Our English correspondent Seneca III was present at the trial of Tommy Robinson last Thursday. Below is his report.
The Trial of Stephen Yaxley-Lennon
by Seneca III
Preamble
In fully-fledged Police States where the Law, Civil or Criminal, is whatever the ruling Junta says it is there is no right of access to fair and impartial legal processes. There is only a perverted form of ‘justice’ designed for and used in the public show trials of ‘Enemies of the State’.
The principal control mechanisms of such State entities really are simple and straightforward — physical brutality, including torture, arbitrary incarceration and summary execution — and the concealment thereof is generally and with deliberate intent quite minimal — universal public knowledge thereof serves to frighten and intimidate the subject population so that it submits to and obeys the diktats of the ruling entity, thus precluding protest or counter-action.
However in embryonic, quasi-Police States, such as are now in the latter stages of their gestation all across the West — particularly within that inappropriately named behemoth, the European Union — lip service still has to be paid to the remnants of the original, idealised concept of one Rule of Law for all. Up to now this lip service, whilst being nothing more than comforting noises designed to conceal a real and different intent, has been paid quite subtly so that in general its common purpose (no pun intended) has slipped below the conceptual radar of the body politic.
Now, fortunately, in one revealing moment this intent has, perhaps out of a hubris generated by the past successes of its implementers, stumbled into the open, its methodology glaringly exposed. In this demonstration of its reality we saw how ‘Political Correctness’, together with the latter’s bastard spawn ‘Islamophobia’ and ‘Racism’, rides roughshod over our ancient rights and freedoms on a deceptive tide of faux self-righteousness. Now many more of us have at last awoken to the deep and abiding threat posed by this, ‘The New World Order Project’, as it approaches its apogee.
But, still, at least for the moment, the Iron Fist of the ruling elite continues to strike — mostly whilst covered with its ever-thinning velvet glove of dissimulating legality. Thus the Junta’s apparatchiks and enforcers must, at least when exposed to public scrutiny, be seen to function within the existing legal framework of the State, within the power-limiting — and to them annoying — constraints of its statutes. Those statutes oblige them to impartially and openly serve the commonalty as a whole without fear or favour, rather than from behind a veil of smoke and mirrors. And they failed this day because they had tried to cross what became a bridge too far for them — a bridge that was at last properly defended.
Hence, on the morning of the 14th of April, 2016, during the trial of Mr. Stephen Yaxley-Lennon and the consequent public exposure therein of the series events leading up to his prosecution (or, as his Counsel, Mr. Richard Kovalevsky QC, so eloquently put it, “This preposterous prosecution!”) we were given a short but definitive peek behind the veil and were able to cast our eyes upon the draconian future so long planned for us in the venal corridors of power.
It was there that day that the establishment’s long exercised practice of first ridiculing, then demonising and then destroying those who would protest or resist their social re-engineering was clearly seen in all of the gruesome reality of its final phase.
A Magistrates’ Court
For the benefit of non-British readers and those who are British but are unfamiliar with HMCS (Her Majesty’s Court Service) I offer a brief résumé of the structure and functions of English and Welsh Magistrates’ Courts (Scotland does it a little differently).
A Magistrates’ Court is a lower court and cases are heard by a bench of three, sometimes two, unpaid lay judges (JPs) — they are named after their original forbears who were charged with keeping the sovereign’s peace — or by a paid District Judge (a DJ), normally an experienced professional lawyer. JPs are nonetheless extensively well=trained, monitored and mentored throughout their early tenure and are chosen from local citizens of good character.
The lead Magistrate, known as the Chairman, is addressed in court as ‘sir’ or ‘madam’ and the magistrates collectively as ‘your worships’. The other two magistrates are known as ‘wingers’. All decisions are made collectively. The Chairman’s opinions carry equal weight with the other two, although in court the latter remain silent unless asked a question by the Chairman, to which they reply quietly into his ear behind a covering palm. The Chairman is the only one who asks questions of members the legal teams and addresses and directs the body of the court in general. Also present is a Clerk of the Court who is a qualified solicitor or barrister and sits immediately below the bench facing the courtroom, and whose function is to offer to the bench advice on points of law.
Peterborough Magistrates Court is a modern purpose-built construct and the layout of its courtrooms are illustrated in the sketch (from memory) below. In their own way these rooms do give a small clue as to the changing face of due process, and readers might care to note that the public gallery is situated in the far rear of the courtroom, separated from the main room and fronted by heavy glass panels with only a narrow air/sound gap around them, rather than, as in the past as I best remember (in higher courts), open and to one side thus giving interested observers and the Press a lateral, panoramic audio-visual field view of the proceedings. (To my mind this arrangement is but another tiny, almost insignificant blow to the concept of open justice — or perhaps I’m just being my normal paranoid self )
Key:
| A. | Magistrates’ retiring room. | |
| B. | Bench; M = Magistrate. | |
| C. | Witness box. Not used during this case as the Prosecution failed to produce any and it thus came down to a matter of conflicting legal arguments. | |
| D. | Clerk of the Court. | |
| E. | Defence Counsel. | |
| F. | Crown Prosecutor. | |
| G. | Defendant. | |
| H. | Assistant Defence Counsel | |
| I. | Public gallery. The seats small, folding and far more tightly packed together than illustrated. | |
| J. | Other court functionaries — Usher(s), Probation Officers and companions to minors etc. |
The trial
Caveat: I have a hearing problem (often known as ‘Gunners Ear’, and no derogatory interpretations of that phrase, if you please, or the Baron will apply his red pen with gay abandon) and even with my electronic ones stuffed in and wound up full chat I had great difficulty in following the verbal side of the proceedings coming through the thoroughly irritating little gap between the glass panels. Consequently most of the time I had to fall back on lip reading what the Chairman was saying, from a distance, and the occasional few words of other participants that came through, and also to reading their (rear) body language, which was very informative in ways perhaps not available to the aurally functional. Fortunately a nice young woman sitting next to me was kind enough to summarise the proceedings during the break we had whilst the bench was retired considering its verdict, and again when the trial concluded. So, whoever you are and should you come to read this report, I thank you once again for your most helpful courtesy.
That said, I obviously cannot claim to be quoting precisely and with absolute confidence what was actually said in Court that day. I must paraphrase what I think I heard, added to what I was told, and so this section of the report is but a brief collection of impressions thus garnered from several sources.
0915hrs: I arrived early anticipating a need to be in line for one of the limited number of seats in the public gallery, as I was expecting a crowd of Mr. Lennon’s supporters and a substantial media scrum. Of the former there were about a dozen and of the latter, with one exception I was possibly able to identify (Breitbart London’s Liam Deacon?), there were none!
0940hrs: Defence Counsel, Mr. Kovalevsky QC, and Mr. Lennon arrived. Mr. Kovalevsky was wheeling a large black carrier, which I presumed to contain the copious documentation (his brief) which he had prepared in order to present his case (see later) and after depositing this inside the courtroom he and his client disappeared into one of the consulting rooms.
0940-1125hrs: Much toing and froing — the Usher, two young women who were obviously either solicitors or barristers smartly dressed in virtually all black outfits and Mr. Kovalevsky in his pinstripe suit — this was not a County, Crown or High Court where Judges, Counsel and court officials are bewigged and robed (a much more intimidating atmosphere than in a Magistrate’s Court, I can assure you).
1125hrs: Public gallery opened and was mostly filled.
1130hrs: “All rise!” as the bench entered, seated themselves and then invited the court to do the same. Proceedings began.
1130hrs-1220hrs: Proceedings opened with the Crown Prosecutor stating the charge and outlining her case. Then Defence rose and spoke — I could not hear the plea given on Mr. Lennon’ behalf (he was never called upon to testify or speak for himself throughout the proceedings) but I presume it was ‘Not Guilty’.
Then I noticed that on Mr. Kovalevsky’s side of the table there were neatly arranged piles of paperwork, whilst in front of the Crown Prosecutor there was a small pile of papers that I presumed had come from what looked the file folder she had earlier carried in with her. To my simple mind the difference between the two sets of paperwork indicated extensive preparation on one side and possible overconfidence on the other. This opinion was later reinforced by the number of times she had to borrow and refer to paperwork from the Defence, and to which it had been referring. The bench certainly already held copies to which to refer, but how they were obtained I do not know.
Also, as I could not hear the verbal quotations from and the nature of these documents, I have no idea whether or not she should have been handed copies prior to the case, or that these documents were in fact concerning legal matters which she, with due diligence (rather than with establishment disinterest in such?), should herself have considered whilst preparing her case.
The case continued and what came out time and time again was that during his last ‘incarceration’ Mr. Lennon had repeatedly asked of the prison authorities that he be placed in solitary confinement because he feared for his life (summary execution?) at the hands of the Muslim prisoners, many of whom were serving life for murder and had nothing to lose, that this request was repeatedly denied him by the prison authorities, and he was locked alone in a wing and a cell with violent Muslims who were preparing to ‘napalm’ him — prison slang for a face full of boiling sugar water (torture, by non-State surrogates?) — and that he was forced to fight, in self-defence, for his sight and perhaps his life.
Furthermore it came out that at the time this ‘assault’ was investigated by the prison authorities and a decision not to take the matter any further — fear of their own complicity in this State-sponsored campaign to rid itself of this turbulent peasant, probably. Also it was revealed that after his release this incident was again investigated by other authorities, and it was again decided not to prosecute — possibly for the same reasons. Only later, when he appeared as a co-leader of the British branch of PEGIDA, was this current scurrilous prosecution launched.
These discussions continued for some time, together with contributions from the Clerk of the Court and questions from the Chairman, and eventually we came to the closing stages. I think the prosecution asked for an adjournment in order to be able to present evidence that the chairman obviously thought should have been presented in the first case. As best I could make out this revolved around information which Defence had rightly requested of the Crown and which had been promised by the latter, but was never forthcoming.
The Chairman repeatedly asked the Prosecutor for a binding commitment that if he did adjourn the court for this reason, said paperwork/evidence would be forthcoming from the Crown Prosecution Service. By this point it was evident to me from her body language that the crown Prosecutor was either unable to give this commitment, was being evasive or was agitated, confused, embarrassed or completely at her wits’ end — or several or all of those things.
Eventually, at 1220hrs-ish, perhaps in frustration at the fact the case was going nowhere, the Chairman closed the trial, the Court rose and the Magistrates retired to consider their judgement — Case Adjourned or Case Dismissed?
1300hrs: Court re-convened. After a short explanation or comment that I did not follow the Chairman declared ‘Case Dismissed’! There was a short, loud cry of joy from the public gallery as we all rose to leave but the Chairman kindly asked us to reseat ourselves, as Defence had subsequently requested that the court award costs. After a few minutes of discussion, with the Clerk of the Court contributing advice from what I suspect was Case Law, costs were awarded. I was/am not aware whether these were partial or in full as we then rose and left for the last time.
It was over, and the relief on Tommy’s face was palpable.
Afterwords and afterthoughts
As I left the court I had to stop off at security to pick up my pocket camera which had been politely confiscated during the entry body search. I found this rather odd as I and everyone else had been permitted to keep their camera-mounted mobile phones with them, although it was a requirement that they be switched off in the courtrooms proper, but not in the general environs. As I was retrieving my camera one of the security guards asked me what the verdict had been and I replied “Case dismissed with costs awarded.” The guard turned towards a colleague and they both quietly smiled at each — a revealing moment indeed.
Secondly, I had arrived at court that morning under a dark, drizzly overcast. When I departed I walked out into bright sunshine and I couldn’t help but think someone else might be smiling on us that day.
Finally, as one of my esteemed stoic namesakes, Marcus Aurelius Seneca II, once said — “You cannot enslave a man who is prepared to die.” I am of the opinion that if enough of us adopted that stance it wouldn’t be too long before we had the establishment ‘bastardi’ firmly by their ‘testibulae’, and we could then settle their hash once and for all.
— Seneca III, Middle England, and in a cheerful mood for once on this Ides of April 2016.
Addendum
When the word first came out that Tommy was to be charged I commented on the fact that it was curious that the powers that be had denied his request that he be tried by a jury of his peers and assigned the case to a lower court instead.
Upon reflection I suspected that such things are not done by accident or out of any sense of justice or compassion but always for reasons advantageous to the (hidden?) objectives of the State and detrimental to the accused, so I decided to look deeper into this.
And, lo and behold! it eventuates that guilty convictions by Magistrates’ courts run around the 98% mark whilst those of trial by juries around the 80%. Furthermore lower courts attract far less media attention and reporting (normally only from the local press) than higher courts which in part may account for the notable absence of the ‘Fourth Estate’ in Peterborough on Friday.
Also, in Magistrates’ Courts offenders are normally represented by solicitors, friends or, foolishly, themselves, and lower court benches rarely have to make judgement in the face of the legal expertise of a Silk.
Indeed the Junta’s apparatchiks were looking to quietly take game, set and match well out of the public eye, and they almost succeeded.
Seneca III 17 April 2016 A.D.
For links to previous essays by Seneca III, see the Seneca III Archives.
“And they failed this day because they had tried to cross what became a bridge too far for them — a bridge that was at last properly defended.”
Please forgive me picking this up but I’m not entirely sure this is the best analogy as the alluded to “bridge” was being defended by the Wehrmacht. British Paras tried to do the crossing.
I hope you can see my point.
Well, watching and waiting, you are certainly as entitled to your opinion as I to mine.
However I would suggest you have a close look at the strategic objectives and the tactical shortcomings of ‘Operation Market Garden’- Wicki does a half way decent job of it.
If, for instance, by foregoing any emotive analysis of the rights or wrongs of either side in 1944, as I do, one simply examines the background to and the reasons why this operation was launched and how it was conducted perhaps it is possible to find analogy after analogy with the objective, tactics and failures of the British State during ‘Operation Get Tommy’ in 2016.
Rgds, S III.
Thank you for the reportage. With all the ill news lately (and for some time), it’s nice to see the Good Guys win once in a while. Something to consider though, statists won’t take this loss well, or lying down. Expect Tommy to have another round or six on the way, and when least expected.
“Junta”
And these elected dictatorials have the face and rudeness and primitiveness to look Chinese or others, in the eye, and remind them of human tights.
In the west only muslims and jihadis have inordinate and excessive human rights.
Bitingly eloquent assessment of western jurisprudence. THANK YOU. Glad you and breitbart were there to represent the “media.”
Thank you Seneca III for your contribution
Just shows that there is deliberate cover up, of how the authorities knew they going to be trounced, when the knew a QC was turning up.
That silence is as if they want to stop others finding ways how to question and win against the authorities.
Yet much more easy to google any thing like Tommy faces more charges, plus other words tossed in like “notorious” “rabble” “islamphobe” etc.
So far it is only a small chink in this can of worms, but the break through, that Tommy Robinson, has achieved, must be followed up, before they can find other ways to seal that hole.
We need to be careful that the media do not seal us up into an echo chamber, so we need to spread the information, into education, other media and support others, doing what we can to reaffirm and rip that lid of that can of worms, and finally turn it up side in total exposure.
Yes I feel overall that there is a movement, like Trump’s questions, Tommy Robinson, Gert Wilders, Orban, Milo, Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff, Mark Steyn and many others, opening up the issues, and now there is a little bit of movement, we must stay on that roll, to show others that against odds, push back is possible. and worth doing. A moment of appreciation, but we can not rest, as the PC&MC keep grinding on through the institutions.
For me this espouses an understanding in part of what our culture means ! ! and leads into the future, where we want to go.
[are my thoughts]
http://time.com/4267058/donald-trump-aipac-speech-transcript/
Like Dunkirk, an important event, but far from the turning point, in the war. Many more battles to be fought, before we reach the “end of the beginning, and the beginning of the end”.
Tommy stands steadfast, with integrity. Now with some support, that should with others spread out and build up a massive ground swell, on many fronts.
The call to arms has been sounding for a while, like the “phony war phase” in WW2 and a great leader is in waiting again.
Scrum, not ‘scum’, simpleton – my opinion of the Meeja may in part reflect yours but I’m afraid I couldn’t possibly comment here 🙂 S III.
P.S. Scrum is word used to define a particular formation in the game of Rugby Union where groups of men huddle together pushing and shoving in order to seize an advantage. You may have seen similar on television where a heaving mass of journalists are doing likewise around a celebrity whilst trying to get an advantageous comment or a photograph.
Sorry as I was not aware that I altered the word, and so attributed to you by including it in the block quote, is not good form, when you really do want to be an impartial observer.
I do appreciate your preamble , and the final paragraph in the post 🙂
I did notice in googling that the only report made was the breitbart reporter doing his job, and nor do I want to include him in that shortened word.
There is a real dearth of coverage by the main British media, that also simultaneously cover Tommy and the counter-jihad with all the PC&MC slime of islamphobia and then some.
The RT RUPTLY tv interview, taken as Tommy exited the Court, is head quartered in Berlin and financed by Russia to be a news video service.
It shows just how important your report is, and witnessing the trial itself. It all comes together with the background you provide.
I hope that maybe some of your local papers may also take up your report if you take it around to them. I have learnt very painfully just how much they can edit and alter. Usually they can be quite happy to take a report, as it saves them a lot of work, and so long as you can sit beside them as they re-edit for publishing. If you can build a rapport with a “friendly” journalist, then that works for the best.
The another curious thing on Tommy’s exit of court room, there seem to be no supporters, and he just came down the steps to catch a bus.
I know he had a lot to do. There was a major interview that was fitted in on Trinity Channel.
At least he had the elation of being free, and going back to home to family.
However he urgently needs 24 hour security, after how he has talked about islam, challenging muslims by just explaining what Mohammad is about, with massacring a tribe, raping a new wife on the first night, advising that muslims can take sex slaves, lighting a fire on a guy’s chest to encourage him to give up his valuables.
Tommy’s life and his family’s are still fully on the line.
————————-
I want to one day travel to Cardiff Arms Park, to hear the Welsh singing at a rugby test match, against the winning All Blacks and perhaps also as they spontaneously start singing when the scrum goes down, head to head, and the ball is thrown in as the real prodigious “heave” gets going. and then again against the Lions. 🙂 Just to take in that atmosphere and history.
Not sure when/if I can break free, but would love to buy you a beer one day, and also what ever the Baron and Dymphna enjoy.
There was some support there it just happened to be out of camera, although I suspect the non-presence of our enrichers was mainly due to the fact that they expected him to be leaving in a prison van.
Also, if you come over let me know via the Baron and I’ll see what can be arranged.
Rgds, S III.
Were the possible verdicts of the trial guilty, not guilty, and case dismissed? If so, is case dismissed a better outcome than not guilty? If a case is dismissed, say for example because of poor preparation on the part of the prosecution (I doubt a case would be dismissed due to poor preparation by defense, in which case the poor schmuck wouldn’t even feel the cell door hit him in the rear), can charges be brought back and a case made by a more prepared (competent) prosecution? If so, wouldn’t not guilty have been a better verdict?
No, this is better. This is the judge telling the prosecution that they should never have brought charges. “With costs” means that he is also saying that they were VERY wrong to do it. A strong message, much stronger than not guilty.
“Can charges be brought back…”
They wouldn’t dare, even with “new evidence”. The Court has decided there is no merit in the charge.
In England nobody is allowed to sit on the Bench as a local Justice of the Peace or bewigged Judge without first being brain-washed . They are required to take a course in the politically correct attitudes to `racism,sexism,homophobia and islamophobia`,etc.
If along the way they `fail`in these items they are suspended and ordered to go and be re-brain-washed.This includes making statements out of Court that are ant-pc.
An associate says he knows people who have refused to become magistrates because of this.
Like the English (and American) Jury system which draws local people who (since Anglo-Saxon days ) are assumed to be free-minded and to know`what’s-what`in the community they serve , lay-magistrates are there for the same function. This has now been corrupted.
I too rejoice at the result, but this whole episode has shredded what little remained of my respect for the British justice system. It’s part of the enemy. Period.
Had TR been tried by jury, by the way, things might have been interesting too. Under the UK system, 12 passport-holders are selected randomly for jury duty. This means that one or two of them, or more, will likely be newish citizens, whose English is not up to following a court proceeding. (In fact, whose English is not up to following the instructions on a packet of Campbell’s instant soup; but given that many native English also are too thick to understand English law and legalese, one mustn’t be too censorious.) Plus, one or two jury members could well have been Muslims, by the law of averages. No ordinary Joe would dare to object at the linguistic incompetence or cultural bias of a jury member, of course, as the consequences could be severe. As long as he ticked the PC boxes, you could put a trained chimp on an English jury, and nobody would dare to say anything. Trial by jury in Britain is a sick joke.
That’s extremely disturbing and it would seem to additionally explain why this level of court was chosen.
In the new Britain, jury summons may be sent out in Urdu or Arabic, to help immigrants cope with the linguistic challenge of reading directions to a court session. Incompetence in English is considered near-irrelevant in the judicial process.
Here is more on the state of British justice, from the Daily Mail:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1380538/Cant-read-write-English-You-serve-jury-new-rules.html
The incompetence that was demonstrated by the prosecuting attorney is indicative of the contempt that the government has for Tommy. The government was entirely surprised by the appearance of Queen’s Counsel in Tommy’s behalf. The dismissal with costs is tantamount to a slap in the face of the government by Tommy and those who supported him and contributed to his legal defence. I would advise discretion for all concerned. The government may take this come-uppance personally. Tommy could find himself arrested on some spurious charge and never see the light of day again. Such things happened during Nixon’s reign of terror and England is further along than America was back in the late 60s and early 70s. Thanks to God that justice was served properly this time.
I would suggest that it is indicative of the contempt that the establishment and its enforcers hold for all of us who are not of them, acuara! S III>
I’m sure you meant to mention that “JP” stands for “Justice of the Peace”.
Yes, I did, but I was tired. Thanks for letting me know. Rgds, S III.
Thank you, Seneca III, for this report, with background information and diagram.
[1] What heat sources and containers are available to prisoners to allow then to prepare boiling sugar-water “napalm”?
[2] The reporting is straightforward, but I have trouble following some of the prose in the preamble. An example:
“Now, fortunately, in one revealing moment this intent [what intent?] has, perhaps out of a hubris generated by the past successes of its implementers, stumbled into the open, its methodology glaringly exposed. In this demonstration of its [what is the antecedent of the pronoun “its”?] reality we saw how ‘Political Correctness’, together with the latter’s [what is “the latter”, and what is “the former” that it is contrasted with?] bastard spawn ‘Islamophobia’ and ‘Racism’, rides roughshod over our ancient rights and freedoms on a deceptive tide of faux self-righteousness. [Is “self-righteousness” a pejorative? Which is morally preferable, genuine self-righteousness, or faux self-righteousness?] Now many more of us have at last awoken to the deep and abiding threat posed by this, ‘The New World Order Project’, as it approaches its apogee.”
Regarding heat sources in prison, a reliable source (the Northeren Ireland constable who recently arrested a corrupt Judge and was sentences to 3 months imprisonment for “contempt of court”) there were water boilers in his prison which are accessible to prisoners.
Mustn’t deprive the prisoners of their tea in prison I guess. Tea is a human right in the UK? But maybe the prisoners don’t get biscuits… Those are for the free men?
Seneca III .. this was an exciting piece to read. all we need are
the minutes from the court reporter. Map was cool & the fact that you were present was a coup in itself. It was a treat to read this first hand account.
Freedom of speech and thought is valid for all subjects except Islam ………..
The UK is clearly going to need martyrs to wake up. Our awful comprehension of the fact is a sign that that age is passing. Those of us in the light, living or dead, are whole under the law of one. Those of us with a understanding of that law, with the ability to move between oneness and duality, know that materia detritae is not required for God to be whole. Heaven recycles.
I may not have been clear. Tommy Robinson or those right behind him are going to need to die to wake up the frightened. And it’s just not good enough anymore. But don’t worry, it only takes a spark of God to continue. The law of One means that Christ himself could stand alone on earth and still victory would belong to us. God loves that we see and know our martyrs and thereby His Son is not alone. But to be motivated by it … it’s okay, it’s enough … but not really. We need to stand with Tommy. And I understand the emotional tenor over this … but the internet isn’t enough anymore. I personally I’m hoping to move to the UK soon to fight. If not, I’ll come back stateside. I love South Africa, but the fight isn’t going to reach here and I’m wasted. We need peace marches in cities across north america now. Everyone who reads these blogs needs to be organisers. Vigils for Europe. It’s time to stand with Tommy.
A small victory. However the fascist state will not let up – they know they have shown the British public – those who notice these kind of things – what happens when you challenge Islam in any meaningful way. Note how much has been made of late of the Labour Party and its intensifying affair with Islam, its hatred of the natives, Jews etc. It has stolen much of the ground from the Far Left. However this persecution of Tommy R is under the watch and the approval of the Conservatives and Cameron. There is no real difference between the Tories and Corbyn and the other Far Leftists. Hence one cannot vote in elections. To do so is a vote for Islamic Supremacism. It will be a revolution or surrender. There is sadly no alternative.
And it was the same here, Lawrence, until billionaire Trump stepped on the power cord which supplies our current politicians. That’s why they’re fighting him so fiercely: he must not be allowed to get in the way of the game plan.
The Republican Convention, to be held in July, appears to be forming up to be a giant blood-letting.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Republican_National_Convention
Note that the convention hall is named for one of the people who made his huge fortune in the mortgage business. Yucky, to say the least.
It may be that the ensuing chaos will end up with Paul Ryan as the heir presumptive to the Republican side of this presidential campaign. They will have to eliminate Donald Trump or watch the game be taken from their hands entirely.
Given Trump’s ability to get along without their help, he may well decide to go the third party route. For which he will be smeared as a liar, etc., since he promised not to do that. But his promise to refrain was based on the GOP(e) playing by the rules, and they have no intention of honoring their word.
There will also be screaming about how he has “split the party” (it was split and spoiled a long time ago). Thus, the plan will still hold: “everybody knows” that Ryan will lose bec Trump will draw off the enough of the disaffected so that Hillary will win. This will leave Trump holding the bag of Big Fat Nothing.
After Hillary’s victory, Ryan will return to his day job – Speaker of the House – and the Hillary machine will reward (under the table) the backroom boys of the Republican National Committee who gave her the Oval Office.
Things will return to ‘normal’ – the same normal which has led to the awful mess we’re in where the cronies run (and continue to grow) the permanent government establishment. We will be overrun.
Until Trump’s push I would have agreed with your prognosis for America, too, and there would be no way to win any meaningful change so why bother to vote?
Watch carefully in July to see who emerges as the GOP candidate: a fair game would give the nod to Trump based on his level of support and success in the primaries. IF the fix is in, Paul Ryan will be anointed.
At that point, the anger coming from the bitter clingers and fly-over country rednecks who have supported Trump’s candidacy will be huge and palpable. And VERY loud. Almost certainly Trump will mount a 3rd party campaign, which is just what the GOP(e) wants: it splits the “Republican” vote and Hillary wins the presidency. Things back at the ranch inside the Beltway can settle down to their usual routine.
And America is then doomed to what you describe: revolution or surrender.
Seneca III: Thank you very much for this clear and eloquent account. I’d hoped you would report on the proceedings.
Tommy is naturally happy…as we all are. With this will probably come a tendency for him to be nice to the authorities for a while…. like the fleeting tail-end of the penumbra of the Stockholm syndrome.
I pray that he continues his robust leadership without interruption Let the ornery and irascible and brave and gumption continue!
Seneca III, thanks for giving us these details of the trial. There are several pertinent aspects to this – the unpreparedness of the Crown Prosecutor being one. As acuara commented previously this likely shows the Crown’s contempt for TR – no need to prepare much since, bolstered by its previous string of victories, it fully expected to prevail in this instance as well. And, it’s obvious that the Crown expected no competent defense from the accused. Pride goes before a fall, indeed.
Another pertinent aspect is the repeated investigations of this incident, over a span of six months, before the decision to charge TR was taken. Obviously, since the previous investigations did not have the desired effect of intimidating him, and he defiantly – in the minds of the authorities – went ahead and took part in the formation of Pegida UK, they acted, grasping at legal straws which they over-confidently assumed would work to get TR jailed once again. They didn’t count on the presence of Mr. Richard Kovalevsky, QC. One shudders to think of the outcome had he not been there.
For now the British Establishment still must comply with the rule of law but the saga of TR shows us how precarious the situation there really is.
Addendum
When the word first came out that Tommy was to be charged I commented on the fact that it was curious that the powers that be had denied his request that he be tried by a jury of his peers and assigned the case to a lower court instead.
Upon reflection I suspected that such things are not done by accident or out of any sense of justice or compassion but always for reasons advantageous to the (hidden?) objectives of the State and detrimental to the accused, so I decided to look deeper into this.
And, lo and behold! it eventuates that guilty convictions by Magistrates’ courts run around the 98% mark whilst those of trial by juries around the 80%. Furthermore lower courts attract far less media attention and reporting (normally only from the local press) than higher courts which in part may account for the notable absence of the ‘Fourth Estate’ in Peterborough on Friday.
Also, in Magistrates’ Courts offenders are normally represented by solicitors, friends or, foolishly, themselves, and lower court benches rarely have to make judgement in the face of the legal expertise of a Silk.
Indeed the Junta’s apparatchiks were looking to quietly take game, set and match well out of the public eye, and they almost succeeded.
Seneca III.
I wonder if it’s possible to reexamine the other cases Tommy was convicted on. I think a case could be made that he pleaded guilty on the mortgage fraud due to a confession extracted by torture. Fear for his wife and children’s safety would be torture.