Form: Argument

TO: PETER ZEIHAN, (All):
RE: –“Trump is a FELON,”–

(a) Upgrading a misdemeanor to a felony through artifice will not survive appeal.
(b) Selective prosecution under it will not survive an appeal.
(c) I will be surprised if the political prosecution survives appeal – at least in the comment on the ruling.
(d) And I’m curious if the high court will insert a phrase in a decision that suggests very subtly ‘this better not happen again’.
(e) And I might even suggest a non-zero chance that the court will extend protections to at least presidents, that are limited to high crimes proper.

There is nothing Trump did in this context that isn’t done by everyone of any degree of wealth and responsibility that runs a complex organization, especially one that works with government officials and employees, unions, construction, and service workers.

EXAMPLES
I have on multiple occasions spent entire days signing documents, with law firms from multiple countries, for complex transactions, that I have negotiated verbally, given a bullet point list to my legal team and financial team, told them the structure I want at the outcome – and then all I do is sign documents. And shake hands.
I’ve been in endless lawsuits accused of nonsense, delivered my and other executives entire email repositories and drive contents.
I’ve worked as an economic advisor on two campaigns.
I’ve seen the government to the most profound immoral and ethical prosecutions (I worked for Justice) with no accountability and total abandonment of the principle that “the purpose of the government in any administrative action is to maintain the individual, the family and the company as viable going concerns.”
I’ve participated in Intel operations (as a consultant and contractor) that were both virtuous and more than highly questionable, and one of my companies has built and configured complex software for tens of millions to one of the armed forces that made their complex contemporary logistics possible.
I’ve bought and run companies or done business in thirty countries.
I see exactly what you see, but instead from ‘the plumbing’ so to speak.
And if you prosecute a man for the classification of hush money to a hooker, when there is ‘no harm no foul’ then “trump up” the charges to a felony by creative lawyering, and use that for political purposes, when you would do neither for other citizens, then you’ve just proved trump’s point about the illegitimacy of at least the Justice department.

THIS PROSECUTION
This prosecution was, like much of the action by the justice department, extremely questionable. And while I deeply understand the work the “Yale-ies” have done with the Federalist Society to populate the high court bench with jurists who actually comprehend the constitution, the common law, and the purpose of both, the question is, whether it is too late.

THE CONSEQUENCES
It’s likely too late. We have exhausted debate. We have exhausted the capacity to vote. The military has been as politically eviscerated of it’s world war traditions as the first world war eviscerated them of their pre-industrial aristocratic traditions of duty and loyalty. We have no king to appeal to by a suit of common law as did the founders. We have only the court remaining. And even on that court a thin majority.

So your estimation of population risk is the same as my estimation of internal risk. And any acceleration of htat internal risk will leave those empires left standing when the world wars ended the age of empires and eschewed in the age of nation states and federations,

FEEDBACK WORTH CONSIDERING
I love you Peter, and you’re one of my favorite public intellectuals who I respect the most, but your depth of comprehension of economics and geostrategy is not matched in your understanding of politics and certainly not law.

And as much as I would like to constructively interview you given your very deserving rise to such worldwide influence, and because of my deep appreciation for the value you’ve provided the world, your introgression into areas you repeatedly fail to predict correctly due to this lack of understanding the herding of endless clients in power politics at least in the short and medium term, and when you talk of political process and of such terrifying statements as “Our government was built to debate not to govern”, and of the consequences of your understanding, then it’s something you could understand with a little effort, but yet don’t.

And while I promote you quite a bit, and I defend you quite a bit, especially from “the lost boys” of the right, whose daily discordant symphony of cat wails, poisons not only their own well, but the wells of others, I’d ask you to consider the value of not pouring gasoline on the bonfire of the attempts to undermine you and the influence you have so thankfully created, until you grasp the costly utility of our governmental design, and it’s recognition of human nature far more accurate than all others combined.

Affections
Curt Doolittle
The Natural Law Institute

Reply addressees: @PeterZeihan