Tennessee : Bastion of Tyranny (Part 1)

About the book.

I still have not retrieved most of it, though I probably can retrieve 50% of it around this Xmas.

When I said publish I meant post online for public consumption. I'm not selling it, it's all free.

When I called it a book, I meant compilation of chapters of writing into an aggregate.

I don't like the traditional scheme and it will not be an Ebook either.

Though like 30 chapters cannot be written properly until I retrieve my writings, the other 20 or so I can craft in the meantime because I've got access to those notes on my person.

Each chapter will be an ATS thread and I've only written like 2 of those since all of this. After I get it created I will make a compilation thread linking them all in order.

So far in my thread history a total of 11 exist so far (I think?).

I might copy it all and make a website just to put it all in order though. Dunno yet.

The 2nd book I haven't decided much on yet other than that it's biographical in nature and it's title.

a reply to: Liquesence

The gist of the legislation was this:

My writings named a certain person and detailed our dealings and revealed their criminal acts.

They wanted the new laws to construe any mention of this individual at all as a form of criminal behavior (felony).

Obviously this didn't go through and they removed all of those parts in the language and just kept a few definitions.

The definitions didn't actually change from the old ones either. They just added a few words which were already implied in the original language.

So the legislators actually did their jobs by protecting the rights of authors to do "tell alls" and to write about other people and things they did.

The traditional avenue for fighting that is to sue for libel or slander, where they have to prove they didn't do those things.

So my specific fears about this particular thing were assuaged and I don't have to fear being criminally charged for telling people all the stuff that I went through.

I'll get around to all of that at a way later date.

a reply to: muzzleflash

The gist of the legislation was this:

My writings named a certain person and detailed our dealings and revealed their criminal acts.

They wanted the new laws to construe any mention of this individual at all as a form of criminal behavior (felony).

But do you have a link, somewhere I can read the language of the legislation itself, instead of relying on hearsay?

They wanted to make it a criminal act to mention another person and that person's criminal dealings?

Unless you have proof, that does sound like potential libel. Who is this "person" you're detailing?

When I said publish I meant post online for public consumption. I'm not selling it, it's all free.

Where online are you attempting to publish it where it can be accessed for "free?"

When I called it a book, I meant compilation of chapters of writing into an aggregate.

So it's not a book? It's a collection of writings...by others, or original content, or both?

a reply to: Liquesence

But do you have a link, somewhere I can read the language of the legislation itself, instead of relying on hearsay?

I'm gonna go with no, because then somehow we'd be able to figure out who OP is.

Really, the "fact" that this legislation which was crafted to target one specific individual and protect another specific individual somehow made it to committees where it was supposedly altered but left the pertinent details more or less the same then somehow got changed again so that it (apparently) sounds not even remotely close to how it was when it was introduced sorta kinda stinks to high heaven.

a reply to: Shamrock6

You'll find out I told you the truth.

All of the versions of the bill are kept in archive and the videos of the hearings as well.

I'd like to finish these legal cases first before I reveal all of the details.

And I'm protecting other people primarily, because once you see that this was on the news 3 or 4 times nationally, that my name and other individuals names etc are plastered everywhere etc, you'll see how sensitive and personal this all is.

Also it's worth noting that I made it clear I considered and construe all of this as 2 bills of attainder and will be pursuing legal remedies in that regard.

I even have the Attorney General stating in clear language that it's unlikely these bills affected anyone else.

Although I admit fighting this as Bill of Attainder is exceptionally difficult and incredibly complex, they did make several key mistakes that I can exploit to those ends and just barely tip the scales into my favor.

There's nothing easy about any of it, and it takes a ton of research and planning.

I'm generally pretty meticulous and so it becomes very time consuming. There isn't much case law on attainders either, so it's likely new precedent will be set on various aspects of all this, no matter which way the judges rule on it.

Oh, and once I file the attainder suit everyone will easily be able to figure out who I am and everything about all of this. It'll stand out like a sore thumb at that point even if they dismissed my suit on the initial pleading.

In the attainder case I'm gonna try to get Alberto Gonzales to represent me.

I have to wait through due to conflict of interest as he works for Waller and I'm fighting Waller in the Media case.

I realize he likely won't take it on but he works nextdoor and I like him and think he's the best choice. I'll try to convince him though. He's a cool guy it's worth the try.

How does "The Latest Testament" that seems to be a book about Occult Secrets, Secret Societies, and explaining your, I can only assume metaphysical theories of what life is, intertwine criminal acts of what I can only assume is a state senator or Mr. Pilot Flying J himself.

My writings named a certain person and detailed our dealings and revealed their criminal acts.

Honestly I was to read this book.

~Morpheus

a reply to: MorpheusUSA

It's complicated. Maybe I'll explain more about that in a little bit, on phone in transit currently.

a reply to: muzzleflash

Since he's no longer with the Waller firm, I don't think there's any conflict of interest.

Of course he may not be interested in giving up his work as a Dean to take on a lawsuit over bills of attainder that were never actually passed into law, but hey.

a reply to: Shamrock6

I'd be happy just to get his opinions really.

I didn't know he left Waller, cool thanks for telling me that. Good to know.

a reply to: MorpheusUSA

The 2nd book I was splitting things up into, "1001 American Nights", will discuss things of a personal nature naming names and all that stuff. Sorta like a tell-all memoirs thing. Most of the documentation for what I wanted are on the devices in question and involve the person who wanted it destroyed.

I haven't decided to what degree some of that will bleed into TLT or any other things I've been considering on manifesting. I haven't 100% decided upon exactly how all of this should work or how I want to do all of this yet. It's definitely still a work in progress.

a reply to: Shamrock6

I don't think he'd have to give up anything to at minimum, give me a few pointers.

He's actually a really nice guy and isn't rude, snobbish, or condescending like most attorneys (he's from Humble Tx after all).

I also have a funny connection with him because I went to TTU in Lubbock and now I'm here at Belmont, lol, so our paths have overlapped in a few weird ways, and make it easier to break the ice n relate.

I don't hold anything against him over the NSA surveillance or habeas corpus stuff. That's neither here nor there. I just know he's very intelligent and knowledgeable and would be able to advise me better than just about anyone on how to properly handle an Attainder case.

The SCOTUS has only shot down like 5 Attainders before so it's like insanely rare and me even making such an accusation is exceptional, so every part of this is incredibly complex and so therefore I need the very best minds to at least look over what I'm trying to do here. I'm confident Mr Gonzales is probably my best bet especially since I'm a block away from his office.

a reply to: Shamrock6

I realize it's super unlikely he'd actually represent me or anything, but just imagine the firepower that'd give me. My chances would go from like less than 1% to upwards to like 50%-50% instantly.

Hell, each piece of advice someone as well educated as him could give me would add like 1% to my chances.

I know a ton of attorneys, not really well but well enough, so I regularly can go chat and get advice about things. They often aren't as well educated as people think. Usually the older ones tend to be much more knowledgeable and capable of giving excellent pieces of info I'm looking for. It's sorta rare the younger ones are very accurate, they always seem so afraid to answer anything definitively and it's very frustrating.

A few older guys I speak to here and there are fun and will smoke cigars and just theorize and be willing to entertain all sorts of things. I like to research stuff so I can cite it verbatim, even listing case # and dates, etc, and surprise them, it's a lot of fun.