We don’t know who is running this country!

 

Who?  Some say Soros.  Some say Obama.  Some say a corporate cabal.  We don’t really know who is running this country.  We know it isn’t Biden.  He’s just the propped up, empty shell. That was confirmed beyond all doubt on June 27, 2024.

We know the deep state is rife with pro-Palestinians and other Islamists.  We know it’s heavily endowed with Communists.  McCarthy was right in the ‘50’s.  He’d be even more right today.

Who the electorate supposedly “elected”, Biden, is a mere decoy - a puppet.  The Biden voters were duped.

The Biden voter, aka, [mostly] Trump Haters, have been foisting their own fraud on the rest of the nation.  They are defending the lying cabal that is accusing Trump of lying.  Today’s New York Times editorial that calls for Biden to exit the race, is just one example of the many continuing lies and liars against Trump. 

So, who is leading our nation?  Who is pulling the strings?

We are in one precarious pernicious position.

Is a trial by a "jury of our peers" really guaranteed? Or was the concept "bastardized" by the legal profession?

 I was curious.  President Trump was said to have a jury of his "peers." Many believe that guarantee is in the US Constitution.

https://www.usconstitution.net › constnot-html

Things That Are Not In the U.S. Constitution - The U.S. Constitution ...

Jury of Peers. People often say "I have a right to have my case heard by a jury of my peers!" when there is no such right in the Constitution. The Constitution does take up the issue of juries, however. It is the nature of the jury which is not in the Constitution. In Article 3, Section 2,

Nope.  It is there only by inference, primarily in the Sixth Amendment.

Sixth Amendment:

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

Do you see the word "peer" mentioned?  And worse yet, the "legal" definition is a LOT broader (i.e. "bastardized") compared to the common definition:

Legal definition:  

Definition of "jury of one's peers"

The constitutional right that ensures criminal defendants are tried by an impartial group from the same geographical jurisdiction, consisting of a broad representation of the population, irrespective of their race, national origin, and gender.   https://dictionary.justia.com/jury-of-ones-peers

Common definition:

peer /pîr/

noun

1. A person who has equal standing with another or others, as in rank, class, or age.

   "children who are easily influenced by their peers."  American Heritage Dictionary

 ___________________

one that is of equal standing with another : EQUAL

The band mates welcomed the new member as a peer.

especially : one belonging to the same societal group especially based on age, grade, or status

teenagers spending time with their peers    Webster's Dictionary

So there you have it. The mythical protection of a "jury of your peers."  Good luck surviving a jury trial if you are an elderly conservative Christian Caucasian in a county comprised of young atheist or Muslim indigent illegal immigrant liberals.

Not ONE of Trump's jurors were in any manner an equal with regard to rank, class, age, or socio-economic status, intelligence or any other measure. Trump didn't have a chance in hell of a fair trial by his "jury of his peers."  There was not one real peer there.