Donald V. Watkins Copyrighted and Published on February 9, 20220 Within two days of his acquittal in the Senate impeachment trial, President Donald J. Trump continued his purge of complicit staffers and other administration officials who tried to remove him from the presidency by (a) launching the Russia probe and (b) participating in the House of Representatives' impeachment proceedings. Gone are: (a) Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, who worked in the White House on the National Security Council as an expert on Ukraine; (b) Yevgency Vindman, a National Security Council attorney and the brother of Col. Vindman; (c) Gordon Sondland, Trump's handpicked ambassador to the European Union; (d) Marie Yovanovitch, the former ambassador to Ukraine; and (e) Jennifer Williams, Vice President Mike Pence's special advisor on European and Russian affairs, who fled her job earlier than expected at the end of January. For the moment, Trump has paused his purge, but more coup d'etat collaborators and participants are expected to be fired. Additionally, Trump's Department of Justice (DOJ) is expected to announce criminal charges against some of the key participants, particularly those who used the Russia probe as a cover for their coup d'etat. These collaborators do not enjoy legislative immunity like the Congress members who lead the impeachment initiative. Top Coup Leaders Still Free Several leaders of the three-year-long coup d'etat against Donald Trump remain free for the moment and have not been charged, to date. They include: (a) Rod Rosenstein, former President Barack Obama's former Deputy Attorney General who oversaw the Russia investigation; (b) James Comey, Obama's FBI director and the person who breathed life into the Russia investigation by approving the Bureau's improper requests for FISA surveilance warrants; and (c) Robert Mueller, the political assassin/special prosecutor Rosenstein designated to take down Donald Trump. Mueller eventually lost his nerve and left Rosenstein and Comey twisting in Washington's deep, dark, political abyss. President Trump criticized Mueller's criminal investigation, calling FBI agents "scum," labeling the federal prosecutors as "corrupt," and exposing the federal criminal justice system as "rigged." No DOJ official, U.S. court officer, or Republican member of Congress publicly disagreed with Trump's assessment of the "rigged" federal criminal justice system. Another coup leader who remains free is Jeff Sessions, Trump's former Attorney General. Sessions, who was a U.S. Senator before taking the Attorney General's job, deserted the President in the midst of the coup d'etat while Trump and his children were taking a barrage of incoming fire from renegade DOJ officials who reported to Mueller. According to confidential and reliable news sources, Jeff Sessions was a key participant in the small circle of cabinet members who discussed removing Donald Trump from his presidency by invoking the 25th Amendment. They talked about declaring Trump unstable and unfit for the Office of President, and eventually decided against this approach. This plan of action is described in a September 5, 2018 Op-Ed article published in the New York Times by "Anonymous." In addition to Jeff Sessions, the cabal of coup d'etat members in Washington included: (a) one highly placed staffer in Vice President Mike Pence's office who served as a back-channel between Pence's office and the coup plotters; (b) at least three prominent White House staffers who interacted with Trump on a daily basis, one of whom had a direct tie to Sessions: and (c) at least four original cabinet members, including one who was a high ranking military officer. All of these coup d'etat co-conspirators departed their cabinet posts and White House jobs after news of the attempted coup was leaked to Trump. Pence's staffer left, as well. Two low-level, secret coup participants are federal criminal justice system officials in Birmingham who advised Sessions in a clandestine role to evade detection. In return, Sessions vouched for one of these officials during the White House and DOJ vetting process. Both officials are still on the job. Finally, we have learned the true identity of "Anonymous," who was a senior member in the Trump administration when his Op-Ed article was published in the New York Times.

By: Donald V. Watkins © Copyrighted and Published on February 7, 2020 Pete Buttigieg's stunning victory in Iowa's Democratic Primary this week has exposed a measure of raw hypocrisy within the National Democratic Party. Informed voters recognize that Buttigieg is super-smart; he is well-versed on domestic and international issues; he is a fiscal conservative and social moderate; and he is a distinguished military veteran. Buttigieg is the former mayor of South Bend, Indiana, a city of 100,000. He is young, vibrant, sensible, and an attractive candidate for moderate voters. Normally, Democrats would be ecstatic to have a presidential candidate with Buttigieg's credentials. However, Party leaders are struggling to hide their private disdain for the fact that Buttigieg is an openly gay man who is devoted to his loving partner. Buttigieg's sexual orientation is a "problem" for the power-brokers who control the National Democratic Party. They want gay votes, but not a gay man at the top of the Party's national ticket in 2020. For the record, I respect all people who deserve respect, regardless of their sexual orientation. Also, I was the first non-gay public official in Alabama to address the state's LGBTQI community at its annual gathering in Montgomery in 1981. Additionally, as a lawyer, I represented the LGBTQI community in numerous court cases in the 1980s and 90s when it was not popular to do so. Finally, as Birmingham Mayor Richard Arrington, Jr.'s Special Counsel from 1985 to 1998, I personally imposed and aggressively policed a "zero tolerance" policy that prohibited discrimination of any kind against members of Birmingham's LGBTQI community. In 2016, Democratic Party leaders used the "Super-delegate" system of party loyalists to steal the nomination from Sen. Bernie Sanders and give it to Hillary Clinton. Afterwards, Clinton was soundly defeated by Donald J. Trump in the Electoral College voting. If Buttigieg continues to rack up primary election victories, Party leaders will likely steal the nomination from him. They can't handle the thought of a gay man as their presidential nominee. The Party's hierarchy wants former vice-president Joe Biden as its 2020 presidential nominee, even though Biden is old, tired, and entering the early stages of senility. These Party bosses dislike Bernie Sanders because he is considered a "Democratic socialist" who is backed by liberal feminist and New York City Congresswoman, Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez. They view Sen. Elizabeth Warren as a smart, uncontrollable, arrogant outsider. This makes Warren an "undesirable." The Party's goal over the next few months is to have a brokered convention in Milwaukee. In the event no candidate has enough delegates to secure the nomination outright, the "Super-delegates" will team with those non-viable candidates who need their campaign debts retired. These groups are expected to broker a deal to deliver the nomination to Hillary Clinton. Even though Clinton is not running in the primaries, she is the Party's "chosen one." As explained in my February 4, 2020 article titled, "Donald J. Trump: The Invincible President," none of the Democratic candidates can defeat Trump. However, Buttigieg would give Trump one spirited run for the presidency.

By: Donald V. Watkins © Copyrighted and Published on February 4, 2020 Three weeks after New York City real estate tycoon Donald J. Trump announced his candidacy for President of the United States, I published an article on Facebook which predicted he would win the race. During the Republican primaries, I watched Trump mow down 15 challengers in the race like they were paper mannequins. In November 2016, Trump came from behind to win a stunning Electoral College victory over formidable Democratic Party presidential candidate, Hillary Clinton. After Trump assumed office in January 2017, top Obama-era Department of Justice (DOJ) officials launched a so-called "independent" criminal probe of the Trump Campaign's interaction with Russian officials. Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein teamed with FBI Director James Comey, and Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller in an attempted coup d'etat, which was thwarted through the sheer strength of Trump's willingness to defeat lawlessness within the federal criminal justice system. Trump's hand-picked Attorney General, former U.S. Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL), deserted him on the battlefield while Trump and his children were under a barrage of fire from a cabal of renegade DOJ officials who tried to overthrow his newly installed government. Trump is the first and only president in U.S. history to publicly label FBI agents as "scum," characterize the DOJ as "corrupt," and portray the federal criminal justice system as "rigged." No president before Trump had the courage to define the federal criminal justice system for what it is -- corrupt and rigged to the core. Trump single-handedly de-balled Rosenstein, Comey, Mueller, and Sessions. He fought these coup d’état co-conspirators and won. Turkey President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who survived an attempted coup d’état several years ago, rounded up all of the leaders of that coup, charged them with the appropriate crimes, prosecuted them to the fullest extent of the law, and imprisoned them. Trump has not yet punished the coup d’état leaders in his case. When the DOJ's attempted coup d’état failed, the Democratic controlled House of Representatives launched an impeachment inquiry that resulted in the December 2019 impeachment of President Trump on charges that he abused the powers of his office and obstructed a Congressional investigation. On Wednesday, the Republican controlled Senate is expected to acquit Trump on both charges. In November 2020, a Democratic presidential nominee will try to block Trump's re-election. Barring divine intervention, Donald Trump will win re-election by a landslide margin in the popular vote and Electoral College. Here are a few of the reasons why: The U.S. economy is booming. The stock markets are at an all-time high. Unemployment is at an all-time low. Trump has not started any new wars. Trump has used his experience as a successful international businessman to renegotiate trade deals with China and Mexico on terms that are more favorable to America. Trump also signed the First Step Act in December 2018, which is the most significant criminal justice reform legislation in decades. Whether we agree with Donald Trump's policies, or not, no one can deny his unconquerable spirit and his highly skilled ability to fight and win the toughest battles in life. American voters have never experienced this kind of president in the modern political era. A majority of voters love him for his strength as a fighter. They realize that Trump has a plethora of character flaws, but they are attracted to his unconquerable fighting spirit. The 2020 Democratic presidential candidates are a boring collection of irrelevant politicians. They are weak and timid warriors. Only a political gladiator with considerable fighting skills can defeat Trump. No Democratic candidate in the race has these skills. Remember, in political warfare, the most committed adversary will win. As for me, I have been a declared political independent since 2001. Over the decades, I have supported Democrats, Republicans, and Independents who have run for various federal, state, and local political offices. I have contributed large sums of money to these candidates, and never took a dime from them for any purpose. Finally, I am a capitalist who focuses on economic growth and participatory democracy. I am not a "slave or indentured servant" on anybody's political party plantation, and I like it that way. I make my own political friends and enemies. I do not outsource this prerogative to anyone, ever. This commentary is NOT an endorsement of President Trump. Instead, it is an explanation of why Trump is politically invincible at this juncture.

By: Donald V. Watkins © Copyrighted and Published on February 2, 2020 The February 2020 edition of Cosmopolitan Magazine features an excellent article by veteran reporter Sarah McClure that exposes a culture of incest, rape, and abuse within the 342,000 member Amish community in North America. The Amish are dispersed across rural areas of Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, Kentucky, New York, Michigan, and Wisconsin. They keep to themselves, and they are hiding a horrifying secret. During a year-long investigation, Ms. McClure identified 52 official cases of Amish child sexual assaults in several states over the past two decades. Virtually every victim McClure spoke to was dissuaded by his/her family or church leader from reporting his/her abuse to police. These abused children had also been conditioned to avoid seeking outside help. Some victims were intimidated and threatened with excommunication. The incest, rape, and sexual abuse has occurred in Amish children as young as 9 years old. The Amish community's closed-end, patriarchal society, isolated lifestyle, educational system that ends at the eighth grade, culture of victim shaming and blaming, and meager access to social media and cell phones, all combine to create a nightmare experience for young incest, rape, and sexual abuse victims. Zero Tolerance for the Sexual Abuse of Children On December 15, 2019, I published an article titled, "Clergy Sex Abuse Must End, Now." The article blasted the Catholic Church for its belated, weak, and timid response to the clergy's widespread sexual abuse of young Catholic children. I demanded that Pope Francis "man-up" and purge the Church of child molesters within the ranks of its clergy. The Pope's weakness on this subject is glaring and inexcusable. He has yet to demonstrate a firm "zero tolerance" policy on child sex abuse. Unlike the Catholic Church, the Amish do not have a centralized leader. They live in local congregations or "church districts," each one of which is made up of 20 to 40 families. Without a centralized leader for the Amish faithful, the responsibility for protecting young Amish victims from incest, rape, and sexual abuse rests with local sheriffs, prosecutors, and judges in the church districts where they reside. These public officials must also demonstrate by clear and convincing law enforcement practices that a "zero tolerance" policy for child molesters is in effect and will be strictly enforced, without exceptions. Catholics and Amish faithful are free to practice their religious beliefs, but they are not free to commit criminal acts of incest, rape, and sexual abuse against children. Any religion that tolerates incest, rape, and the sexual abuse of children is no religion at all. New Program Aimed at Helping Abused Children Today, I am announcing a new national program aimed at helping sexually abused children. This program will identify, profile, and shame law enforcement officials who lack the courage and/or competence to protect young children from incest, rape, and sexual abuse. If sheriffs, prosecutors, and judges are incapable of aggressively policing and stopping the perpetrators who engage in this kind of criminal conduct, they don't need to hold public law enforcement offices. From this day forward, we are demanding a strict "zero tolerance" policy on incest, rape and sexual abuse of children. If we save one child with this program, it will be worth the price we must pay from law enforcement officials who may become vindictive over their shaming. I am sick and tired of worn out excuses from the perpetrators of incest, rape, and sexual abuse of children and from the indifferent law enforcement officials who tolerate it.

By: Donald V. Watkins © Copyrighted and Published on January 26, 2020 The ink had not dried on my special five-part series of articles titled, "God Wears a Robe," when U.S. government law enforcement agencies and bank regulators announced on Thursday that they had settled cases involving a nationwide fraud scheme perpetuated by Wells Fargo and its senior management executives from 2012 to 2016. As part of the fraud scheme, Wells Fargo bank executives created more than 2 million fake bank accounts for existing customers for the sole purpose of bilking them out of unearned banking fees. The fraud scheme was implemented under the watchful eyes of John Stumpf, Wells Fargo's former CEO, Hope Hardison, the bank's former chief administrative officer, Michael Loughlin, the bank's former chief risk officer, Carrie Tolstedt, the bank's former head of consumer banking, as well as Wells Fargo's former general counsel, chief auditor, and scores of mid-level executives. All of the fraud perpetrators are white. As expected, none of these bank executives faced criminal charges for conspiracy, wire fraud, mail fraud, or bank fraud. Thursday's settlement is the most glaring example of the preferential treatment federal prosecutors accord to big Wall Street banks and their top executives. Wells Fargo and its former top executives are "too big to prosecute." Culprits like Wells Fargo, Stumpf, and the other bank officers bought their way out of criminal prosecutions by agreeing to pay large fines. Stumpf was fined $17.5 million. Hardison and Loughlin paid $3.5 million combined. Stumpf also agreed to a lifetime ban from the banking industry. Bank regulators are seeking $25 million from Ms. Tolstedt and a lifetime ban from banking. She has already forfeited $66 million in bonuses and payments derived from the fraud scheme. The other Wells Fargo executives involved in the fraud scheme are embroiled in administrative proceedings to resolve their cases. Selective Prosecution Based Upon Race and Status in the Financial Community Now, compare the U.S. government's preferential treatment of Wells Fargo and its white senior management executives with the government's mistreatment of Christopher Pitts, an Alabama attorney who completed $200 million in real estate closings for the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. Pitts' case was featured on January 21, 2020 in "God Wears a Robe" - Part 3. Federal prosecutors charged Chris Pitts with operating a fraud scheme because there was an unexplained $1,090,888.53 shortfall in his HUD-related trust accounts. These prosecutors spent years going after Pitts. They eventually conceded that Pitts did not steal the missing $1,090,888.53. However, federal prosecutors refused to dismiss the fraud case against Pitts. After federal prosecutors in Montgomery, Alabama indicted Chris Pitts, a forensic audit was conducted by Pitts. The audit results found that the $1,090,888.53 was missing from Pitts' HUD-related trust accounts because mortgage giants Washington Mutual and Countrywide Financial failed to send the money they owed to HUD before these lenders collapsed during the Great Recession of 2008. What is worse, the government did not file a claim for insurance benefits under various policies Pitts had purchased to cover the full amount of the loss for this kind of occurrence. Even though Wells Fargo operated branches within the Middle District of Alabama during its 2012 to 2016 crime spree involving the fake bank accounts, the federal prosecutors who came after Chris Pitts over $1,090,888.53 were too weak and compromised to pursue criminal charges against Wells Fargo and the bank executives who perpetrated the fraud scheme. The "in-your-face" disparate treatment between the prosecution of Chris Pitts and the prosecutorial "pass" given to the Wells Fargo fraudsters is sickening. It also constitutes a classic case of selective prosecution based upon race and stature within the financial community. In the eyes of the federal prosecutors who pounded their chests in three press releases while going after Pitts, the fall from grace and monetary fines were enough punishment for the culprits in the massive Wells Fargo fraud scheme. These prosecutors determined that Chris Pitts needed to go to prison because he committed an accounting error that, at best, amounted to "negligence." Of course, Pitts, who is black, has no standing or significant stature within the Wall Street community of power players. A Gathering Place for Neo-Nazis, Skinheads, and Clarence Thomas-like "Negroes" Even though Wells Fargo's multi-year fraud scheme was documented by bank regulators and acknowledged by the bank itself, federal prosecutors decided to give the perpetrators of this scheme a huge break by not prosecuting them on federal fraud charges. Prosecutors have this power. No federal prosecutor is required to apply federal criminal laws in a fair and non-discriminatory manner. They are not even required to follow the American Bar Association's standards of practice for prosecutors, or any standards at all. The power of the U.S. Attorney's Office to harass black criminal suspects and charge them with a variety of crimes, whether warranted or not, has attracted a host of neo-Nazis and Skinheads to the ranks of federal prosecutors and their support staffs. These modern-day racists are subtle and polished in the expression of their racism. They do not openly use derogatory terms like "nigger", "coon", and "filthy, evil beast" in public settings. Instead, they simply mistreat blacks like their predecessors did during the old COINTELPRO era. Today's federal prosecutors are comforted in the practice of their racism by the sprinkling of Clarence Thomas-like safe "Negroes" who are showcased as their "friends" and colleagues. Thanks to the 1996 U.S. Supreme Court case of United States v. Armstrong, the discretion of federal prosecutors to forgive the crimes of rich and powerful white criminal defendants while aggressively prosecuting black defendants like Chris Pitts is virtually unreviewable in the court of law. Chris Pitts remains imprisoned at the Talladega Federal Prison Camp while the white Wells Fargo executives are free to go about their daily lives without worry. They have been forgiven by federal prosecutors.

By: Donald V. Watkins Copyrighted and Published on January 23, 2020 The Conclusion The cases of Isaac Culver, Christopher Pitts, and Dr. Donatus Mbanefo demonstrate the embedded racism in the federal criminal justice system. In too many cases, modern-day COINTELPRO law enforcement agents and prosecutors run the system. They destroy lives of innocent black people simply because they can. Prosecutorial judgments are often skewed by their racist tendencies. Sadly, these three cases are not the worst ones I have encountered in recent months. I am writing a book about five cases that are far worse than those involving Isaac Culver, Christopher Pitts, and Dr. Donatus Mbanefo. Black men are imprisoned in the federal criminal justice system at six times the rate of white men simply because the U.S. Department of Justice has become a weapon to maximize the incarceration of black men. Federal prosecutors are successful in this regard because federal judges, who are supposed to be the guardians of the fair administration of justice, are little more than judicial "fluffers" for prosecutors. In some cases, their arrogance and racism exceed that of prosecutors. J. Edgar Hoover would be extremely proud of them. To be clear, there are some fair-minded and decent federal prosecutors and judges who work hard every day to make sure that the scales of justice in their courtrooms are balanced and colorblind. Unfortunately, their numbers are dwindling each year. The sad reality is this: Very few federal judges are willing to stop modern-day federal agents and prosecutors from running COINTELPRO operations because they do not want to suffer the fate experienced by two brave federal judges in the 1960s, 70s, and 80s -- Frank M. Johnson, Jr. of Montgomery, Alabama and Virgil Pittman of Mobile, Alabama. These two judges were severely criticized in the local media and ostracized in a majority of the state's white community because they advanced and protected the rights of African-Americans and other minorities to receive a fair trial and equal justice in their courtrooms. In the case of Judge Johnson, this ostracism caused his son to commit suicide. The blame for the revival of COINTELPRO operations within the federal criminal justice system today rests squarely at the feet of federal prosecutors and judges. For the most part, they are no longer fair, balanced and impartial participants in the administration of justice. They have erased the line between prosecutors and judges. They are one and the same now. Furthermore, today's prosecutors and judges are mostly "political hacks" who prosecute and decide cases on the basis of a political agenda, race, and personal biases, rather than law and facts. President Donald J. Trump, whose sister was a distinguished federal judge in New York, has recognized this sad reality. The President has labeled FBI agents as "scum", federal prosecutors as "corrupt," and the federal court system as "rigged." Trump should know better than most Americans whether his assessment is accurate because he was the self-proclaimed "victim" of an FBI-sanctioned attempted coup d'etat and two-year grand jury investigation by federal prosecutors. Trump survived this coup d'etat because he fought against it with every ounce of strength in his body. Interestingly, no Republican member of Congress has publicly disagreed with Trump's assessment of the federal criminal justice system and its key participants. Members of the lawyers' bar associations are reluctant to criticize federal judges publicly or hold them accountable for their misdeeds simply because they fear the expected retaliation when they appear in their courtrooms. Most lawyers are afraid of prosecutors because they know how incestuous and slimy the relationship between prosecutors and judges has become. How many more innocent people of color and their families must be ruined before the American people lose complete faith in the system? More importantly, will trust in the system ever be regained? Federal judges are the biggest contributors to a federal criminal justice system that perpetuates the only constitutionally approved form of "slavery and indentured servitude." The founding fathers gave these judges a lifetime appointment so they would have the independence to do the right thing -- render justice in a fair and impartial manner, without fear of consequences. Federal judges are the only group of public officials in America with lifetime tenure in their jobs. Rather than honor the rationale for the award of a lifetime job, most federal judges have turned their backs on this principle in order to seek and enjoy social acceptance in the renaissance of white supremacy. This problem will be hard to fix because "God Wears a Robe." People of color need not fear the men and women in white robes any longer. As the cases of Isaac Culver, Christopher Pitts, and Donatus Mbanefo demonstrate, it is the "gods" who don black robes who constitute a clear and present danger to people of color in America today.

By: Donald V. Watkins © Copyrighted and Published on January 19, 2020 Justice should be fair, impartial, and colorblind. In America, it is not. One of the last and largest bastions of white supremacy in America is the federal criminal justice system. Comprised of law enforcement agencies, prosecutors, judges, and probation officers, the federal criminal justice system incarcerates black men at six times the rate of white men. It incarcerates black women at nearly double the rate of white women. Overall, blacks make up 13% of the nation's population, but account for 37.5% of the federal prison population. Are black men six times more likely to commit federal crimes than white men? Of course not. Is America's black population three times more likely to engage in crime than its white population? No. What is true is that the federal criminal justice system is rooted in deep-seated racism against people of color. The trend of using the criminal justice system to terrorize the black community dates back to the era of slave codes, which severely punished blacks under color of law for any and every act that attempted to recognize their humanity. In the 1857 Dred Scott case, the U.S. Supreme Court made it clear that blacks in America -- whether freed or slaves -- had no rights that white men were bound to respect. When Congress passed the Thirteenth Amendment abolishing slavery, it gave federal and state judicial systems the power to perpetuate slavery and indentured servitude as long as this inhumane status was used in punishment of a crime. Not surprisingly, this loophole in the Thirteenth Amendment has been aggressively used by state and federal prosecutors and judges to drive the mass incarceration of blacks as a political and racial agenda. The reign of racial terror conducted by the federal criminal justice system against African-Americans and other "undesirables" was first documented by Congress in the 1976 Church Committee Report on COINTELPRO activities. This formal FBI program, which operated on a centralized basis from Washington, D.C. from 1956 to 1971, targeted black civil rights activists and other dissidents for neutralization. FBI agents, federal prosecutors, and cooperating federal judges railroaded blacks on trumped up federal charges in an effort to destroy their credibility in the white and black communities. When the formal COINTELPRO program ended, FBI field offices in the South continued COINTELPRO activities unabated to this day. The official and unofficial versions of COINTELPRO have been hugely successful because highly intelligent and more polished white supremacists have been able to quietly and surreptitiously infiltrate the ranks of law enforcement agencies, prosecutors' offices, and judgeships to carry out this racist agenda. This exclusive five-part series of articles exposes the nature and scope of the federal judiciary's embedded racism, as illustrated by the criminal cases of three prominent alleged "first-time offenders" -- Isaac Culver, Christopher Pitts, and Dr. Donatus Mbanefo. All of these men are black; all of them are the victims of impermissible selective prosecution; all of them are imprisoned; and all of them are actually innocent of the charges for which they have been convicted. In each case, the prosecution was driven by a modern-day COINTELPRO racial and political agenda. In each case, the trial judge betrayed his sworn duty to guarantee a fair and impartial trial. In each case, there was a complete failure of justice. Federal Prosecutors and Judges At the outset, we must all understand that the titles "prosecutor" and "judge" are no different than the titles "electrician" or "plumber." Federal prosecutors and judges are simply attorneys who are paid to do a job. There is no magic that happens when these individuals enter their offices (courtrooms); they simply go about performing their designated duties. Every modernized society has abolished the prosecutor's favorite tool, the grand jury, including England, which is the original source for most U.S. laws. The reason for abolishing the grand jury is because it ultimately became a mechanism by which prosecutors got to "tar and feather" defendants before trial. In the U.S., federal grand juries are often empanelled without the designated "target" of the investigation being notified. Likewise, the "target" has no idea of who is sitting on the grand jury. It could very well be an ex-girl or boyfriend. It could very well be someone with whom the targeted person has had a past altercation. The grand jury is a one-sided affair in which prosecutors simply present whatever evidence they would like the grand jury to consider with absolutely no challenges to its truth or veracity. Because the grand jurors have no idea of their job or the power they could potentially wield, they do not realize they can subpoena witnesses, they can demand to hear and consider exculpatory evidence that exonerates the "target," and that prosecutors are merely "guests" in the grand jury room who can be excused from their presence at will. It is the grand jurors, not the prosecutors, who are "in charge" of the proceedings. As described by author Eddie Curran in his 2009 book titled, "The Governor of Goat Hill" (at page 491), U.S. Attorneys lead the 93 offices of federal lawyers who prosecute crimes and represent the government in civil matters. For the most part, U.S. Attorneys are "political hacks." Very few of them won an appointment to office on the basis of competence or merit. Many of them were active campaign operatives for the successful presidential candidate. Some of them are diehard racists, particularly in a couple of the Deep South states. Federal judges are selected by a group of elite members of the local community for which they are to serve a lifetime appointment. The presidential appointment is only a token administrative gesture. The community group recommends to their district congress members the attorney they would like sitting on the bench. Since this appointment is made for life, the list of misdeeds of these judges is well-documented and never ending. For example, there are federal judges who sleep with prosecutors, law clerks, and courtroom bailiffs in clandestine relationships, those who hold court while high on drugs or intoxicated, those who surrender control of their courtrooms to prosecutors and powerful political figures, those who beat their wives, those who take bribes and payoffs, and those who are nothing more than shameless political hacks. To be clear, there are some fair-minded and decent federal judges who work hard every day to make sure the scales of justice in their courtrooms are balanced and colorblind. Unfortunately, their numbers are dwindling each year. Sadly, when these people are appointed to judgeships for life, they feel and act like gods. Maybe the U.S. Supreme Court judgeships require a lifetime appointment, but there is simply no justification for thousands of attorneys to be appointed as gods to district and appellate-level courts. There are simply too many of them to closely monitor their behavior. This self-perpetuating political patronage system creates a breeding ground for charging, trying, and convicting innocent people, particularly defendants of color. Even when these convictions are overturned (which occurs many years later), the victims of these miscarriages of justice have already suffered irreparable harm and they have absolutely no recourse against the racist prosecutors and judges in their cases because these culprits have immunity from lawsuits that is granted to them under federal law. Tomorrow, we will expose the "Judicial Lynching of Isaac Culver" in "God Wears a Robe" - Part 2.

By: Donald V. Watkins © Copyrighted and Published on January 15, 2020 The world knows that Boeing's new 737 MAX airplane is unsafe. The aircraft is fatally flawed from a structural engineering standpoint. Two 737 MAX airplanes have already crashed and killed 346 passengers and crew members. A secret FAA report that was publicly released in December predicted that a total of 15 of 737 MAX airplanes will crash during the life cycle of the aircraft's production. The crashes were predicted to occur every 2 to 3 years. A total of 2,625 passengers and crew members aboard the 737 MAX jetliners are expected to die in these crashes, assuming the FAA allows the airplane to fly again without structural modifications. Air carriers worldwide have ordered 5,000 of these flying death traps, which cost $200 million a piece. The 737 MAX's "Frankenstein" engineering design makes them unsafe to fly. Boeing's first "fix" for the 737 MAX was the MCAS software package. This "fix" proved to be ineffective after the first two crashes occurred within six months of each other. Boeing's new solution to its 737 MAX crisis is simple. It involves two slick hoodwinking moves on the flying public. First, Boeing will make passengers on future 737 MAX flights assume the risk of flying on this defective airplane by encouraging carriers to specify on the purchased tickets that these passengers are flying on a 737 MAX. This way, the unlucky passengers and crew members who are among the next 2,279 people who will die in the remaining 13 fatal crashes will not have a viable legal claim against Boeing because they voluntarily assumed the risk of flying on the airplane with full knowledge of its widely-known design flaws and defects. Second, Boeing will offer simulator training to 737 MAX pilots to help them navigate the cockpit emergencies that are expected to occur in the next 13 fatal crashes. The training will give pilots 15 seconds of response time to avoid a crash after takeoff, which is when these crashes are likely to occur. Realistically, no pilot can effectively respond to this type of cockpit emergency in a mere 15 seconds. This prophylactic solution allows Boeing to shift liability for the next 2,279 deaths from the company to the pilots and airlines that employ them by citing "pilot error" for these crashes. Will Boeing's hoodwinking strategy work? Yes, but only if the flying public buys it. Boeing has already secured a preliminary buy-in from FAA regulators and top Department of Justice officials. In Washington, big campaign donor money speaks louder than flight safety measures, especially during a presidential election year. Finally, the public should understand that it is far cheaper for Boeing to pay death claims to the 2,625 passengers who have already died and those who will likely die in the FAA's 15 predicted 737 MAX crashes than it is to properly fix the design flaws in the aircraft. In this regard, Boeing continues to place profits ahead of flight safety.

By: Donald V. Watkins © Copyrighted and Published on January 8, 2020 Hollywood actress Lori Loughlin and her husband, Mossimo Giannulli, will go to trial in 2020 on what federal prosecutors in Los Angeles claim is the biggest college cheating scandal in U.S. history. Loughlin and Giannulli have been charged with wire fraud, mail fraud, and bribery. Both defendants maintain their innocence. If convicted, they face up to 50 years in prison. If there was ever a case for "jury nullification" against misguided federal prosecutors, this is the case. Jurors should boldly and proudly invoke the doctrine of jury nullification in Loughlin's and Giannulli's case. The same federal prosecutors who targeted, indicted, and are expected to try Loughlin and Giannulli would never have the balls to charge the multitude of billionaires who routinely buy admission into prestigious universities for their academically challenged children and grandchildren by gifting these schools tens of millions of dollars for new buildings and endowed chairs that often bear the donors' names. This is exactly how a mediocre high school student/current senior presidential adviser like Jared Kushner got into Harvard University. Kushner's father, a New York real estate mogul who served time in federal prison, bought Jared's admission into Harvard with his multi-million dollar gift to the university. What is worse, the weak-kneed federal prosecutors in Loughlin and Giannulli's criminal case would pee on themselves if they had to challenge the college cheating practice that affords admissions preferences to the relatives of university alumni who otherwise could not win admission to these prestigious university on the basis of their own merit. Never mind that this discriminatory preference was instituted a century ago for the specific benefit of white Anglo-Saxon men at a time when Jewish enrollment at these universities was surging. Furthermore, the same federal prosecutors who strutted to the microphones like peacocks during their press conference in the Loughlin-Giannulli case do not have the courage or intestinal fortitude to indict Boeing senior management executives and board members for the criminally negligent homicide of 189 people who died in the October 2018 crash of Lion Air Flight 610 or the murder of 157 people who died in the March 2019 crash of Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302, even though a Boeing manager in the 737 MAX program repeatedly warned these executives and board members about flight safety problems with the production of the 737 MAX aircraft before the fatal crashes occurred. On this issue, prosecutors are castrated eunuchs. The only practical device available to ordinary Americans who want to redirect the attention of misguided federal prosecutors to the mega-criminals who break the law while winking at accommodating federal prosecutors during their crime spree is jury nullification. Jurors should exercise this powerful tool whenever federal prosecutors extend their non-prosecution preferential treatment to the super-rich Fortune 500 corporations and Wall Street executives who are deemed "too big to prosecute." If the federal judge who presides over the Loughlin-Giannulli criminal case is more than your typical, ingratiating, judicial "fluffer" for prosecutors, he/she will respect the jury's invocation of jury nullification in this case.

By: Donald V. Watkins © Copyrighted and Published on January 10, 2020 Columnist Peggy Noonan published a "Declaration" in the December 28-29, 2019 print edition of the Wall Street Journal titled, "The Century of the Postheroic President". It is the best explanation of Donald J. Trump's voter appeal that I have read. According to Noonan: "We have entered the age of the postheroic presidency. Certain low ways are forgiven, certain rough ways now established. Americans once asked a lot of their president. They had to be people not only of high competence and solid, sober backgrounds, but high character .... But the heroic conception of the presidency is over. Bill Clinton and his embarrassments damaged it. Two unwon wars and the great recession killed it. 'If you like your doctor you can keep your doctor' buried it. When you deliberately lie like that, you are declaring you have no respect for the people. And people noticed .... They would like to have someone admirable in the job, someone whose virtues move them, but they've decided it's not necessary. They think: Just keep the economy growing, don't start any new wars, and push back against the social-issues maximalists if you can." Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton started this trend. Americans knew that Nixon and Clinton were low-life liars, but voters stuck with them through two terms. Both men were impeached. Nixon resigned, while Clinton finished his second term in office. George Herbert Walker Bush lied, as well. His "read my lips -- no new taxes" pronouncement was a big lie. His son, George H. Bush, was dumb, deviant, and lazy. Bush allowed Vice President Dick Cheney to run the government, while he relaxed at his ranch in Texas. Barack Obama was a nice guy, but he was lost in the job. Democrats and Independents stayed with Obama because his motivational speeches made us feel good. By 2016, voters had given up on high moral character and ethical standards in the White House. Hence, they elected Donald J. Trump, America's first "thug" president. Republicans and Independents have supported Trump for three years because Democrats seem to be lost in the fog of irrelevant public policies and outdated ideologies. In 2020, President Donald J. Trump has tens of millions of closeted voters who disapprove of his litany of character flaws but see no realistic alternative for the presidency. The Democrats who are running for president are uninspiring and out of touch with reality. Joe Biden, the Democratic Party's front-runner is in the early stages of senility. He would rather attack an inquisitive Iowa voter than aggressively go after Donald Trump. Trump will likely win re-election in this year because he has grown the economy; he has not started any new wars; and he has defeated left-leaning socialist Democrats at every turn. Because of this track-record, voters will ignore Trump's (a) homegrown bigotry against women, gays, Muslims, and people of color, (b) embarrassing ignorance on matters of significant public interest, (c) habitual narcissism, (d) impulsive lying, (e) nasty, gratuitous insults to America's traditional allies, and (f) incessant, ingratiating subservience to Russian President Vladimir Putin. There is one wild card that could upset a Trump victory in 2020: If Trump pressures the FAA to unground the 737 MAX airplanes after taking campaign money directly from Boeing or through one of his allied Super-PACs, and if one of the 737 MAX flying deathtraps crashes in America months before the election, voters will likely punish Trump for placing Boeing's profits and his need for campaign money ahead of flight safety and their lives. Voters support Trump, but not at the expense of their own lives.

By: Donald V. Watkins © Copyrighted and Published on December 31, 2019 As 2019 comes to a close, it's time to look back at the most important national and international events of the year. 1. President Donald J. Trump became the first American president to publicly call FBI agents "scum." No Republican Party leader scolded Trump for this degrading remark. Trump had previously labeled federal prosecutors as "corrupt" and the U.S. criminal justice system as "rigged." 2. After three years in office, Trump nominated 52 ideologues to the federal bench. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell got 50 of these judges confirmed in the U.S. Senate. After eight years in office, only 55 of President Barack Obama's judicial nominees were confirmed. The federal judiciary has reclaimed its 1960s-era COINTELPRO heritage as one of the greatest bastions of white supremacy in America. 3. In December, the U.S. House of Representatives impeached Trump on two articles -- abuse of the Office of President and obstruction of a Congressional inquiry. The Senate trial is scheduled to occur in January 2020. 4. The Federal Aviation Administration grounded all Boeing 737 MAX aircraft in March following two crashes that killed 346 passengers and crew members. Boeing has manufactured over 800 737 MAX aircraft which sell for $200 million each. The aircraft is a fatally flawed deathtrap. On December 23rd, Boeing fired CEO Dennis Muilenburg for this colossal engineering and flight safety failure. The board members who oversaw Muilenburg's failed leadership remain in their board seats. To date, no federal or state prosecutor has shown the courage to prosecute Muilenburg and the board members for criminally negligent homicide in connection with the first 737 MAX crash and murder in connection with the second crash. These individuals remain too big to prosecute. 5. Voters in Montgomery, Alabama elected their first African-American mayor in November. His name is Steven Reed. Mayor Reed was also the first black elected as Probate Judge in Montgomery County, Alabama. Reed was born and raised in a Montgomery-based iconic civil rights family. Reed has a demonstrated backbone of steel that places him in a category by himself among the nation's African-American mayors. Reed's election in the "Heart of Dixie" and "Cradle of the Confederacy" made national news headlines. He is the son of Dr. Joe L. Reed, one of the first blacks elected to the Montgomery City Council in 1975. 6. Special Counsel Robert Mueller concluded a multi-year criminal investigation into the Trump Campaign's connection to Russian influence peddlers during the 2016 presidential election. No charges were lodged against the President. Trump single-handedly de-balled Mueller with daily tweets that eventually caused Mueller's prosecution team to collapse in disgrace. 7. Former U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions was kicked out of the Trump administration after Trump mocked Sessions' Southern accent, made fun of his inferior Alabama education, and treated Sessions like a bumbling idiot. Sessions, who was the nation's first Senator to endorse Trump's candidacy in 2016, is planning to run for his old Senate seat in 2020. 8. North Korea dictator Kim Jong Un mocked President Trump, called him a "dotard," and made Trump look like an idiot on the world stage by signing a phony denuclearization agreement. Now, Kim Jong Un has resumed long-range missile testing. Meanwhile, Trump gratuitously kissed the North Korean dictator's ass on international television during a poorly planned summit with the Korean strongman. 9. Aramco, Saudi Arabia's national oil company, went public in December at a valuation of $1.7 trillion, thereby making it the most valuable company on the planet. While ordinary Americans were shut out of the opportunity to buy Aramco shares, the Trump family enriched itself when a Saudi company in which the family is a partner bought coveted shares on the Trumps' behalf. 10. U.S. Border Patrol agents rounded up a record number of undocumented migrants from Central and South America at the Southern border of the U.S. The roundup was similar in scale to the government's roundup of Hispanic-speaking migrants during "Operation Wetback" in the 1950s.

By: Donald V. Watkins © Copyrighted and Published January 1, 2020 The December 30, 2019 print edition of the Wall Street Journal published a letter to the editor from Brian T. Wilson, an Atlanta-based corporate pilot and retired airline pilot. This is what Mr. Wilson had to say about the Boeing 737 MAX airplanes that killed 346 passengers and crew members in two separate crashes six months apart -- one in October 2018 and another one in March 2019: "The Boeing 737 MAX seems to have been a Frankenstein design, quite frankly. And instead of scrapping the design and starting over, Boeing elected to apply a software band-aid, the MCAS, to save the aircraft when the design issues revealed themselves.... Grounding the aircraft was the right decision. Boeing needs to go back to the drawing board and listen to its engineers and test pilots rather than its marketing executives." In Washington, money talks, especially during an election year. Money trumps airline safety when it flows to the Super-PACs that finance the campaigns of the deregulation candidates, from the President of the United States to members of Congress. Under deregulation, the FAA allowed Boeing to certify the flight safety of the 737 MAX. This role used to be within the exclusive province of the FAA. Despite the airplane’s fatally flawed design problems, Boeing said it was safe to fly. Two crashes later, the world learned that Boeing had lied about the safety of the 737 MAX airplane. What is more, a secret FAA report prepared after the first crash predicted that fifteen 737 MAX airplanes will likely crash during the life cycle of the airplanes, with a frequency of one crash every two to three years. In reality, the frequency of the crashes is every six months. Sadly, the 737 MAX cannot be fixed. Its design flaws are structural in nature. Software packages cannot fix structural design flaws in the airframe. 2020 Prediction Under political pressure from the White House, the FAA will clear the 737 MAX to fly again in 2020, despite its continued flight safety problems. This is an election year. The PAC money from Boeing, its major vendors, and executives will be flowing like water to thirsty Washington politicians. The next 737 MAX crash will probably occur in America, and the cause of the crash will be the same as the first two crashes. Nearly 200 people on the plane and the ground will die. After this crash, the 737 MAX will be grounded permanently and scrapped for parts. The political fallout from this predicted crash will be devastating to every official who played a direct or indirect role in facilitating the 737 MAX's to return to the skies. Unfortunately, this is the ugly side of national politics in America today. Things only change at the FAA when the death toll from airplane crashes reaches an intolerable threshold. For the 737 MAX, that threshold will be reached in 2020.