Discretion n. ...(3) freedom or authority to act according to one's own judgment, with little or no oversight
or accountability to one's principal.
Immunity n. ...(2) in the political, government or position of authority, absolute freedom and exemption
(The Oxford Dictionary of Current English. Oxford Pr.)
When all is said and done, though this great nation may die a thousand deaths by attrition, in the end America's tombstone will read: "America, death by discretion." Indeed, much of what has been done to destroy this country and the rule of law has passed under the rubric of "executive discretion". While a majority of Americans have been distracted and kept busy, this country has been sold down the river and the Constitution has become a practical dead-letter by virtue of the globalists and fascists who have embedded themselves deep within the branches of the U.S. government. They operate under an agenda that is not in America's best interest, and routinely operate outside of the law well aware of the broad discretion allowed member of the executive, judicial and legislative branches.
The discretion at issue here is far more than American's passively approving what is going on in Washington D.C. and in their states in their name (although the discretion given to politicians, law enforcement and the judiciary is almost absolute, and certainly at issue here). At it's core, the more insidious discretion and immunity here is in respect to the almost absolute inability of the American citizenry to hold elected and appointed official accountable, either in court, or in the election booth. Both American law and precedent operate under the presumption that the king can do no wrong (a legal maxim the founders sought to escape).
Read that again.
And it does not matter whether it's prosecutorial discretion afforded to government lawyers by the courts, or political discretion afforded the politician. This discretion, which is virtually unchecked, will eventually be looked on by historians as one of the leading causes in the collapse of the American hegemony and the cheapening of the rule of law. Given the current unrest and protest arising in the United States, it would be wise for every free person to educate themselves on how far the state and federal government can go to silence or retaliate against those whom they find undesirable, uncooperative or a threat.
This is important to keep in mind as Americans raise their voices in town halls about government mandated health care, are scared with vague threats of H1N1 flu pandemics by the media (based on conjecture and surmise), and the resulting government sponsored swine flu vaccine programs; or otherwise deal with individuals and agencies tied to any federal, state or local governmental body. One thing is for sure, the ability of ordinary Americans to affect change or demand accountability of those in power has been materially compromised and stripped of any real relief.
This country was founded upon the principle that men are not angels, and need rules and a constitution (and an informed citizenry) to bind them down. Founders like Jefferson knew that power unchecked is uncontrolled power, and the natural course of things lead to tyranny. Indeed, Congress and state legislatures nationwide often give broad discretion to agency chiefs and Secretaries of various agencies and regulatory arms. Typically this is found in the language of that body's governing statute. The practical effect of this delegation of broad discretion is broad language and no advance notice of what is forbidden under a given statute. The other result is that said broad discretion makes that director or agency the sole authority and a blank check to later decide (many time after the fact) what is unlawful and how to penalize such conduct.
The dirty little secret that many Americans are unaware of is these agencies become de facto authoritarian as they serve as judge, jury and executioner to all who fall under their rule making authority. Most state and federal courts are severely limited in judicial review of any agency decision. Factual findings are rarely disturbed. And Agency chiefs serve as the final arbiter to any administrative findings at issue. Not surprisingly, more often than not, the agency chief finds in favor of his own office at the expense of the aggrieved, no matter how specious of a record is before that official. And then the courts rubber stamp the decision, if an aggrieved has the money to seek further review. The conflict of interest and injustice inherently present in such a stacked system is overwhelming.
The courts, however, have long considered the discretion of any governmental agent, especially a prosecutor, to be a sacred cow that cannot be challenged. Indeed, the courts consider any discretionary move made by a prosecutor to be done in good faith. Stare Decisis holds clearly that in the United States the decision by a prosecutor to prosecute, regardless of the merits of that decision, is absolutely immune from civil liability in an American court. The Supreme Court decided as such in the case of Imbler v. Pachman , decades ago. Many state bar associations also refuse to investigate prosecutor conduct, even though these prosecutors are members of the state bar, and instead defer to the state to investigate itself (and absurd conflict of interest on its face and in practice). And it is interesting to note that in affirming absolute immunity to prosecutor Pachman whom the court found had knowingly fabricated evidence, allowed perjured testimony and generally acted in bad faith in prosecuting Imbler, that the Supreme Court necessarily found that such reprehensible acts were "within the scope" of presenting and procuring an indictment against an accused. In other words, a prosecutor is allowed to prosecute a case absolutely immune from civil liability regardless of whether the case was prosecuted in good faith, or in bad faith.
Indeed, the Court refused to provide a prosecutor with "mere" good faith (or qualified) immunity that is routinely provided to Police officers under 42 USC 1983 (federal civil rights liability statute of 1862). This decision may be hard for many Americans to square (and smacks of elitism), until we remember that the office of prosecutor is a political one. For every high-profile Duke lacrosse case, where an overzealous and reckless prosecutor is held to account by the state Bar, there are hundreds of cases every year (at least) where no one is held to account and justice is never served. Paul Craig Robert's book The Tyranny of Good Intentions is a good place to start for more specific information on this epidemic.
Are there still reputable, honorable prosecutors at the state and federal level? Of course there are. Chances are, however, that that these men and women of principle will not excel politically like their less ethical partners in the law in this current unethical, unlawful environment.Yet these are the gate keepers as the elite and big business move this country into a global one world government. Is it any wonder the President can announce a domestic security force with inpugnity? No wonder David Rockefeller can nostalgically regale the elite's present course in his 2002 Random House biography:
"Some even believe we [the Rockefeller family] are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure - One World, if you will.If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it" (David Rockefeller. "Memoirs", p. 405)
It is vital that western civilization awaken to the fact that their governments have been taken over by a cabal of globalists and criminals and the mechanisms of justice and recourse are tilted in favor of the government and big business as it is crammed down our throats, regardless of how loudly we object. Justice is based on the presumption that an official be afforded great latitude in his or her discretion because the law presumes all actions will be based on good faith and the integrity of the public official. In fact, what good is the law if it assumes that those with the most to gain, in an inherently corrupt industry (government), can do no wrong? Or, at the least, that the greater good is served by ignoring such wrongs?
A presumption of good faith in public officials? The founders are rolling in their graves. Jefferson and others have warned about the dangers of an unaccountable judiciary that always expands their authority over the people and away from those in power. We have been warned by the founders over the danger of central private banks ad nauseum. Liberty is hardly a tangible thing when our Constitution is currently given mere lip service and a cabal of corrupt criminals have a choke hold on this once (and still can be) great country.
And yet, despite of the fact that the systems of checks and balances are stacked against the people and set up to serve the status quo, the petition clause and assembly clause of the 1st Amendment gives the people the right to petition for a redress of grievances, and to peacefully assemble and demand change. We must repeatedly exercise these rights in mass until the world and the media begin to shed light on the real nature of the system and the will of the American people. We must also demand that the real perpetrators of 9-11 be brought to justice, or do our part in exposing the vapid, impotent, 9-11 Commission Report, and demand a real and nuetral investigation. Only when our litany of grievances are made public can peaceful change be a remote, but real, possibility; much less actually happen.
If we do not, our course has already been chosen for us. History tells us that unaccountable republics turn into faux-democracies on their way to empire and tyranny. The American people must be awakened and assembled. The courts must be petitioned again and again until perhaps someone or some group with standing finds a judge sympathetic to fundamental fairness and, God forbid, substantive due process and justice.
We must force our grievances into the light of collective humanity before it becomes too late and this country becomes once and for all a full blown police state with a new, 21st Century Constitution that does not recognize individual liberty and the sovereign individual. Let it not be said that while the West slid into tyranny, those with the foresight and vision to recognize what was happening did nothing.