Adviser v. Advocate
Modus Operandi?
Are we witnessing Henry Kissingers modus operandi? In operation? Before our very eyes?
In this U.S. government brief?
Henry Kissinger stands accused of lying, about his bona fides. Deceiving CIA officers, and DIA officers, that what he ordered them to do, Richard Nixon wanted done. But it was what Henry Kissinger wanted done, instead, and not Richard Nixon, indeed against the direct orders of Richard Nixon.
And what do we have here, in this brief?
U.S. government lawyers (Justice Department) telling us, that the State Department Legal Adviser joins with them, in this brief.
The State Department has nothing to do with U.S. government litigation (the exclusive domain of the Justice Department).
So, why would Justice Department lawyers want to put this name on their brief?
Or, more likely, why would their client Henry Kissinger instruct them to do so?
Or, more likely still, why would Henry Kissingers legal muscle, William D. Rogers (Arnold & Porter), instruct them to put his friend, Will Tafts name on this brief?
A lawyer, and an office, neither of which, made any appearance in the trial court below.
A lawyer, and an office, neither of which, entered an appearance, on the docket, in this appeal court.
A lawyer, and an office, neither of which, signed this brief.
Gravitas. Prestige. Influence. Persuasion. Deceit.
People who dont pay close attention believe State Department lawyers are more trustworthy, than Justice Department lawyers.
Indeed, that any lawyer is more trustworthy than a Justice Department lawyer.
And especially in the present climate, when Justice Department lawyers have been exposed, secretly constructing a shadow state, by secret legal opinions. An elected dictatorship, with the executive branch free, to disobey laws, and commit crimes and torts, on orders of the elected dictator (the President), and his agents, with impunity. And to lie about them on orders, with impunity. And even a permanent dictatorship, because those same secret legal opinions are also believed to assert, that its legal for the U.S. President to suspend the constitution and rule by decree, if the CIA and FBI can engineer enough public disturbance to make it look like a good idea. A idea also copied from Adolph Hitler, who did the same, the day after the Reichstag fire, he likely engineered (Feb. 27 1933), a month after forming his government (Jan. 30). (Thats how he got his criminal machine in motion, with the help of his lawyers).
But partly too, because legal advisers are governed by different rules of ethics, as to part of their duties. A secret part.
William Howard Taft IV was Legal Adviser for the U.S. State Department (April 16 2001-2005 February 28).
The ethical duty of a legal adviser is to express an honest, candid, reasoned, opinion, to the client, in this case, the State Department. Whether the client likes it or not. Its tough love.
And its this reputation, Henry Kissinger would dearly love to trade-on, by having the State Department Legal Adviser endorse this brief, creating the illusion, its an honest legal opinion, and not a partisan brief.
But so too the Justice Department itself, and other dark forces in the U.S. government.
No U.S. government official is safe, in relying on a secret legal opinion of the U.S. Justice Department.
Now that those lawyers have been caught, issuing unlawful, secret, legal opinions, most of them still secret.
These dark forces are desperate, to reassure U.S. government officials, they can safely commit crimes and torts on orders, and lie about them on orders, without fear of prison {11 kb, copy, 14 kb, 13 kb}. And suits for damages, which would bankrupt them, and their families. They badly need an independent voice to support their tale, from another part of the government.
Such as the State Department Legal Adviser.
Note: The following sidebar has grown too large for its purpose, to merely illustrate the difference between an adviser and an advocate, and when I finish writing it, Ill summarize it, make a separate webpage of it, and link to it. CJHjr
This is from my ol man's web site, WAR LAWWAR LAW
Modus Operandi?
Are we witnessing Henry Kissingers modus operandi? In operation? Before our very eyes?
In this U.S. government brief?
Henry Kissinger stands accused of lying, about his bona fides. Deceiving CIA officers, and DIA officers, that what he ordered them to do, Richard Nixon wanted done. But it was what Henry Kissinger wanted done, instead, and not Richard Nixon, indeed against the direct orders of Richard Nixon.
And what do we have here, in this brief?
U.S. government lawyers (Justice Department) telling us, that the State Department Legal Adviser joins with them, in this brief.
The State Department has nothing to do with U.S. government litigation (the exclusive domain of the Justice Department).
So, why would Justice Department lawyers want to put this name on their brief?
Or, more likely, why would their client Henry Kissinger instruct them to do so?
Or, more likely still, why would Henry Kissingers legal muscle, William D. Rogers (Arnold & Porter), instruct them to put his friend, Will Tafts name on this brief?
A lawyer, and an office, neither of which, made any appearance in the trial court below.
A lawyer, and an office, neither of which, entered an appearance, on the docket, in this appeal court.
A lawyer, and an office, neither of which, signed this brief.
Gravitas. Prestige. Influence. Persuasion. Deceit.
People who dont pay close attention believe State Department lawyers are more trustworthy, than Justice Department lawyers.
Indeed, that any lawyer is more trustworthy than a Justice Department lawyer.
And especially in the present climate, when Justice Department lawyers have been exposed, secretly constructing a shadow state, by secret legal opinions. An elected dictatorship, with the executive branch free, to disobey laws, and commit crimes and torts, on orders of the elected dictator (the President), and his agents, with impunity. And to lie about them on orders, with impunity. And even a permanent dictatorship, because those same secret legal opinions are also believed to assert, that its legal for the U.S. President to suspend the constitution and rule by decree, if the CIA and FBI can engineer enough public disturbance to make it look like a good idea. A idea also copied from Adolph Hitler, who did the same, the day after the Reichstag fire, he likely engineered (Feb. 27 1933), a month after forming his government (Jan. 30). (Thats how he got his criminal machine in motion, with the help of his lawyers).
But partly too, because legal advisers are governed by different rules of ethics, as to part of their duties. A secret part.
William Howard Taft IV was Legal Adviser for the U.S. State Department (April 16 2001-2005 February 28).
The ethical duty of a legal adviser is to express an honest, candid, reasoned, opinion, to the client, in this case, the State Department. Whether the client likes it or not. Its tough love.
And its this reputation, Henry Kissinger would dearly love to trade-on, by having the State Department Legal Adviser endorse this brief, creating the illusion, its an honest legal opinion, and not a partisan brief.
But so too the Justice Department itself, and other dark forces in the U.S. government.
No U.S. government official is safe, in relying on a secret legal opinion of the U.S. Justice Department.
Now that those lawyers have been caught, issuing unlawful, secret, legal opinions, most of them still secret.
These dark forces are desperate, to reassure U.S. government officials, they can safely commit crimes and torts on orders, and lie about them on orders, without fear of prison {11 kb, copy, 14 kb, 13 kb}. And suits for damages, which would bankrupt them, and their families. They badly need an independent voice to support their tale, from another part of the government.
Such as the State Department Legal Adviser.
Note: The following sidebar has grown too large for its purpose, to merely illustrate the difference between an adviser and an advocate, and when I finish writing it, Ill summarize it, make a separate webpage of it, and link to it. CJHjr
This is from my ol man's web site, WAR LAWWAR LAW