If Hillary Isn’t Indicted, the Rule of Law and the Republic Are Dead

To paraphrase Ernest Hemingway: How did you lose your Republic? Two ways, gradually and then suddenly. The Romans experienced this when their Republic was extinguished by Empire.

The erosion of the Republic was gradual: slowly but surely, the lower classes’ representation in governance was curtailed; the Oligarchy of the wealthy and powerful cemented their privileges at the expense of the many; Oligarchs rose above the laws that were supposed to apply to all, and executive power was consolidated in top administrators and the wealthy at the expense of the Senate.

When Caesar crossed the Rubicon with his army to seize control of Rome, the Roman Republic ceased to exist. Gradually and then suddenly: this is how Republics become Empires.

We find ourselves in a parallel moment in history: the American Republic has been hollowed into a shell that is maintained for PR purposes. Beneath the propaganda, the Establishment runs the nation for its own benefit. The people are ignored, because they are powerless in this hollow shell of democracy: their only role is to provide bodies, talent and blood for the Imperial armed forces, pay taxes if they have any money, and be content with their food stamps if they don’t.

Here’s the proof:

Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups, and Average Citizens

Multivariate analysis indicates that economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence.

Here are two articles in the same vein:

America the Banana Republic

The Quiet Coup

The United States has reached a crossing the Rubicon moment: either Hillary Clinton is indicted for knowingly violating statutes regarding State Department security, or the rule of law and the Republic are dead. This is a binary moment: we either let Hillary evade the laws that were established to protect the security of the nation and confess there is no rule of law now for the Oligarchy, or the agencies tasked with defending the nation indict her.

There is no middle ground. If Hillary isn’t indicted, the rule of law, i.e. no one is above the law, is dead.

If you believe Hillary that she didn’t really do anything to violate the spirit or the letter of security laws, please review these statutes:

U.S. Department of State Foreign Affairs Manual Volume 12 – Diplomatic Security
12 FAM 531.1 Top Secret Storage
12 FAM 531.1-1 Domestic
(CT:DS-185; 01-31-2012)
(Uniform State, USAID, OPIC, TDP)

(TL:DS-70; 10-01-2000)

Incidents involving intentional or grossly negligent release or mishandling of classified information may be subject to criminal penalties. An illustrative list of criminal statutes establishing penalties of fine and imprisonment for the release of classified information is set forth in 12 FAM 558 Exhibit 558.

Once the Oligarchy is above the law, the Republic is already dead. Once the people have lost the ability to influence the central state’s policies and decisions, the Republic is dead. Once the elected officials can no longer impose the nation’s statues on the Oligarchy (or have lost interest in doing so because they are all corrupted cronies), the Republic is dead. Once the nation’s agencies of law enforcement are stayed from indicting, prosecuting and jailing members of the Oligarchy, be they super-wealthy politicos like Hillary or super-wealthy Wall Street bankers, the Republic is dead.

The Democratic Party bosses and special interests have already selected Hillary as their shoo-in candidate for the Presidency, and these Oligarchs and special interests won’t let any pesky details like laws protecting the security of the nation stand in the way of their Not So Quiet Coup.

The nation’s Deep State, which I have covered extensively, has at least grudgingly approved Hillary as the next neo-conservative (never met an Imperial entanglement or drone strike she didn’t like), neocolonial (we’re going to put the “little people” in their rightful place, i.e. under our management) Imperial President.

A vote for Hillary, unindicted Oligarch, is a vote in favor of the destruction of the rule of law and the Republic. This is the Rubicon every voter must decide to cross or refuse to cross: vote for Hillary (destroy the Republic and surrender to Imperial Oligarchy) or refuse to vote for an unindicted Imperial Oligarch.

This entry was posted in General and tagged , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.
  • Don Robertson

    It’s been fifty years since government invented the high falutin theory of best management practices, which proscribes even the appearance of impropriety.

    • wunsacon

      [Deleted. Meant to reply to different poster.]

  • wunsacon

    CHS, you predicted the past. The rule of law has been dead for many years. For how long? I do not know precisely but know it’s been dead at least 15 years and probably as long as 240.

    Where exactly did it die? Every time I look a little further back, I see another example just as, nay, far worse than the Hillary *email* scandal.

    – Wall St. is a criminogenic environment protected by the Executive. I quite liked your writing the past 10 years on these events. So, it’s surprising you wouldn’t see that the Rule of Law died by that time.

    – An unknown number of innocent people held at Gitmo, held for 12 years without trial. Hello??

    – By the time Rumsfeld, on Sept 10, 2001, announced the MICC couldn’t account for $2 trillion, the Rule of Law must’ve been dead a few years.

    – Clinton’s earlier perjury showed it was dead at least a few years earlier than that.

    – Before that, citizens paid to bail out Wall St. banks (over their faulty “lending” to corrupt* Latin American leaders). (* Here, I use “corrupt” primarily as a verb and secondarily as an adjective.)

    – Bill Black’s management of the S&L crisis was possibly the last gasp. Then again, it was probably an aberration.

    – Before that, there was Iran-Contra (a misleading name for a scandal involving the Executive violating the law).

    – Before that there was the “October Surprise”. Skipping over the Carter administration, we go straight into the Nixon administration.

    Where would you stop? Not long before that, we go into the Jim Crow, genocide against Cherokee, Apache, Sioux, etc.

    Come to think of it, when you look at the record and then consider what you choose to focus on, it’s just a tad comical. Yes, it’s silly to focus on Hillary’s email crimes as the point where the “rule of law” died. Were no laws broken by her and this administration’s undeclared-by-Congress aggressive wars? Surely, killing innocent people is a crime much more worthy of your scrutiny. Yes? Surely, they violated laws to accomplish this. Yes?

  • tom

    Even if she is indicted, that does not prove that the rule of law is not dead! It might simply mean that the Deep State has decided to sacrifice her for reasons of its own.

    • wunsacon

      …OR to saturate the news cycle with controversy over relatively meaningless issues while the *content* of the emails and the policies they relate to go relatively unexamined and undiscussed.

  • Charlie Primero

    The Clintons evaded prosecution for scores of murders and millions of dollars earned via drug running into Mena and influence peddling to the Chinese. Does anyone actually think they will now be taken down by a few technical violations of some obscure government regulation? Get real.

  • empty

    while the overall message of your article is correct, your analogy to Caesar and the Rubicon is severely misinformed and unhelpful. Caesar was a Popularis who greatly expanded the power of the people against the optimates, who were the conservative oligarchs

    the Republic, in fact, died with Caesar

    • cstahnke

      Yes, this is more or less true Caesar was an oligarch like Roosevelt and Kennedy who championed the people who were struggling against the increasingly criminal acts of the big landowners. Just to be clear, the Republic was also long gone by the time Caesar took power as it is now. Formally we lost the The spirit of the Republic in 1968 and the legal end came in 2001.

      • empty

        “Caesar was an oligarch”
        it depends on how you define your terms. Caesar spent most of his life in debt, only having his own wits and (barely) his familial status to rely on. after sulla died, he spent some years living in a poor neighborhood as a legal advocate against the corrupt establishment

        “the Republic was also long gone”
        the roman republic is a misleading concept, as the senate never really represented the people, but merely the ruling oligarchs. there never was even a written constitution, law was shaped by the oligarchic senate to their own whim

        “by the time Caesar took power”
        took power? upon Caesars crossing of the rubicon, (with only one legion), the senate fled rome, leaving no one in administration. even after assuming the role of commander-in-chief (dictator), which in his role was more akin to a president, he democratized and made more egalitarian the political process, allowing gallic nobility, equestrians, and libertini to enter the senate, among many other reforms

        no, the death of the republic only came about after Ceasers death and the capitulation of the proceeding emperors to the oligarchs

        “Formally we lost the The spirit of the Republic in 1968 and the legal end came in 2001.”
        i can agree on the legal end coming in 2001, and though im not sure what event you are referring to in 1968, if i were to argue for a spiritual end, the establishment of the federal reserve in 1913 would be most appropriate

        • cstahnke

          The Republic died in the Civil War era in Rome–it was just not sustainable. I agree with the rest of it. Yes, 1913-1919 was the era that undermined our republic in four of five different ways–I would consider, particularly, the Harrison Narcotic act and the establishment of the Creel Committee and the end of a free press in WWI as even more important than the Fed.

          As for 1968, it was the assassinations of King and RFK that closed the door on any possibility of either a democracy or a Republic–what followed was a slow unraveling. In Washington–the main event came in the Bush-Clinton years when they decided to “re-invent government” and opened the door to massive corruption involving contractors–but that’s another story. As I said 2001 with the Patriot Act and the repeal of not just any idea of international law (Geneva Conventions etc.) but habeas corpus as well. Subsequent policies of Bush/Obama made the whole idea of a “free” society a bit problematic. So here we are living in a massive era of post-modernist delusions with no way out but up.

          • empty

            “The Republic died in the Civil War era in Rome–it was just not sustainable. I agree with the rest of it.”
            youre missing the point; there never was a republic, there was only a system which represented the oligarchs, exactly like today. it wasnt until Caesar ‘took power’ that the senate began to represent the people

            “even more important than the Fed.”
            youre underestimating the power of the fed. establishing such a system and capitulation to the financial powers it represents are the only reason measures such as you suggest were able to occur in the first place

            “it was the assassinations of King and RFK that closed the door on any possibility of either a democracy or a Republic”
            this assumes there is no one capable of replacing those figures

            “the main event came in the Bush-Clinton years when they decided to
            “re-invent government” and opened the door to massive corruption
            involving contractors”
            Eisenhower spoke of this decades earlier in his MIC speech

            “As I said 2001 with the Patriot Act”
            i already agreed

            “the repeal of not just any idea of international law (Geneva Conventions etc.)”
            international law still applies, the problem is getting anyone to actually enforce it, which is the problem with our propagandized ‘exceptional’ society

          • cstahnke

            Yes there was a Republic with laws that were even sometimes enforced. There was a constant class-struggle in Rome that went to almost comical extremes but there was a balance which game normal citizens some (sometimes they flat out refused to fight even when the enemy was just about to seize the Capital. Usually the patricians managed to prevail but sometimes they didn’t and had to compromise. Same thing with out history–a lot of knock-down drag out fights with occasional victories for the working class.

          • empty

            “there was a balance which game normal citizens”
            if you think only allowing the aristocracy to join the senate and get many more votes per person, not paying any taxes, selectively enforcing unwritten laws, using gangs to force farmers off land, etc is balanced and representative, that is absurd

            “Usually the patricians managed to prevail but sometimes they didn’t and had to compromise.”
            right, when the people rose up against the minority oligarchs they would be forced to capitulate; that isnt republican, that is revolutionary

        • wunsacon


    • wunsacon

      Yo, empty, where’d you acquire this information?

      So, the “Republic” lived and died with Caesar?? Interesting…

      Tangentially, I always thought it strange when some people — especially if they manifestly self-identify as “religious” and thus implicitly “moral” — compare ourselves to a *failing* Rome with a tone that implicitly suggests they *admire* what the Roman Empire represented — which is “barbaric” by my standards. It’s even stranger now that you tell me “Rome” was far more barbaric than I’ve known.

      • empty

        “Yo, empty, where’d you acquire this information?”

        Michael Parenti has written explicitly on this subject in his book “the Assassination of Julius Caesar”, (his lecture on the subject https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X-w3PIQk7RM) but the information is really hidden in plain sight. because of the realities of the educational system, which Parenti refers to on this subject as ‘gentlemen’s history,’ we only see through the eyes of the ruling class—in a sense, history written by the winners, and having a bias against the people

        “So, the “Republic” lived and died with Caesar??”
        Caesar’s influence cant be understated—it is because of him the Germans and Slavs derived the terms for their leaders, Kaiser (which is the true pronunciation of Caesar) and Czar. As I stated in my discussion with cstahnke, Caesar was essentially the first president, establishing a new branch of govt in the republic alongside (and not overthrowing) the senate and popular assembly

        “they manifestly self-identify as “religious” and thus implicitly “moral” — compare ourselves to a *failing* Rome”
        I find religious people often have inflated opinions of themselves, thus seeing only what they want to see

        “a tone that implicitly suggests they *admire* what the Roman Empire represented — which is “barbaric” by my standards.”
        To be fair, most, if not all societies then were barbaric, as even societies can still be today, but again is why Caesar was so influential and had to be rewritten into an autocrat by later ruling classes

        “It’s even stranger now that you tell me “Rome” was far more barbaric than I’ve known.”
        As the saying goes, ‘truth is stranger than fiction.’ but of course because ‘gentlemen’s history’ (and politics) continues even today, one pretty much has to do their own research to establish truth; as Mark Twain said, “Education consists mainly in what we have unlearned.”


  • The rule of law has been dead for a long time in the US. The constitution as Bush described it only a piece of paper. The Clinton Huckster Road Show is only a shining example of this.

  • Paul X

    The rule of law is still here: those who make the rules, can ignore the law. In fact that is one way to tell who the rulers are – all the people for whom the law does not apply.

    As to The Republic, that is just another fantasy that everybody believes, but nobody scrutinizes very closely. It is the idea that a “representative” can impartially, fairly and simultaneously “represent” the interests of his constituents, including liberals, conservatives, fascists, communists and flat earthers. It’s like being taken to court and discovering your defense lawyer, who represents you, is also on the prosecution team.

    Things will not improve until we get a better fix on reality.

  • Alexandros HoMegas

    She is it AIPAC, she is safe.

  • Mar 21, 2016 Following the Money to War Profiteers

    Peter B. Collins presents Christian Sorensen & Sibel Edmonds on the Military Industrial Complex & the need for independent media not beholden to the MIC.


  • WeAreYourGods

    Well written piece. I find myself wondering how long ago our nation became an oligarchy, but it was long before my birth. These days, the trappings of democracy are falling away one by one, exposing the reality or mass surveillance, criminalization of journalists, the crushing of free speech and assembly, elimination of due process, sidestepping of constitutional protections against illegal search, the list is long and depressing. One rule remains above all others, the oligarch class are not accountable, they are out of reach of the very control systems they have co-opted to rule over us.

  • FEBRUARY 19, 2016 Dick Cheney Poisoned Hundreds Of US Troops In Iraq — They’re Dying — And The Media Is Silent

    The legacy of death and misery from the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan continues today, and, once again, Dick Cheney plays a central role. A new book by Joseph Hickman, a former U.S. Marine and Army sergeant, titled The Burn Pits: The Poisoning of America’s Soldiers details how soldiers and local civilian populations were exposed to constant streams of toxic smoke from the burning of waste.


  • exomike

    What happened? Did someone dig the rule of law up and re-animate it or did they roll away the stone. Hell it’s already well beyond the 9 deads that a cat gets.

  • Angl0sax0nknight .

    Either Hillary is indicted for crimes EVERYONE KNOWS she committed (along with her sycophants) or she will be held accountable by THE PEOPLE!! NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW OR JUSTICE!!! It all depends on who is will to execute that justice!!

  • Angl0sax0nknight .

    Those that are guilty are not only those that committed the crimes but THOSE THAT PROTECT THEM!!!