Monday, July 13, 2026 - 11:07:44 AM
Pat, I am OK. You are OK.
“THE DAY AFTER: How to Wield Power in a Post-Trump World!!”
Brian Tyler Cohen - You have no clue, “THE DAY AFTER: How to Wield Power in a Post-Trump World!!”
I been at this for 22+ years[1], my Manifesto.
It is not about a transient majority on the supreme[2] Court. It is about the corrupt despotic conspirative unconstitutional oligarchy. Look at the judge-made-law in Scott[3], Randall[4], Bradely[5], Blyew[6], Cruikshank[7], Civil Rights Cases[8], Plessy[9], Lochner[10], Mapp[11], Pierson[12], Bivens[13], Imbler[14], Briscoe,[15] Ashcroft,[16] Loper,[17] Trump[18], Slaughter[19] REDEFINING redressability / culpability of “any person under color of law” and you can see the corruption.
Thomas Jeferson said it first and best:
"(Y)you seem to consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions; a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. Our judges are as honest as other men, and not more so. They have, with others, the same passions for party, for power, and the privilege of their corps.... Their power [is] the more dangerous as they are in office for life, and not responsible, as the other functionaries are, to the elective control. The Constitution has erected no such single tribunal, knowing that to whatever hands confided, with the corruptions of time and party, its members would become despots." — Thomas Jefferson 28th September 1820, letter to Mr. JARVIS, from Monticello (underlining and bolding added)
Justice Harlan dissenting in the Civil Rights Cases, 109 U.S. 26 (1883) confirmed it post-Civil War:
Constitutional provisions, adopted in the interest of liberty and for the purpose of securing, through national legislation, if need be, rights inhering in a state of freedom and belonging to American citizenship have been so construed as to defeat the ends the people desired to accomplish, which they attempted to accomplish, and which they supposed they had accomplished by changes in their fundamental law. By this I do not mean that the determination of these cases should have been materially controlled by considerations of mere expediency or policy. I mean only, in this form, to express an earnest conviction that the court has departed from the familiar rule requiring, in the interpretation of constitutional provisions, that full effect be given to the intent with which they were adopted.
With the potential veto proof authority, of Article I. The Article I democratic-representative congress needs to take their authority back from the usurpation of the, want to be supreme[20] oligarchy with the mere statutory constitutional provisions of Article III Section 2 “the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.”
Congressionally eliminate judge-made-law, the use of binding judicial authority and any and all thoughts of attaching stare decisis.
Learned judicial opinions can and should be used / referenced but they cannot be used as unimpeachable judge-made-law within the rational context of adversarial due process of law in front of a trial specific constitutional local jury.
I would love to know a perfect person. But for at least 2,026 years there has not been one on this planet. And I do not expect one anytime soon. Judge-made-law with stare decisis requires perfection. Human beings constantly and unavoidably make mistakes, be they sitting at the local bar drinking a beer or on a supreme[21] Court wearing gender neutral black robes. As a reliable source of justice, the best anyone can hope for is adversarial due process of law before a trial specific constitutional local jury.
2026 07-13-26 Brian Tyler Cohen - You have no clue POSTS REV working
Monday, July 13, 2026 - 11:07:44 AM
The last clause of the First Amendment makes any assertion of IMMUNITY unconstitutional.
https://dgjeep.blogspot.com/2026/02/last-clause-1a.html
The Constitution for the United States - Article I, II, and Schoolhouse Rock’s[22] “I’m Just a Bill[23]” clearly define how to make law. Show me where in the amended Constitution for the United States “judge-made-law” is called for or authorized[24]?
https://dgjeep.blogspot.com/2025/06/sc.html
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1FVfm-ushzCCTS5BtH1R7MeOvnDvh_kqv/view
The Issue with Trump, HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH TRUMP!
https://dgjeep.blogspot.com/2025/03/the-issue-with-trump.html
American Exceptionalism – NOT SO MUCH
https://dgjeep.blogspot.com/2023/10/american-exceptionalism-not-so-much.html
https://dgjeep.blogspot.com/2013/04/equal-rights-in-free-market-economy.html
A Balanced Budget for America
https://dgjeep.blogspot.com/2012/07/balanced-budget-for-america.html
BE AWARE, but do not be afraid, Trump is, at best and at worst, pathetically incompetent and INEFFECTIVE manager / leader!
https://dgjeep.blogspot.com/2025/01/be-aware.html
Trump does not know the name of the country he was or is to be president of...
https://dgjeep.blogspot.com/2025/01/istgtdnk.html
The constitutional small "d" undemocratic corrupt “dark money” Senate and Electoral College
https://dgjeep.blogspot.com/2024/01/dark-money-senate.html
Trump is a convicted and diagnosed psychotic criminal, chronic degenerate, maniacal liar and a "fucking moron!"
https://dgjeep.blogspot.com/2025/01/be-aware.html
The constitutional small "d" unrepresentative corrupt “dark money” Senate and Electoral College
https://dgjeep.blogspot.com/2024/01/dark-money-senate.html
The Judicial sophistry of "absolute immunity" creates "absolute power" to the ABSOLUTE CORRUPTION of We the People's unalienable rights under color of law... the AUDACITY of the INSANITY, ignorance and stupidity in support of a "fantastic or delusional" scenario.
https://dgjeep.blogspot.com/2024/01/if-that-is-not-absolute-corruption-of.html
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1UmmaZmRkIUZ3EdC_9iI0Bpojr6LZ_lU0/view?usp=sharing
Petition Supreme Court website https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/18/18-5856/62608/20180904161503131_00000007.pdf
https://dgjeep.blogspot.com/2022/09/the-facts-of-my-case-are-without.html
DGJeep v. Supreme Court of the United States (Petitions for Writ of Certiorari 07-11115, 11-8211, 13-7030, 13-5193, 14-5551, 14-10088, 15-8884 and 18-5856)
https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?Search=David+Jeep&type=Supreme-Court=Dockets
Monday, July 13, 2026 - 11:07:44 AM
[2] Article III of the Constitution for the United States posits "The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish (bolding/underling added)." The Constitution for the United States posits one supreme Court among the many inferior Courts, NOT a Supreme Court outside the many Courts. The grammar of the capitalization is important for an accurate interpretation. As is the "judicial Power" in the Constitution for the United States is ABSOLUTELY constrained by the use of a trial-specific-local-jury as originally REQUIRED 1215 - Magna Carta's Clause 39 - "No free man is to be arrested, or imprisoned, or disseised, or outlawed, or exiled, or in any other way ruined, nor will we go against him or send against him, except by the lawful judgment of his peers or by the law of the land" and as incorporated in the in our Constitution for the United states Article II Section 2.3 criminal issues and the VII Amendment for civil Issues.
[3] Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. 393 (1856) -- The Dred Scott ruling STARTED the Civil War.
[5] Bradley v. Fisher, 80 U.S. 335 (1871) “any person under color of law”
[6] Blyew v. United States, 80 U.S. 581 (1871) Government sanctioned MASS MURDER with undemocratic unrepresentative stare decisis attached.
[7] United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1876) Government sanctioned racial pogrom (massacre) and an unregulated militia with undemocratic unrepresentative stare decisis attached.
[8] Justice Harlan’s lone dissent in the Civil Rights Cases, 109 U.S. 26 (1883):
“Constitutional provisions, adopted in the interest of liberty and for the purpose of securing, through national legislation, if need be, rights inhering in a state of freedom and belonging to American citizenship have been so construed as to defeat the ends the people desired to accomplish, which they attempted to accomplish, and which they supposed they had accomplished by changes in their fundamental law. By this I do not mean that the determination of these cases should have been materially controlled by considerations of mere expediency or policy. I mean only, in this form, to express an earnest conviction that the court has departed from the familiar rule requiring, in the interpretation of constitutional provisions, that full effect be given to the intent with which they were adopted.”
[9] Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537 (1896) Government sanctioned separate and with lip service alone to equal
[10] Lochner v. New York, 198 U.S. 45 (1905) Lochner created the still tooooo prevalent and nebulously defined term, “liberty of contract”, to emotionally enable Government sanctioned union busting and anti-regulation.
[11] Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961) CONFIRMS the immunity for the deprivation of rights and EXCLUDES the evidence.
[12] Pierson v. Ray, 386 U.S. 547 (1967) QUALIFIED immunity does nothing to sustain inalienable rights.
[13] Bivens v. Six Unknown Fed. Narcotics Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971) Any person under color of law.
[14] Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U.S. 409 (1976) Any person under color of law
[15] Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 325 (1983) Any person under color of law
[16] Ashcroft v. al-Kidd, 563 U. S. 731, 741 (2011), Ashcroft asserted they need to be to be freed to act without regard after 9/11? And yet it lingers to corrupt EVERYTHING going forward.
[17] In Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, the Supreme Court's landmark June 28, 2024 decision, the judiciary abolished the 40-year-old "Chevron deference" doctrine. Loper took power from the elected executive and installed under themselves self-servingly with undemocratic unrepresentative stare decisis attached.
[18] 23-939 Trump v. United States (07/01/2024) absolute immunity to the Article II executive with undemocratic unrepresentative stare decisis attached.
[19] Trump v. Slaughter, 609 U.S. ___ (2026) Decided: June 29, 2026 took power away from the Article I, legislature and Article II executive working harmoniously together and handed it to the Article II executive EXCLUSIVELY with undemocratic unrepresentative stare decisis attached.
[20] Article III of the Constitution for the United States posits "The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish (bolding/underling added)." The Constitution for the United States posits one supreme Court among the many inferior Courts, NOT a Supreme Court outside the many Courts. The grammar of the capitalization is important for an accurate interpretation. As is the "judicial Power" in the Constitution for the United States is ABSOLUTELY constrained by the use of a trial-specific-local-jury as originally REQUIRED 1215 - Magna Carta's Clause 39 - "No free man is to be arrested, or imprisoned, or disseised, or outlawed, or exiled, or in any other way ruined, nor will we go against him or send against him, except by the lawful judgment of his peers or by the law of the land" and as incorporated in the in our Constitution for the United states Article II Section 2.3 criminal issues and the VII Amendment for civil Issues.
[21] Article III of the Constitution for the United States posits "The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish (bolding/underling added)." The Constitution for the United States posits one supreme Court among the many inferior Courts, NOT a Supreme Court outside the many Courts. The grammar of the capitalization is important for an accurate interpretation. As is the "judicial Power" in the Constitution for the United States is ABSOLUTELY constrained by the use of a trial-specific-local-jury as originally REQUIRED 1215 - Magna Carta's Clause 39 - "No free man is to be arrested, or imprisoned, or disseised, or outlawed, or exiled, or in any other way ruined, nor will we go against him or send against him, except by the lawful judgment of his peers or by the law of the land" and as incorporated in the in our Constitution for the United states Article II Section 2.3 criminal issues and the VII Amendment for civil Issues.
Thanks in advance...
“Agere sequitur esse” (‘action follows being’)
David G. Jeep, Federal Inmate #36072-044 (formerly)
www.DGJeep.com - From: Dave@DGJeep.com - David.G.Jeep@Gmail.com
Mobile (314) 514-5228 leave message
David G. Jeep
1531 Pine St Apt #512
St. Louis, MO 63103-2548
