Resetting Checks and Balances

Desperate times call for desperate measures. There is no reason a convention of intelligent, principled Americans could not devise a Rico-like procedure to redress the imbalance between them and unprincipled entitlement mongers, to rein in wealthy, international sociopaths. The procedure may be called “FOPMIS,” i.e., Forfeiture Of Power Made In Sedition. Every non-government attorney who is licensed to practice in federal court could be given leave to use it, as a legal bounty hunter.


Cry havoc and let loose the dogs of law!

Progs could hardly argue inefficacy. After all, they tend to find progressively more governmental regulation to be the answer to every economic, political, and spiritual concern. Due process could be retained, to require an examining trial to reasonably ensure a prima facie basis for further prosecution. Else, the prosecution should be dismissed, with court costs to be assessed against the bounty hunting lawyer. Checks could be built in, to protect most decent Americans, to preclude use of FOPMIS for purely political purposes (as opposed to use only for bounty purposes).

As things stand, our constitutional system of checks and balances between federal branches of government and the States and the people is broken. Some form of redress must be made, to restore direct power to the people. Ways ought at least to be considered for redressing the power of sociopathic, international billionaires that is leveraged out of ill-gotten wealth (as by feloniously purchasing political influence, as by, in effect, combining to purchase politicians and even governments).

FOPMIS should require proof of a number of necessary elements, such as: (a) that the culprit is an individual who is in America or who has funds or resources in America; (b) that his net worth is in excess of one billion dollars (or that he has used his access to more than two billion dollars to advance seditious purposes against America); (c) that he has used his wealth to act or to conspire to act treasonously or seditiously against America’s interests; (d) and that his conduct constituted a federal felony.

Even so, an action under FOPMIS should be civil, not entail punishment by way of incarceration, entail only a civil penalty (near complete forfeiture of wealth), and should require proof only by a preponderance of evidence.

An individual found worthy of attaching forfeiture under FOPMIS should be entitled to keep only such minimal resources as an ordinary debtor in bankruptcy would be entitled to keep, subject to appropriate oversight by a trustee. But if the FOPMIS target is exonerated (found innocent by unanimous verdict), then the prosecuting attorney should be debarred from further FOPMIS bounty hunting. No lawyer who is salaried in any way by the government should be licensed to pursue the procedure.

A FOPMIS Defendant should be entitled to take the Fifth Amendment where appropriate, only to protect against possible incarceration. Since the procedure should be civil, the Defendant should have to assert the Fifth to each element about which he is questioned. Each time he takes the Fifth, the finder of facts should be entitled to consider that the Defendant’s answer may have been adverse to his interests. Provided, of course, that there is other, independent evidence for each element that is necessary to the prosecution.

This sounds strange. We are in strange times. Those working to sink the liberty of ordinary Americans are working in feverishly competitive cabals. They ought at least to be given pause to fear ordinary Americans. Maybe it’s time to bring back the American cowboy / bounty hunter --- as a lawyer.