Thursday, May 31, 2007

Judge Paul Maloney's nomination to Federal Court

Distinguished Members of the Senate Judiciary Committee,

I am writing because of a number of serious concerns I have over the nomination of Judge Paul Maloney to the Federal Court. Based on these issues, I ask you to deny his appointment. The justification for this request is as follows:

1. Illegally accepting campaign contributions for Governor John Engler's Leadership PAC in 2000. I have attached the most pertinent campaign finance disclosure records. For further information see MI committee id # 509688-9 for Maloney and MI Committee # 509596-6 for John Engler. The activity in question involves the 10/2/00 refund check for $9,850 sent by the Maloney Committee to Gov. Engler due to excessive campaign contributions, and the $15,750 contribution Maloney accepted from same PAC on 10/27/00. I have also attached information regarding a questionable $175,000 loan from McKinley Associates (i.e. Mr. Ron Wieser) to Gov. Engler's PAC on 10/20/00 which provided the funds necessary for the $15,750 contribution to Maloney on 10/27/00.

2. Possible criminal negligence in failing to ascertain the facts regarding a 2005 recall election in which, he set aside a Board of Canvassers Certified election. (The People Vs. Jean Nesbitt case number 2005-2899-AW). The recall election was organized by Reverend Edward Pinkney. Rev. Pinkney motivation for organizing the recall election is twofold. The commissioner facing recall blocked an investigation into the known illegal action of the Benton Harbor, Michigan Chief of police. Secondly, the commissioner in question represented the critical vote in the sale of 520 acres of Benton Harbor's river and lake front land to the Harbor Shore developer for less than one million dollars. This is far below the going market rate for the quality and quantity of land sold. The latter is also the reason the campaign financing records of Paul Maloney should be carefully examined. Obvious examples of Paul Maloney's negligence include:

A. Denying a motion to intervene by an attorney hired by residents of Benton Harbor, Michigan to represent the majority will in the 2/22/05 election. He ruled, “the case will be vigorously litigated, therefore, there is no actual or potential for inadequate representation.” Upon examination of the trial tapes you will find:
i. A lack of cross examination of approx 2/3 of witnesses when the testimony of many witnesses was if not right out lies, at least highly suspect.
ii. Failure to call critical parties to testify before his Court. This includes any member of the Board of Canvassers, a majority of alleged victims of voter fraud, and the person alleged with organizing the said fraud, Rev. Edward Pinkney. Rev. Pinkney in fact, could have provided essential evidence, including DNA and a polygraph that would have contradicted the most important alleged evidence of the prosecution.
iii. Allowing the prosecutor to admit numerous exhibits based on testimony of a witness who stated information that was impossible for the witness to know (see tape at time: 13:58.28, 4/12/05). For example, the prosecutor asks “do you know James Cooper?” The witness responds, “not by name.” Then the people ask, “do you know if he voted at that time from the soup kitchen?” The witness answers, “I don't know,” The next question was “do you recognize that person as someone voting from the soup kitchen?” “Yes,” the witness responds. And that exhibit was allowed to be admitted into evidence without any further questioning and no objection! Immediately one notices three problems with this type of standard for truth in court. First, it is not possible for someone lacking the capacity to identify a person by name to thirty seconds later recognize their signature. Furthermore, the witness stated she did not know if James Cooper was from the soup kitchen; but then, as if by magic, she can recognize his signature and know that he came from the soup kitchen. And these contradictory statements are accepted as the standard of proof! Here is a crystal clear example of Maloney letting falsity stand for fact. Now, and this is the second problem, a major argument the prosecution raised against the Benton Harbor clerk was alleging the clerk failed to check the voter application signature against the signature on the “master registration card.” Think about that for a minute. How is it that the prosecutor can argue that because the Clerk provided the opportunity for fraud in failing to verify a voter's signature against a reference card, then turn around to argue that a witness's identification of a signature - of a person whose name she couldn't identify - should be taken as proof? Finally the third problem is the fact that no person voting at the polls has their signature checked against a registration card. Any voter need only produce their name. Does the State claim that these votes should too be thrown out because the State can't trust that the voter is who they claim? If not verifying the signature of voters was the standard, not a single vote in any Michigan election would count. Not a single one of these serious issues were ever mentioned. These contradictory “proofs” and inconsistent standards for voter identification were admitted without objection from either the defense or questions from the judge. And this type of behavior is supposed to earn judge Maloney more power!
iv. Failing to inquire about the sworn testimony by a witness indicating police manipulation and intimidation of persons during the investigation stage (see tape at time: 11:50.00, date 4/13/05).

B. An insufficient number of challengeable votes to overturn the recall election. The number of alleged fraudulent ballots did not reach the mathematical bright line necessary to affect the election outcome. The margin for recall was 51 votes. Even if you accept Maloney's statement made in his judgment that 27 votes were invalid based on defendants concession there still remained a 24 vote margin, not enough to set aside an election. If there had been adequate representation for the majority of Benton Harbor voters the number of conceded ballots would have been far below 27. I counted only 3 votes that necessitated invalidation because they involved errors in mandatory provision. The remaining ballots fell within the category of failing to follow directory provisions. The signature issue for example. Michigan law declares that errors involving directory rules is not a sufficient reason to invalidate those votes.

As a poll inspector and as citizen committed to democracy, I find his judgment woefully unsupported by the facts in this case. Don't just believe me though examine the tapes yourselves. I have included copies of the tapes, as well as the tape date and time for all examples cited above for your convenience. These represent just a few examples of Paul Maloney's utter lack of care in establishing the relevant facts in a decision that extended judicial power into legislative territory. Maloney declared the case was to be decided based on the “totality of the circumstances.” How is this possible without the testimony from all essential parties? If the totality of circumstances were to be used as the basis for his judgment, why did he fail to obtain evidence necessary to base his decision on that totality? I can think of only one reason. If the committee decides to make a diligent inquiry into this matter, I doubt it will fail to reach the same conclusion.

The day after election trial, Rev. Pinkney was arrested. Surely some reason was needed in order to justify this blatantly illegal judgment. Rev. Pinkney actions represented, in the words of the defense, “an outside political wind.” In part, this is correct. Indeed, there was a strong wind blowing, a wind that blew out of office a commissioner who exemplified local corruption; however, Rev. Pinkney is a legal resident of Benton Harbor. It is also true that Rev. Pinkney proved to represent a serious challenge to the local power structure. In that sense then, there is outside political wind blowing. But do not be deceived by the cunningness of the fox, for their files are empty. This was simply a case of smoke and mirrors that any federal judge must have the capacity to see through. Listen to the charges for a moment. The State alledges he paid people $5.00 to vote. Rev Pinkney claims, a claim supported by a polygraph, that he paid people $5.00 to distribute fliers.

I am quite confident that every member of this committee paid at least one campaign worker. I'd also go out on a limb and assume that more than $5.00 was paid to your campaign employees. Please excuse me for this assumption if it proves incorrect. Now, your paying campaign workers and Rev. Pinkney paying for the distribution of fliers are functionally equivalent. At least, I can't see how their different. If anyone can tell me how these two activities are not equivalent please let me know. The second charge, a felony mind you, is that Rev. Pinkney was in possession of absentee ballots. Reflect on that for a moment. So what if Pinkney enables people to exercise their right to vote by giving legal voters postage stamps and placing them in the mail, as the prosecution contends. In fact, this latter charge is also one Pinkney denies - a claim that is supported by a polygraph test. But that's not the important issue. It is what is called a false problem. Why? Because no one ever accused Pinkney of intimidation or harassment, nor did the State claim that he altered any of the ballots he is accused of being in procession of. Given the disenfranchisement that plagues Benton Harbor, the fact Pinkney was enabling people to vote should be encouraged.

This brings us to another serious problem in the civil trial. One reason given by Maloney for setting aside the election was the “suspiciously high number of absentee ballots.” One again this is a false issue. The real question is why there wasn't 100% voter turnout. But then that too must be evidence for invalidating the election. If one adheres to Maloney's line of reasoning, full participation must represent evidence of fraud if 47% participation does. Civic participation must be encouraged. People who enable others to exercise their voting rights must be honored not criminalized. Sadly, the criminalization of civic participation is exactly what is happening here.

Finally, even if you accept the prosecutions argument that Rev. Pinkney paid voters $5.00 to vote, the only difference between the Reverends action's and Maloney accepting contributions from Congressman Fred Upton is one of degree. Since the Upton family contributed $1,300 to Maloney's campaign, and the fact that the successful recall election would have blocked the sale of Benton Harbor land to a corporation established by Whirlpool - a corporation founded by the Upton's grandfather. Now, who is buying whom here? Which action again is more questionable? Rev. Pinkney denies he paid anyone to vote, but Maloney cannot hide his campaign finance records.

It is the duty of this committee to safeguard the people from this complacent, biased, or outright corrupt judge. Based on the evidence discussed above, I ask you to deny giving Paul Maloney even greater power by rejecting his nomination for appointment to the Federal Court. I would also recommend that the committee consider appointing a special investigative team into Maloney's campaign contributions as they might be the motivation for the election ruling. Democracy must be defended. I seriously doubt Paul Maloney ability to provide that defense given his actions. If the committee requires any further information I can be reach by mail at [edited]. Thank you for your considerations.

Armin C. Schleiffarth

Tuesday, May 22, 2007

Prosecutor’s Sham Helps BANCO Grow

On May 19, 2007 thirteen Benton Harbor citizens were
enticed by an advertisement to attend a Town Hall
Empowerment Meeting at the Benton Harbor Library. They
were led to believe by the advertisement that they
would be provided with information on the power and
responsibility of citizenship. The advertisement also
said the citizens would be provided with information
on opportunities for viable jobs, job training, home
ownership and higher education being offered to the
citizens of Benton Harbor. Chief Prosecutor Art Cotter
conducted this meeting. Both The advertisement and the
meeting were a sham. The meeting was actually about
Rev Edward Pinkney.

Nine of the people who were at the meeting came over
to Rev Pinkney’s home declaring that the prosecutor
came lying again. Prosecutor Art Cotter had no
information about jobs or education or homeownership.
He only wanted to talk about Rev. Pinkney. Those that
came over to Rev. Pinkney’s home, from the so-called
Town Hall Empowerment Meeting, were inspired to
immediately join B.A.N.C.O. to fight against the
corrupt court system.

This is just the most recent example of the misdeeds
of Chief Prosecutor Art Cotter. Rev Dr. James R. Smith
also came over to Rev. Pinkney’s and played a DVD
about Chief Prosecutor Art Cotter when he was on the
Board of Link. Link is a crisis intervention center
that deals with social and welfare services including
sexual abuse treatment. The DVD has interviews of
several Link employees regarding Rick Pahl, Prosecutor
Art Cotter’s best friend. Mr. James Busby, a
well-respected man in the community, and three other
former Link employees informed Art Cotter about his
friend. His best friend, Rick Pahl, was molesting the
children but was also a racist. He fired six black
employees including James Busby for no reason. Board
member Prosecutor Art Cotter refused to meet with
James Busby and seven former Link employees concerning
these matters. Further, Rick Pahl moved a client, Ryan
Rust, into his home. Everybody at the Link knew about
this. By not taking any action when informed of these
accusations, Art Cotter was harboring a child molester
and racist. This shows that he helps his friends, even
when they commit horrendous criminal acts. If Rick
Pahl hadn’t moved to Minnesota, he would be still
molesting children in Benton Harbor. Rick even
molested his own son.

Since the sentencing of Rev Edward Pinkney, B.A.N.C.O.
is growing at a tremendous rate. We have added over 80
new members. We now have over 75% of the Benton Harbor
residents including 20% of Berrien County residents
supporting Rev Pinkney. We will continue to grow. The
national response has been tremendous. BANCO’s goal is
justice for all.

I Rev .Dr James R Smith will become the new executive
director of B.A.N.C.O. as of June 1, 2007.

Monday, May 21, 2007

Pinkney's Sentence - Victory! No Prison and Free for Now

On May 14, 2007, Reverend Edward Pinkney was spared
the possibility of prison for up to 10 years and was
left free on house arrest until a decision is made on
his Motion for Bond Pending Appeal. All of Pinkney’s
supporters from Benton Harbor, Berrien County,
throughout Michigan and around the country get credit
for this success. The Court received more than 1000
letters in support of Pinkney, many from prominent
individuals and organizations. The Court specifically
commented on the support letters.

Judge Albert A. Butzbaugh courageously resisted the
recommendation of the probation department and the
arguments of the prosecutor for Pinkney’s
imprisonment. Any sentence over 12 months is
automatically prison time. Once in the prison system,
you are subject to the control of the parole board.
Had Pinkney gone to prison, he could have been held
for up to ten years.

Pinkney successfully argued that the probation
department had improperly scored his guidelines to
come up with a 14 month minimum. The Judge granted
enough of Pinkney’s objections to reduce the minimum
to 12 months. The Judge could still have used the
guidelines to give him up to 3 years. To his credit,
Judge Butzbaugh refused to do so, sentencing Pinkney
to a maximum of 12 months in jail.

Pinkney has a number of powerful issues on appeal,
including underrepresentation of minorities on the
jury, defects in the procedure by which he was
arraigned, denial of public trial because the
inability of his supporters to watch the jury
selection or come into the courtroom, the validity of
the statute and others. One of the big issues is that
Pinkney cannot participate in any electoral activity
while on probation. Pinkney’s lawyers Hugh M. Davis,
Elliott S. Hall, and Timothy M. Holloway, working with
other attorneys on this National Lawyers Guild
Project, are filing those motions. The Judge could
decide to give Pinkney a new trial without an appeal.
The hearing on all those issues will probably not be
held before July or August, 2007.

But there are very serious financial considerations.
Just to keep Pinkney on tether and house arrest costs
$84.00 a week. He has to pay for his transcripts from
his first trial at the rate of $200.00 a month. There
are probation costs every month for 5 years. He has
to pay for the transcripts from the second trial.
Even though his lawyers are working without fee, the
costs must be paid. His house is in foreclosure and
he is in bankruptcy. His ability to work has been
destroyed by more than two years on bond and house

Pinkney is confined to his home, not even able to go
into his yard. He cannot work. He cannot travel. He
cannot speak to groups that wish to invite him.
Everybody that would invite Pinkney to speak and pay
him for his expenses or an honorarium should send a
letter to him or his lawyers.

Hugh M. Davis, Constitutional Litigation Associates,
P.C., 450 West Fort Street, Suite 200, Detroit, Michigan,
48226. Phone: 313-961-2255; Fax: 313-961-5999;

Now that Pinkney has won his freedom, he has to be
able to survive and fight on. People are needed to
contribute everything they can to the Pinkney/ BANCO
defense fund.

There is an ongoing battle for the poor, unemployed
and homeless in Benton Harbor. The fight to save the
Jean Klock Park from the Harbor Shores project
continues. Some justice has been won, but no peace.


Concerning what's reported on Pinkney: If you actually know
him and hear or read what's reported about his life and activities,
it takes your breath away. How can people so easily make up
sheer fiction and report it in a court of law or in the media?
This kind of dishonesty means there is much at stake....

Sign to support Rev. Pinkney:


Magic Chef

(these are only the North American brands)

Saturday, May 12, 2007

Breaking News & Boycott Berrrien County Tourism


*********BREAKING NEWS************

A witness in the recent trial of Rev. Edward Pinkney
admitted to another witness that she was paid for
her testimony.

She signed an affadavit saying as much which
the second witness gave to his attorney.
His attorney contacted Rev. Pinkney's attorney



Let your voice be heard in support of Benton Harbor citizens by boycotting Berrien County Tourism. The 530 acre Harbor Shores development project is a collaborative venture between Benton Harbor, St.Joseph, Whirlpool Corp., the Alliance for World-Class-Communities, and Cornerstone Alliance. They are all the same people. The land for this venture was transferred to Benton Township and will belong to St. Joseph after Benton Harbor is bled dry paying for the infrastructure.

The land is very valuable real estate. This venture is to take over Benton Harbor and to force its citizens out. Benton Harbor is the poorest city in Michigan. Ninety (90%) percent of the people live below the poverty level and seventy (70%) percent are unemployed. Almost all of the citizens are Black. Rev. Pinkney is facing a prison sentence for fighting this takeover. His innocence was proven by a polygraph test. Help make a statement in support of Benton Harbor citizens by boycotting Berrien County Tourism.

Thursday, May 10, 2007

Monday, May 07, 2007



The stage is set for the sentencing of Rev. Edward Pinkney on May 14 in St. Joseph, Michigan. Pinkney’s attorneys have received the pre-sentence investigation (PSI), which recommends that Pinkney be sentenced to a minimum of 14 and a maximum of 43 months in prison.

Pinkney’s attorneys will argue that the sentencing guidelines were incorrectly scored and that the minimum/maximum range should be lower. Even then, Pinkney is almost certain to get some time in jail or prison.

On Monday, May 7, Pinkney’s lawyers filed a motion for bond pending appeal and another motion to delay the sentencing because the Legislature is considering changes in the law which would reduce the maximum penalties in Pinkney’s case from five years to two years.

Most importantly, Pinkney’s attorneys revealed to the judge and to the public for the first time that Pinkney passed a polygraph (lie detector) test on April 13 on all issues. The polygraph was conducted by Christopher J. Lanfear, the polygraph examiner for the Oakland County Sheriff’s Department. There is no question of Mr. Lanfear’s integrity and impartiality.

Pinkney was asked the following of series of questions:

1. (Q) Did you direct Brenda Fox to illegally influence any voter?
(A) NO!
2. (Q) Regarding Brenda Fox, did you recruit her to pay people five dollars to vote?
(A) NO!
3. (Q) Did you handle absentee ballots from either of the Williams’ sisters (Danielle and LaToya), like they said?
(A) NO!
4. (Q) Did you handle an absentee ballot from Rosie Miles, like she said?
(A) NO!

After analyzing Pinkney’s responses to those questions, which cover every act that he stands convicted of, Lanfear wrote:
It is the opinion of the undersigned examiner, based on the analysis of the polygraph examination of EDWARD JUNIOR PINKNEY, that he is being truthful to the pertinent test questions.

Pinkney’s attorneys gave the prosecutor a confidential copy of the report and offered for Pinkney to take another test. The prosecution refused.

Is it because they do not care? Because they already know he is innocent, having framed him in the first place? Because they do not want to have him pass their own test and have it used against them? Whatever the reason, it is clear that the prosecutor, like the all-white jury, is not interested in truth and justice.

Although polygraph tests are not admissible as evidence, the test supports Pinkney’s argument for the most lenient possible sentence and for bond pending appeal.



The second significant development is that the Prosecuting Attorneys Association of Michigan has recommended to the Legislature, and the Governor agrees, that the maximum penalty for the felonies against Pinkney should be reduced from five years to two years. Getting the Judge to delay the sentencing would be a significant victory and an indication that he is inclined to be lenient. The legislation is being held up because of the overall budget crisis in Michigan; not much legislation will go forward until some of those problems are solved.


On the question of the jury challenge and the all-white jury, Pinkney has filed a motion for reconsideration of the judge’s denial, showing that the information given to his lawyers and expert in order to analyze racial disparities was inadequate, incomplete, and prevented them from doing so. Further, the judge’s refusal to adjourn the trial so that there could be a further investigation of the necessary data to prove racial under-representation prevented Pinkney from having a fair hearing on this fundamental constitutional issue.

For all of the courageous court watchers who went to the trial and were either badly treated or prevented from getting into the courtroom, Pinkney’s lawyers have gathered affidavits from people about the fact that the television monitor where they were sent to watch jury selection did not work for about half the time. Further, even when it was working, it was not possible to see much, including the potential jurors.

After the trial began, security was tightened to the point where people were not allowed to enter the courtroom unless they were inside before the session began. Pinkney claims that these were violations of his constitutional right to a public trial.

The fact that the situation occurred at all is an indication of the overall fear and suspicion of Pinkney and his supporters by the Berrien County criminal justice system. The people who came to the trial were community supporters, church members, members of progressive organizations, progressive media, interested citizens, etc. They were united by one desire--to show support for a man who had fought for the community and was being falsely prosecuted because he was successful. They were respectful and interested. They represented no threat of disruption.

Pinkney’s attorneys are preparing other motions for the sentencing and appeal. We will update you as they are filed.


1. Forward this message, emphasizing the fact that especially with the positive polygraph test, the judge has a duty to avoid sentencing or imprisoning an innocent man.

2. Ask the judge to delay the sentencing in light of the proposed legislation reducing Pinkney’s potential sentence.

3. Tell the judge that you want a full investigation of the jury system before Pinkney goes to jail. Tell him to give Pinkney a new trial under the new system.

4. Tell the judge that you, Pinkney, and his supporters are not violent, disruptive or threatening. You only want to see justice for Reverend Pinkney.

Honorable Albert M. Butzbaugh Berrien County Circuit Court 811 Port Street St. Joseph, MI 49085-1187

Hugh M. Davis Constitutional Litigation Associates, P.C. 450 W. Fort Street, Suite 200 Detroit, MI 48226


Click here to see some of Rev. Pinkney's many, many supporters

Rigged Juries in Berrien County, Michigan


The U.S. Supreme Court ruled against stacking juries with Whites in a powerful 8 to 1 decision in late February. The Supreme Court ruled that an Appeals Court had made it unduly hard for a Black man to get a fair trial on his claim that the jury had been unconstitutionally purged of Blacks. The lower court, the Supreme Court held, did not give full consideration to the substantial evidence the petitioner put forth in support of racial bias in jury selection and instead accepted, without question, the State Court’s evaluation of the racial intent of the prosecution.

Prosecutors in Berrien County, Michigan, have always been stacking juries with Whites. The prosecutors have been improperly barring Black jurors in cases involving Black defendants.

An all white jury that was motivated by something other than the truth convicted Rev. Edward Pinkney on March 21, 2007. The evidence was tainted, witnesses were coerced, and their lives were threatened. Still the evidence did not support a conviction on any charge. There was no forensic evidence, no fingerprints, no DNA, and no handwriting analysis supporting a conviction. The all White jury was rigged from the start. This jury was motivated by racism.

The integrity of Rev. Pinkney, who has become a national political figure, was pointed out throughout this case. Whatever one might believe about Pinkney’s politics or his guilt or innocence on these charges, there can be no doubt that he was motivated by the highest of ideals and desire for the betterment of the Benton Harbor community. He neither sought nor received personal or financial benefit from the electoral activities in which he engaged, but was obviously dedicated to pro bono publico.

The court has now been presented with the polygraph examination conducted on April 13, 2007, by Chris Lanfear’s Consulting and Investigation. Chris Lanfear’s reputation in law enforcement circles is impeccable. He is the Chief Examiner for the Oakland County Sheriff Department. His examination of Pinkney made it clear that he carefully tested Pinkney on every material aspect of the five charges against him and determined that Pinkney was very truthful when he denied engaging in any of the criminal acts of which he was convicted.

The administration of justice and the interests of the community cannot be served or benefit from the imprisonment of an innocent man. Rev. Edward Pinkney is innocent. The result of the polygraph examination was kept confidential and provided to Berrien County Prosecutor Vignansky, along with an offer that Pinkney would also submit to a polygraph arranged by Vignansky and Judge Alfred Butzbaugh. Both declined the offer because they knew that Rev. Pinkney was innocent.

Let this be a lesson to everyone--keep your mind on your freedom and keep freedom on your mind.

Sunday, May 06, 2007





Begins at Colfax and Main St. (Work First Bldg. on corner)
March over bridge into St. Joseph and the Berrien County Courthouse

Rev. Pinkney and others will speak before his sentencing at 1:30pm


Let us be there for our most out-spoken, justice-loving Michigan activists!

To read an excellent account of what this is all about:

Wednesday, May 02, 2007

Capital of Prison Industry is Berrien County, Michigan

by Rev. Edward Pinkney

While the United States celebrates over 200 years of the obliteration of the slave trade, the city of Benton Harbor, Michigan in Berrien County is trapped in a time warp of monumental proportions. Living in Berrien County feels like it must have felt in America before Brown vs. The Board Of Education.

All world citizens should know how corrupt the Berrien county legal system is. It is a danger to every traveler, visitor, and guest worker from out of state, and to every individual who takes the risky steps of entering Berrien county. Just ask the Hispanic families of prisoners, who are not informed that family members are arrested. Many are serving long prison terms in Michigan after they were jailed on flimsy, tainted evidence from
Berrien county law enforcement.

The reality is that Berrien county which proclaims itself the land of freedom has the most dishonest, dangerous, and corrupt legal system (or equal to the worst) within any developed nation. Legal corruption covers Berrien county like a blanket. It is well-known, but well-hidden by the news media. The corporate media owners are afraid both of the reprisal and social revolution that would come from exposing the truth.

An April 24, 2007 Detroit Free Press OpEd states that in Berrien County, most or all defendants are sent to prison. The prison industry is growing all across America, and Berrien County is leading the charge. The USA, land of the free, has twenty-five percent of all prisoners in the entire world, and the largest prison gulag.

Many are innocent and being arrested. The police, prosecutors, and judges in America have no concern at all whether they have arrested someone who is innocent. They just do not care. When a crime is committed, they arrest almost anyone just to say they've caught the bad guy. Police, prosecutors, and judges do not like to admit they made a mistake. Once they arrest you, the police, prosecutors, and judges will try to make up and plant evidence to help convict you. A common trick is to take criminals they know who are facing jail on other charges and have those criminals to be false witnesses in court.

The police, if they do arrest you in America, they like to pile on the charges. The ideal is to charge you with as many crimes as possible, to make you look as bad as possible.

The only people who can really expect fairness in American courts are the rich and the corporations. Nobody else really matters to American judges and prosecutors.

There is a huge amount of bribery in America, perhaps even more than in the courts of any other country. Nearly all bribes are given to judges by lawyers. This is considered the safe way to bribe a judge. Bribery is rarely spoken about - just understood.

No one should be fooled by this country's propaganda - about being the land of freedom. The system is broken. It is the Have`s against the Have-Nots, Rich against the Poor, and Corporations against you and I. They are attacking all of us for the same reasons: political oppression, economic exploitation, and social degradation. All from the same enemy. We must say enough is enough.