Center for a Stateless Society » Should We Celebrate the American Revolution?… ““Why should I trade one tyrant 3000 miles away for 3000 tyrants one mile away?”
There’s a great line in The Patriot: “Why should I trade one tyrant 3000 miles away for 3000 tyrants one mile away? An elected legislature can trample a man’s rights as easily as a king can.” Mel Gibson’s character ultimately signs on to the war effort, but the soundness of his point only becomes clearer looking at early U.S. history. Even the pre-Constitution state governments were tyrannical.
Shays’ Rebellion is cited as a failure of the Articles of Confederation to deal with unrest, but we should remember that two of the rebels were executed by the Massachusetts state effectively enough.
In the first five U.S. presidencies, we see the American empire, albeit in embryonic form, begin its centuries-long crusade of aggressive expansion and centralization of power in the capital.
George Washington cracked down on the libertarian Whiskey Rebellion, created a national bank, and put Alexander Hamilton, a centralizing statist, in charge of the Treasury.
John Adams blatantly violated the First Amendment as much as any president since with his notorious Alien and Sedition Acts. Thomas Jefferson deployed the Marines on an ultimately failed mission in the Barbary war, attempted to suspend habeas corpus and create a department of education, imposed a brutal embargo on English goods that decimated the economy and destroyed privacy rights, and conducted the Louisiana Purchase in bold defiance of the Constitution.
Copperhead: Words That Got a U.S. Congressman Deported… “Congressman Clement L. Vallandigham D-Ohio was the original American “whistleblower.” Serving as a member of Congress from Dayton, Ohio during the War to Prevent Southern Independence, his criticisms of the Lincoln regime earned him the reputation as the leader of the Democratic opposition. The Republican Party smeared him and all…” by Thomas DiLorenzo
” Serving as a member of Congress from Dayton, Ohio during the War to Prevent Southern Independence, his criticisms of the Lincoln regime earned him the reputation as the leader of the Democratic opposition.
The Republican Party smeared him and all other opponents as a “copperhead” a.k.a. snake in the grass. On May 5, 1863, sixty-seven heavily-armed soldiers broke into his home in the middle of the night and dragged him off to a military prison. This was done without any due process, as Lincoln had long ago illegally suspended the writ of Habeas Corpus.
He was said to be guilty of “discouraging enlistments” in the army with his criticisms of the Lincoln regime. A military order issued in the state of Ohio declared all such speech to be illegal, and military officers were to have dictatorial powers in deciding what kind of speech would be permitted there.
All of this was of course done at the direction of Abraham Lincoln.Lincoln apparently wanted Northerners to believe that all such critics were spies and traitors, so Congressman Vallandigham was deported to the state of Tennessee and placed in the hands of a Confederate Army commander.
Abraham Lincoln’s Execution .: Knowledge Base… “Unless historians or other scholars can refute what Professor John Chandler Griffin has revealed in Abraham Lincoln’s Execution, the history not only of the administration of the 16th President of the U.S. and his death at the hands of John Wilkes Booth will have to be rewritten, but also that of the American Civil War….The original plan of Confederate Secret Service member Booth and his co-conspirators was not to kill Lincoln, but rather to abduct him, transport him to…….”
Unless historians or other scholars can refute what Professor John Chandler Griffin has revealed in Abraham Lincoln’s Execution, the history not only of the administration of the 16th President of the U.S. and his death at the hands of John Wilkes Booth will have to be rewritten, but also that of the American Civil War.
Griffin, professor emeritus at the University of South Carolina, has revisited what happened in the 1860’s for two basic purposes: first, to demonstrate that members of Lincoln’s cabinet were implicated with the Confederate Secret Service in the murder of Lincoln (which is why Griffin calls it an execution in lieu of an assassination); and, second, to demolish the standard mythology re the character of Lincoln and his motives in instigating the military action that metastasized into all-out civil war.
Rather than “The Great Emancipator,” Lincoln appears in Griffin’s book as “The Great Dictator.” Blocking the South’s secession in order to establish and maintain a centralized government, Griffin writes, was the true motive behind Lincoln’s instigation of civil war, and not the elimination of slavery.
In fact, Griffin documents, Lincoln repeatedly expressed his view of whites as superior to blacks, opposed equal rights for them, wrote to Illinois legislators that “eliminating every black person from American soil would be a glorious consummation,” appropriated taxpayer money to fund his plan to export freed slaves to a variety of countries; and, despite his famous Emancipation Proclamation, engaged in manipulations so that only slaves in the south would be freed and not those in the north. Lincoln’s prejudices also showed up, Griffin points out, in Lincoln’s support of the war on American Indians unwilling to move to reservations, resulting in their systematic extermination.
At the root of the South’s rebellion was the North’s bleeding the southern economy through exorbitant tariffs on goods that had to be purchased from northern industries. Because many influential northerners were adamantly opposed to military action to stop the rebellion, Lincoln waited until Congress was not in session to use the outbreak of hostilities at Fort Sumter to initiate an all-out war, according to Griffin. Lincoln then proceeded to declare martial law, suspended the writ of habeas corpus, ordered the imprisonment without trial of thousands of northern citizens opposed to war, ordered the jailing of newspaper editors and publishers opposing his actions and then had their operations shut down and their buildings burned, and initiated a host of other illegal and unconstitutional acts.
Once war was in full swing, Lincoln enabled well-to-do families to keep their sons out of the conflict by paying $300 per youngster to the government in return for exemption from service. So it was that the Union army’s enlisted ranks consisted mostly of poor whites and blacks willing to fight.
Support for Lincoln from hardline Republicans collapsed, Griffin explains, when it became clear that Lincoln opposed their vision of Union military victory resulting in a centralized government’s using its power to confiscate southerners’ property and enrich northern mercantilists by reducing southerners to vassals of their conquerors. Instead, looking toward a future election with southern as well as northern support, Lincoln laid out a plan for reconstruction of the South with fully restored voting rights. At that point, in the scenario Griffin presents, plans were formulated – especially by Secretary of War Edwin Stanton and Vice President Andrew Johnson – to get rid of Lincoln.
The original plan of Confederate Secret Service member Booth and his co-conspirators was not to kill Lincoln, but rather to abduct him, transport him to………………..
The Daily Bell – Thomas DiLorenzo: More on the Myth of Lincoln, Secession and the ‘Civil War’… “The Daily Bell is pleased to present this exclusive interview with Thomas DiLorenzo.”
Thomas DiLorenzo: More on the Myth of Lincoln, Secession and the ‘Civil War’
With Anthony Wile
Dr. Thomas DiLorenzo
The Daily Bell is pleased to present this exclusive interview with Thomas DiLorenzo.
Introduction: Thomas DiLorenzo is an American economics professor at Loyola University Maryland. He is also a senior faculty member of the Ludwig von Mises Institute and an affiliated scholar of the League of the South Institute, the research arm of the League of the South, and the Abbeville Institute.
He holds a Ph.D. in Economics from Virginia Tech. DiLorenzo has authored at least ten books, including The Real Lincoln: A New Look at Abraham Lincoln, His Agenda, and an Unnecessary War (2003), Hamilton’s Curse: How Jefferson’s Arch Enemy Betrayed the American Revolution and What It Means for Americans Today (2009), How Capitalism Saved America: The Untold History of Our Country, From the Pilgrims to the Present (2005), Lincoln Unmasked: What You’re Not Supposed To Know about Dishonest Abe (2007) and most recently, Organized Crime: The Unvarnished Truth About Government (2012). Thomas DiLorenzo is a frequent columnist for LewRockwell.com, lectures widely and is a frequent speaker at Mises Institute events.
Daily Bell: Remind our readers about one of your central intellectual passions, which is confronting academic “Lincoln revisionism.” Who was Lincoln really and why have you spent so much of your career trying to return Lincoln’s academic profile to reality?
The Daily Bell – The Final Executive Order: Death of the Republic… “This would be an American version of the Reichstag fire event that allowed Hitler and the Nazis to rule Germany by emergency decree. The spark could be a European bank run, sovereign debt collapse or capital controls contagion crossing the Atlantic and reaching the already bankrupt United States. “
The Final Executive Order: Death of the Republic
By Ron Holland
This is a fictional story showing how the last vestiges of the republic, your personal wealth and gold could disappear in 24 hours.
“The illusion of freedom will continue as long as it’s profitable to continue the illusion. At the point where the illusion becomes too expensive to maintain, they will just take down the scenery, they will pull back the curtains, they will move the tables and chairs out of the way and you will see the brick wall at the back of the theater.” – Frank Zappa
Several weeks ago, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano announced Obama’s sudden executive order favoring illegal aliens. This was just one of many presidential executive orders and actually not a big deal but this tool will likely be the legal mechanism used to financially lock down America similar to the way a warden limits privileges and movement in a prison complex. Executive orders, unless they are challenged, can allow a president to rule by decree. This is basically what our once great republic has been reduced to.
Presidential Executive Orders Are the Greatest Threat To Our Nation
Many presidents have used the power of presidential executive orders but among the most harmful were Franklin Roosevelt’s Executive Order 6102 signed on April 5, 1933 that authorized the confiscation of private gold and Executive Order 9066 imprisoning 110,000 Japanese Americans in “War Relocation Camps.”
Lincoln also issued countless executive orders authorizing arrest and imprisonment of opposition newspaper reporters and editors as well as suspending the writ of habeas corpus widely across the Union. Of course, you will not read much about this in the history books.
With everything happening to this country of ours it is getting harder and harder to maintain a cool head and not jump to conclusions but if we sit back and view the last four years as well as what’s happening now an image is starting to appear of what might possibly be our future.
During President Obama’s first term he laid the ground work. President Obama issued over 144 executive orders, many dealing with martial law. As the Supreme Court already opinioned when looking at President Lincolns use of martial law, “Martial law … destroys every guarantee of the Constitution.”. This means when martial law is declared we as Americans have no rights at all.
» Free Speech Zones: King Lincoln vs. King Obama (Thomas DiLorenzo) Alex Jones’ Infowars: There’s a war on for your mind!
January 22, 2013
During today’s coronation of King Obama His Majesty graciously set aside a small “strip of [Freedom] plaza” in D.C. as a “free speech zone.” In keeping with the theme of Coronation Week, I can’t help thinking of the comparison to King Lincoln, whose own free speech zones were prisons like Fort Lafayette in New York harbor, where civilian dissenters to the Lincoln regime were imprisoned. Having illegally suspended Habeas Corpus, the Lincoln regime rounded up tens of thousands of Northern political opponents, including elected officials, newspaper editors and owners, and just about anyone overheard criticizing Lincoln or his regime.
(“Gunny G: What “The Folks” Are Saying…’) ~ Obama, the Constitution and a Permanent State of Emergency
Obama‘s EXECUTIVE ORDERS against guns are coming our way. The Obama régime is declaring a war on The Gun, and they want this war to be PERMANENT. They want the exception to become the norm. Forever. That’s why a hot war is inevitable.
Article 1 of the Constitution establishes that “the Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, UNLESS when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it” — but it does not specify which authority has the jurisdiction to decide on the exceptional suspension of the Constitution.
Another passage of Article 1 declares that the power to declare war and to raise and support the army and navy rests with Congress, BUT Article 2 states that “the President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States.”
THE EXCEPTION WILL BECOME THE NORM. THE CONSTITUTION WILL BE INACTIVE FOREVER.
Of course, Lincoln’s “save the Union” rhetoric was always outrageous nonsense. The original American union of the founding fathers was a voluntary union based on the Jeffersonian notion in the Declaration of Independence that the just powers of government result only from the consent of the governed, and whenever that consent was withdrawn, it was the duty of the governed to abolish that government.
It was nothing more than a practical political arrangement and not some magical, mystical, sacred union that “justified” the mass murder of more than 350,000 Southerners to “save” it. Indeed, the founding fathers would probably have thought such a thing to be perhaps the biggest atrocity in world history.
Our Secret Constitution: How Lincoln Redefined American Democracy: The Independent Review: The Independent Institute
…..Fletcher’s quest to twist the U.S. Constitution to conform to a Rawlsian theory of egalitarian justice, his attempt to square the circle, results in fundamental inconsistencies. For example, on the one hand he maintains that “the rule of law requires, of course, courts that enjoy respect and legitimacy” (p. 257), but on the other he praises Lincoln for his treatment of Chief Justice Taney’s efforts to enforce habeas corpus (p. 167).
He advocates human dignity but espouses a coercive form of government capable of denying individuals the fruits of their labors. He gives lip service to democratic ideals while promoting a form of centralization incompatible with popular control and consent. Moreover, one must not assume that the centralization he advances stops at national borders. His operative theoretical assumptions blanket the human family with a visionary egalitarian ideal of global redistribution.
The Phoenix, Ariz., fight over a Bible study in a man’s home has spilled over into the state Supreme Court, with a writ of habeas corpus filed by Rutherford Institute asking the justices to intervene and release Michael Salman, who was jailed after repeatedly holding Bible studies at his home.
If polls indicate that Obama is going to win the upcoming election, no problem. He’ll keep flashing that fake Barry Obama grin until Nov. 7, then move swiftly to begin unleashing a dictatorial full monty – consisting of more regulations, higher taxes and less freedom – that will shock all but his staunchest Marxist allies.
Nothing will be off limits – a national police force, instant citizenship for all Third World people who want to come to America, forced equalization of income (except for Obama’s wealthy supporters), widespread use of tax audits to carry out vendettas against enemies of his administration, a virtual end to oil drilling, coal mining and gas exploration, suspension of habeas corpus, a new sedition act that will make it a crime to speak out against the government, the police, or the military … and much, much more.
On the other hand, two or three months before the election, if the polls clearly show that Obama is going to go down in defeat, I believe there’s better than a 50-50 chance of a major “emergency” coincidentally making its appearance, convincingly manufactured in such a way as to cause the average entitlement junkie to agree that we must rally around the president and “postpone” the November elections.
…..The above statement was made by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1866 in the context of its ruling that the Lincoln administration’s suspension of Habeas Corpus was unconstitutional. As long as the civil courts were operating (which they were), the Court ruled, it is unconstitutional for either the president or the Congress to suspend the writ of Habeas Corpus.
What this statement says is that it is precisely in times of national emergencies, such as war, that civil liberties must be most jealously protected. If not, then governments will be encouraged to generate crises, or perceptions of crises, in order to grab more power for themselves by diminishing individual liberty.
This profound truth gives the lie to the notion that one can be an advocate and supporter of the American state’s unconstitutional and aggressive wars on the one hand, and a “constitutionalist” on the other. War is the enemy of constitutional liberty. The current poster boy for this contradictory outlook is the radio talking head Marc Levin (“The Grate One,” as Lew Rockwell calls him) who bloviates endlessly about how devoted he supposedly is to the Constitution while aggressively supporting the neocon agenda of endless war in the Middle East and elsewhere – and all of the accompanying assaults on civil liberties at home. So as not to appear to be sexist, I should also point out that Congresswoman Michele Bachman is the current poster girl for this position, claiming that of all the candidates for the Republican presidential nomination she is the most devoted to the Constitution, while rabidly supporting the never-ending expansion of the warfare state.
Neocons like Levin, Sean Hannity, and Rush Limbaugh who now fancy themselves as constitutionalists since there is a Democrat in the White House are hypocrites of the first order. All during the eight years of the Bush regime their standard response to anyone who would object to the PATRIOT Act and myriad other attacks on constitutional liberty was to proclaim that “9/11 changed everything.” Translation: the hell with the constitution; we’re engaged in a never-ending “war on terra,” as George W. Bush called it.
In Federal Suit, Man Claims DPD Stormed His House For No Reason, Beat the Hell Out of Him – Dallas News – Unfair Park
Every once in a while, amid the stacks of semi-literate, pro se habeas corpus petitions, trademark suits and product liability complaints, there comes a federal filing so disturbing, so completely awful, that it leaves the reader with nothing but questions.
This week, it’s Danny Cantu v. The City of Dallas and a whole passel of named and unnamed police officers. According to the complaint, which made its way to Courthouse News yesterday, Cantu, a diesel mechanic, was making his lunch January 22, 2010, when he saw a few cops streaking across his yard. A deafening explosion shook the room as a flash bomb shot through the door. Nearly 20 officers crashed in.
(“Some On The Right Hate Ron Paul”) The Stupid and the Dishonest Join the Attacks on Ron Paul by Thomas DiLorenzo
Yet another neocon Republican establishment political hack has demonstrated ignorance, deceit, and bad manners in yet another attack on Ron Paul.
This time it is one Jeffrey Lord, a “contributing editor” to The American Spectator magazine. Writing in a January 15 article on the Philly.com Web site, Lord feigns outrage over the fact that five years ago Ron Paul told NBC’s “Meet the Press” that the Civil War was unnecessary to end slavery.
Lord is being deceitful here by taking what Ron Paul said out of context. I remember Ron Paul’s appearance on that show, and the point he was making was that all the rest of the world – the British, Spaniards, French, Dutch, Danes, Swedes, the Northern states in the U.S. – ended slavery peacefully in the nineteenth century. His point was that we should have done what the British did, and used tax dollars to purchase the freedom of the slaves and then ended it forever. That, Said Ron Paul, would have been preferable to a war that ended up killing over 650,000 Americans (850,000 according the the very latest historical research) while destroying a large part of the U.S. economy. Lord is obviously ignorant of all of this history.
Lord cites my book, The Real Lincoln, to feign additional outrage over the fact that I supposedly called Lincoln a “Dictator-President.” He apparently suffered a case of the vapors when he discovered that Ron Paul listed The Real Lincoln as “recommended reading” at the end of his own book, Revolution: A Manifesto.
…..Neocons like Levin, Sean Hannity, and Rush Limbaugh who now fancy themselves as constitutionalists since there is a Democrat in the White House are hypocrites of the first order. All during the eight years of the Bush regime their standard response to anyone who would object to the PATRIOT Act and myriad other attacks on constitutional liberty was to proclaim that “9/11 changed everything.”
Warning – Obama Says He Wants To be Like Lincoln!
Even Lincoln’s most worshipful biographers have called him a dictator. And the reason was as soon as he got into office, he launched a military invasion of the South without the consent of Congress, which is unconstitutional; he declared martial law; he blockaded Southern ports, which is unconstitutional without declaring war; and he suspended the writ of habeas corpus. There were over 13,000 Northern citizens put in political prison without a warrant, and without being charged. Alarmingly, President Barack Obama says he wants to govern like Lincoln, and it would appear he is going to be America’s Second Caesar.
We pray that God will deliver us from the Muslim Potentate, Barack Hussein Obama, and send us a leader to form a new Nation in the image of the old God fearing Judeo-Christian Confederate States of America – what a great day that will be!
The Real Abraham Lincoln – The First American Caesar
The American obsession with the sixteenth President of the United States can rightly be described as a cult – not merely a political cult, but an idolatrous religious cult wherein Abraham Lincoln is literally worshipped as a god. His deified likeness seated upon its marble throne in Washington, D.C. is but a symbol of the sublime place of adoration he occupies in the hearts of his admirers everywhere.
In the words of the St. Louis Globe-Democrat: “Abraham Lincoln has long since entered the sublime realm of apotheosis. Where now is the man so rash as to warmly criticize Abraham Lincoln?” And now we see the same deification of Barack Hussein Obama. Who dare criticize our new Caesar? Any challenge to Obama’s actions or authority is immediately classified as Un-American and racist.
ATTENTION PREPPERS – Having More Than 7 Days Of Food Makes You A Suspected Terrorist
YouTube/FoxNews ^ | 11/29/11
Posted on Wednesday, November 30, 2011 12:29:32 AM by Kartographer
James Madison, father of the Constitution, warned, “The means of defense against foreign danger historically have become instruments of tyranny at home.”
During war there has always been a struggle to preserve Constitutional liberties. During the Civil War the right of habeas corpus was suspended. Newspapers were closed down. Fortunately, these rights were restored after the war.
The discussion now to suspend certain rights to due process is especially worrisome given that we are engaged in a war that appears to have no end. Rights given up now cannot be expected to be returned. So, we do well to contemplate the diminishment of due process, knowing that the rights we lose now may never be restored.
My well-intentioned colleagues ignore these admonitions in defending provisions of the Defense bill pertaining to detaining suspected terrorists.
Their legislation would arm the military with the authority to detain indefinitely – without due process or trial – SUSPECTED al-Qaida sympathizers, including American citizens apprehended on American soil.
I want to repeat that. We are talking about people who are merely SUSPECTED of a crime. And we are talking about American citizens.
If these provisions pass, we could see American citizens being sent to Guantanamo Bay.
This should be alarming to everyone watching this proceeding today. Because it…..
…Soon after the Civil War began, President Abraham Lincoln unconstitutionally suspended habeas corpus (later made constitutional by the acquiescence of Congress, which is authorized by the Constitution to suspend habeas corpus in times of war or rebellion). Lincoln also suspended freedom of the press, closing down some 300 newspapers in the North that had either expressed sympathy for Southern independence or had criticized Lincoln’s harsh suppression of the Bill of Rights.
In addition to Lincoln’s crimes against the Constitution, the war against secession also produced a cash crunch for the federal government, and it delayed gold payments to the Dakota Indians as part of a treaty to purchase 90 percent of the current state of Minnesota from the Dakotas. Facing starvation and bankruptcy from loss of both their lands and income, the Dakotas rebelled in 1862 and claimed their land back in a violent rampage. American military officials put down the justifiable Dakota rebellion and held sham military commission trials. The Dakota military commissions convicted 323 Dakota Indians, handing the death sentence to 303. The judicial process included the trial and sentencing of as many as 42 in a single day. Lincoln ordered a review of many of the sentences and, in the face of the massive and obvious injustice, demanded that no death penalty be carried out without his explicit approval.
Lincoln’s suspension of the freedom of the press did not prevent everyone in the North from speaking out against the war, so the President had General Ambrose Burnside issue General Order #38 on April 13, 1863, which ordered the trial by military commission of anyone who had the “habit of declaring sympathies for the enemy,” followed by death…..
Taney also challenges Lincoln’s assertion that emergencies require the executive to usurp congressional and judicial authority. Near the end of the opinion, he says that, if the executive branch can, in any situation, overstep other branches, then “the people of the United States are no longer living under a government of laws.” In Taney’s view, the Constitution is not a mere suggestion of how government should operate under ideal circumstances. Instead, it is a concrete document to which the executive must adhere at all times, including times of emergency. If presidents can abandon the Constitution “upon any pretext or under any circumstances,” the Constitution means nothing. [vi]
Perhaps most importantly, Taney says the framers never intended for the executive to suspend habeas corpus. He offers mounds of evidence to support this contention. First, he cites a major crisis during Thomas Jefferson’s presidency. Aaron Burr, Jefferson’s vice president, led a conspiracy to seize territory around New Orleans to form a new country. During this time, Jefferson actually wanted to suspend the writ, but wrote that he lacked the authority. Instead, he suggested that Congress exercise its power to suspend habeas corpus. [vii]
Second, he writes that the framers, fearing a liberal interpretation of the “necessary and proper” clause, which gives Congress the right to pass any law deemed “necessary and proper” for carrying out its duties, listed several fundamental rights that cannot be violated. It is not a coincidence, Taney says, that the first right listed is the writ of habeas corpus, which may only be suspended in times of invasion or rebellion. [viii]
Third, Taney argues that it defies common sense to believe the framers would have trusted the executive with the right to suspend habeas corpus. They had just broken away from a powerful, despotic English monarch. Therefore, they distrusted a powerful executive, especially one who could arrest citizens and hold them indefinitely without trial. As evidence, Taney cites the strict limits Article 2 places on the executive, such as the requirement for congressional approval of treaties with foreign nations and his short term of office. [ix]
Taney persuasively argues that the Constitution expressly denies the executive the right to suspend habeas corpus, even going so far as to say “I had supposed it to be one of those points of constitutional law upon which there was do difference of opinion, and that it was admitted on all hands, that the privilege of the writ could not be suspended, except by act of Congress.”
“THIS PLACE NEEDS TO BE LEVELED”by Walter Francis Fitzpatrick, IIIThere is no smoking in the Monroe County detention facility, “a decision that is very important to the health and safety of those incarcerated,” but there is also no heat.Nov. 5, 2010 —
There’s quite a report about the conditions here, but I’m going to wait until I leave to release it. It’s really bad. The jailers in here are moving people around, they’re doing things as if they expect some kind of an inspection, so the reports that are going out to The Post & Email are taking an effect. But this place is a mess. It’s not a fit place to survive…it’s just outrageous.There’s a Mr. Daniel Bragg who has been waiting on a habeas corpus petition for two weeks. It’s been buried; nothing has been done, and it’s just being ignored. Two other gentlemen, Mr. Chris Hooper and Mr. Jeff Shewsbury, went to the day room two weeks ago and they were brought some law books to use to try to prepare for their own defense.
They asked for copies from the books, and they were told two weeks ago that the copies were made and that they would be delivered to them. But it’s been more than two weeks. These documents go to their court cases, and the men can’t get them. So that’s going on.