters, much pains will be taken, many artifices employed to weaken in your minds the conviction of this truth; as this is the point in your political fortress against which the batteries of internal and external enemies will be most constantly and actively (though often covertly and insidiously) directed, ... If, in the opinion of the people, the distribution or modification of the constitutional powers be in any particular wrong, let it be corrected by an amendment in the way which the Constitution designates. But let there be no change by usurpation; for though this, in one instance, may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed. The precedent must always greatly overbalance in permanent evil any partial or transient benefit, which the use can at any time yield." George Washington in his Farewell Address

billofrightsinstitute.org/primary-sources/washingtons-farewell-address

"On every question of construction, carry ourselves back to the time when the constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed." Thomas Jefferson in a private letter

teachingamericanhistory.org/document/letter-to-justice-william-johnson/

I'll resume this thread later if there are some views on the counter to justify continuing.