We've just gotten word that Ghislaine Maxwell has been found guilty on five of six charges.  I the Mentor (i.e., the Happy Bachelor) asked the Heir (i.e., Tropical Soulvangelical) whether this puts to rest his fears from yesterday I channeled here into a base share, and what he said was that we can be relieved that the courts are finally starting to go the way of The Rule Of Law.  He reiterates that what he said about a post-voir dire still applies, and that it's too soon to tell whether we can put that idea on the shelf.  But one concern he had was that the defense's efforts to discredit the survivors, and by extension all survivors including those of Weinstein and Cosby, etc., would have been reinforced if Maxwell were acquitted.  Their discrediting efforts involved outright slander that survivors are somehow gold-diggers that are only in it for the money.  The conviction of Maxwell the Heir takes as the jury's rejection of that vile line of thinking, which should be discarded to the dustbin of history.  The next trial the Heir's focusing on is the Crumblies, and whether Kyle Rittenhouse corrupted Ethan Crumbley with the former's acquittal, making it look as if mass murder didn't have legal or moral consequences.  The Crumbley trial the Heir's not sure of the date on, and last check the counselors were debating with the judge as to whether to lower the Crumblies' bond or not.  But let's keep it just people, and let's keep adhering to principle, if not for anything else, the sake of the children.

We're into either the fourth or fifth day of deliberations in the Maxwell trial, depending on which media outlet you ask.  Now that it's gone on this long, the Heir's 90% sure the jury's heading for full acquittal.  This despite the judge's voiced concerns that Omicron might threaten the ability of the trial to properly come to an end at all.  But the Heir will not accept anything less than a conviction of some sort.  So until and unless that happens, the Heir wants a social discussion about whether we need to have a *socially* mandated voir dire after a given trial, the same way there's a *legally* mandated voir dire before the trial.  The two questions the Heir wants asked of jurors in a post-voir dire is a) do you believe in the Rule Of Law, and b) do you believe the survivors.  He's well aware that once a court trial comes to an end, the jurors will return to their private lives, which is perfectly appropriate.  That said, the Heir holds out hope that with respect to the Maxwell trial and the Rittenhouse trial, at least one juror may come forward from either of those trials, and talk to a newspaper, and express regret for either the verdict or how the verdict was socially interpreted.  The jurors in the Maxwell trial were instructed not to listen to media reports about the case while the trial is going on, which means that 90% of what they need to know to make principled moral decisions they were left in the dark on.  So a given juror weeks or months *after* a trial may end up doing personal research on their own to find out what important information was not admitted, and then go to a newspaper, and then say, well if I knew then what I know now after the fact, I would not have voted to acquit.  The Heir encourages jurors to do so, though albeit they need to adhere to instructions and wait *after* the trial is over.  But they need to come forward for the children and their moral development accordingly.  The Heir has comments to say about the state of socialite society after the Maxwell trial, though he's going to need to wait, because that's another topic entirely.

Something's really wrong.  So the Heir thought when we went into what appeared to be the second day of jury deliberations in the Maxwell trial.  However, the deliberations have since adjourned until Monday after the holidays.  The Heir *thinks* he saw in writing that they did just an hour on Wednesday until what appears to be communications between the judge and the jury to agree to postpone till Monday.  So that's a sum of 1 day and 1 hour, as opposed to 2 days going into a third.  The Heir *hopes* it's the former and not the latter, because he saw how the Rittenhouse trial went.  The jury in that case went into a second and possibly a third day of deliberations before declaring an acquittal.  He hasn't seen any meaningful trial analysis (yet) regarding whether Maxwell's going to be acquitted or not.  He's wondering whether he'll find it on INN, but he wants someone with authorization *somewhere* to substantively convince him with factual evidence that length of time of deliberations means nothing in terms of what verdict a given jury will reach in a given trial.  The apparent conventional wisdom is that short deliberations=Guilty, long deliberations=Not Guilty.  That seems really cut and dried, so the Heir's hoping for more fact-based analysis rather than the kind of casting of aspersions he's hearing increasingly on public radio (and sometimes INN).  Now here's the thing.  The Heir has *also* read through the Tampa Bay Times through the Wikipedia entry on Ghislaine Maxwell that if Maxwell is acquitted, she still has to stand trial to answer perjury charges, so it wouldn't necessarily be over.  The Heir doesn't know whether a Guilty verdict in a perjury trial would necessarily provide the kind of justice the survivors seek and so well deserve.  But a Guilty verdict in *either* trial the Heir thinks will go *some* way at least towards a culture of the Rule Of Law, rather than the Rule Of Snowdenocracy as per most of the 2010s, people publicly thumbing their nose with "hah I beat the rap" after a Not Guilty verdict or a pardoning, hence displaying a consciousness of guilt.

 

Chef: "Well, what's the Heir has to say for himself, Mentor?"

 

Heir: "That we are a nation of laws, not Snowdens."

 

Chef: "Well, I'm glad *someone's* jumped right out and said that.  Here are your Doubtfighters (chicken sandwich with spicy barbecue sauce)."

The Heir does not plan in his capacity at the Bland Barns Catering Counter to enforce mask usage on the part of the customers if BBS decides to do a lockdown on the account of Omicron, whose symbol prior to this base share the Heir has never seen and doesn't know what it looks like.  What also doesn't help is what the Heir sees as Covid misinformation coming directly from public radio, so who needs QAnon?  Thankfully since that's audio, it's readily obvious to the Heir when they've been less than honest when they cherry-pick both polls and studies to make both Biden and Omicron look bad or worse.  We already covered the polls bit here on the shares base, but now the Heir's hearing public radio trying to claim that Omicron is somehow invincible against all present vaccines, despite Fauci attesting to the contrary.  The Heir sees that just as bad as if someone tried to claim that Omicron is caused by space lasers.  So we can't be choosing to combat one form of misinformation and let slide another form of misinformation.  As we're winding down what's left of this year, the Heir sees public radio as only having that much time to prove they're truly different from QAnon, otherwise it'll be too late.  If they come back to him all repentant on 1/2 or 1/3, he'll just whisk them away with his hand, because they missed his deadline.

The Heir never thought he'd ever hear Julian Assange's name on audio ever again.  He thought that last year when Bill Barr decided to up the charges against Assange from computer hacking to outright espionage, those of us in need of justice against Assange saw our hopes dashed, because the Ed Snowden progressives would use the espionage charges as cause for martyrdom.  When those particular British courts ruled against our requests for extradition because of the new charges, the Heir saw the Ed Snowdens' fanaticism vindicated.  Though the Heir never gave up on justice with respect to Assange, he since moved onto more national and local cases like the Crumblies and Ghislaine Maxwell, hoping that the country would find justice there they would somehow now *never* find in the Assange case.  That may have all changed, but now the ball's in Merrick Garland's court to decide whether to extradite or not, and whether it's on espionage or computer hacking.  But the Heir sees Merrick Garland's career as Attorney General as a dismal failure, and he's unhopeful that Garland would ever do the right thing in the Assange case.  Let's look at Garland's track record here.  Deciding to defend Trump in the E. Jean Carroll case.  Taking Trump's side in the assaults against protestors in Lafayette Square.  If the Heir doesn't see Merrick Garland as doing the right thing in the Assange case, he thinks Garland should just throw in the towel and hand the job to a more capable AG, maybe someone like Neal Katyal among others.

You remember when the Heir said he's not taking prisoners anymore as of about October 15?  We think we still have that cultural update linked on this shares base, a statement of general indignation.  But the Heir's not limiting his not taking prisoners just to law enforcement and legal cases such as Julian Assange, Ghislaine Maxwell and the Crumblies.  He's taking his stance to his fellow Americans whom he believes will inevitably vote against their (and *his*) economic interests because the anti-Biden media's essentially telling them to, with those dang "polls" whose scientific health is way in doubt.  Sparing specific criticisms about those polls though for the time being, the Heir thinks his fellow Americans shouldn't knock it till they tried it on the social changes bill.  They did oppose Funny Named Care before they supported it, but the Heir thinks that if people don't give the social changes bill a chance, they'll never get that chance again possibly until some distant point in the future when it becomes apparent to the Heir that we will never have truly recovered from the pandemic (regardless of whether the pandemic itself will last or not) until we implement things such as housing reform and green infrastructure.  The Heir and I saw our entire street flooded when Henri hit, and we had to move our opera lit personal limousines to a side street multiple times first thing in the morning, so we're thinking that people who somehow don't believe that the social changes bill will mean anything to them because they're currently having to pay 20 cents more on a jug of milk than they did last year must have never had to deal with things like Henri or Ida or other weather events related to global warming.  You don't have to be a "tree hugging hippie" to know it's for real.  So, people, don't blow it, because you think you have it hard now?  Just wait until the wrong people get in next year, and you'll almost certainly end up with buyer's remorse.

Despite the Arbury verdict, the Heir is still concerned about an emerging phenomenon he calls "Rittenhousing."  That's actively shooting people for the express purpose of arguing self-defense in a trial.  We have no idea why anyone would go to the trouble, because why not stay out of jail to begin with?  What have you got to prove?  But the Heir's looking at the Crumbley case in Michigan, and he wonders if that's a case of Rittenhousing.  It would not surprise him if both the teen and his parents argue self-defense on trial.  They seem to believe that anyone should be able to use any gun in any way they feel like, that being their possible definition of self-defense.  They don't care that the parents hiding out in that one office building may be a demonstration of a guilty conscience.  But the Heir believes the Rittenhouse verdict has given license to any active shooter as long as that shooter argues self-defense, despite the Arbury trial showing what the Heir sees as a common sense refrain in the law as per what self-defense really is and what it isn't.  That refrain the Heir sees as preventing the self-defense argument from becoming a blank check or a get-out-of-free-jail-card, but don't be surprised when the Crumblies argue self-defense in court.  In other Rittenhouse news, the Heir needs to go to the Wikipedia pages on Anthony Huber and Jonathan Rosenbaum to objectively see whether the families have yet to pursue a case against the city of Kenosha and/or seek compensation from the state of Wisconsin.  He hasn't heard anything on audio about it, and he's not going to do a general web search because that'll collide him towards pro-Rittenhouse biases online.

OK so generally we don't usually do a base share more than once per day, but the Heir's fears that the Rittenhouse case may have turned the self-defense argument into a blank check of a get-out-of-free-jail-card had just dodged a bullet.  He went into his YouTube and was stunned at a Glenn Kirshner video informing him that the three defendants in the Ahmad Arbury case were found guilty earlier today.  They tried to use the self-defense argument similarly to Rittenhouse, but while Rittenhouse was acquitted, the guys in the Arbury case were convicted.  Though the Heir disapproves of politicizing any court trial whether it's Rittenhouse or Arbury, or eventually Waukensha, he does see the Arbury convictions as having taken 90% of the wind out of the Trumpist balloon that politicized Rittenhouse.  That's not to say that the Trumpists won't keep parading Rittenhouse, but the Arbury case casts doubt the Heir thinks on the Rittenhouse concept of self-defense at least.  He's pretty sure that the smart ones at least (and believe it or not, they're out there) will find some way to spin how the Arbury case doesn't reflect on the Rittenhouse case.  They may find a way of doing that without it looking like a kabuki dance, but the Heir's already decided that the concept of self-defense is getting closer back to its original common sense context within applicable law.  He's relieved that some kind of consciousness still matters in our culture after the inherently immoral 2010s.  He's not going to gloat on the Rittenhousers with the Arbury case, as long as he knows that there's a bigger picture to keep in one's mind...

"...the picture of principle.  Happy Thanksgiving, everyone!"

The Heir doesn't think it's a coincidence that 24 hours after Rittenhouse was acquitted, there was that tragedy in Waukesha WI, just about an hour and over 50 miles away from Kenosha.  The Rittenhouse trial laid down the precedent of any criminal suspect getting a get-out-of-free-jail-card simply by using the self-defense defense.  The Heir sees it as blank check, and he'd be surprised that the suspect in the Waukesha tragedy wouldn't try to tell the jury that he acted in self-defense against the people he hit in the parade, including the little kid.  The Heir wonders whether self-defense can now be used to excuse just about any atrocity, ranging from speeding to money-laundering, and we call for the populace to get back to morality and principle accordingly.

So here's the latest on the Heir's thing with the Rittenhouse trial.  He heard on audio how Rittenhouse granted an interview on the Attack Dog News Network, and this he does not see as any real serious effort to heal the country.  He sees it as more of a guilt trip on people whom he sees as rightly believing that Rittenhouse is still guilty and needs to be held accountable.  He sees it foolish of the Attack Dog to want to use the Rittenhouse trial accordingly, because that allows that to be a subject to be brought up again and again to the ultimate *embarrassment* of the Attack Dog.  Stay tuned as the Heir has more thoughts he'll have more time to share later on, particularly from the point of view of justice and principle.

The Heir shares in the outrage at the Kyle Rittenhouse verdict.  The guy's as guilty as sin.  Though the Heir has defended Biden from both media attacks and Ed Snowden attacks, he disagrees that we must "accept" the verdict.  He actually doesn't, and in fact he believes the court trial should be submitted for independent review of some sort.  He's pretty sure such a review will find egregious flaws and discrepancies severe enough as to warrant an update to court trial guidelines, particularly in the case of accused perpetrators who engage in any mass murder they feel like, and then claim self-defense.  Sure he took the position that he's likely to accept a non-guilty verdict for Ms. Meng in the Huawei case if it ever got to trial before she left the country, but that's barring a court trial analysis comparing for example basic facts in the public domain with those that are admitted in court.  He encourages the families of the victims to sue the city, and he believes that they qualify for a restitution from the state of Wisconsin partly to offset legal fees and funereal expenses, among other expenses, plus a monetary compensation principle by which the families might decide to make donated to hate group awareness groups like SPLC.  The Heir's thinking of getting his reps to join in a resolution condemning the verdict, and donating to the SPLC on personal behalf of the Huber and Rosenbaum families (he *thinks* those are the names), even though he's never met them.  He's looking at this verdict from a pragmatic point of view of next steps, unlike the activists he was seeing on visual whom he doesn't believe are particularly helping matters.

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is scheduled to be at the Three Amigos Summit at the White House today.  The Heir believes there needs to be protestors kind of heckling him about the Canada Cave-in to China over the Wauwei executive.  Last month or so, the Heir remembers Canada agreeing to hand the executive back to China in exchange for North American hostages China detained to do the hostage swap with.  That's why when the CIS had a special on cyberhackers, the Heir heard China in the teaser pleading, "Where is the evidence?"  Well the way the Heir sees it, if China allowed a court case to go ahead with respect to charges against the Wauwei executive instead of interfering with a form of international blackmail, they would, *indeed*, see the charges laid out.  Of course the Heir doesn't think that'll matter, since he's sure China will dismiss the evidence out of hand or find some kind of spin.  In a lesser-related issue, the Heir condemns the comments of the French Foreign Minister for calling Biden Trump-Lite over the sub issue.  Even though Biden seems to have patched things up there diplomatically, the Heir *still* holds it against the French Foreign Minister, and demands that the Minister make an unconditional apology accordingly.

The Heir's gotten ready for me the Mentor/Happy Bachelor (and the Heir is the Tropical Soulvangelical) what he calls our "loungtyp."  It's an open source laptop device he did from scratch that we want to use in place of this off-the-shelf tablet.  This is the test base share that we're doing from the loungtyp.  OK, so it's like, loung-what??  Well, me as the Happy Bachelor takes abode in this "lounge" as you may know, and the other syllable is "typ" which is akin to "type."  So it's primarily a sort of diary-ish writing device with which we want to do these shares going forward.  It's a cultural artifact the same way that music player is that the Heir is in the process of making with a different computer board.  We're not declaring the loungtyp a milestone yet in our recovery from the wars of corruption of the 2010s, but we wanted to use this share as a test accordingly.  We'll soon enough see how well it works doing so.

The Heir excoriates the media for its "Donkeys In Disarray" type coverage, which he takes as a biased editorial disguising itself as reporting analysis.  He sees this as going down in the media hall of shame along with their botched and unprofessional coverage of the withdrawal from Afghanistan, and he will continue to stack up moments of shame on the media's part where he sees fit to demonstrate what passes for a so-called "Fourth Estate" in the modern age.  How can the media, he wonders, possibly make the case for free speech when just about everyone in the media is saying the same thing out of fear of being different and not going on the same page as Donkeys In Disarray?  This is something he thinks they should think about, particularly if the takeaway is something to the effect of the media saying, you know we're wrong, *we* know we're wrong, but we have to do this, because this is the way we've *always* done it.  Actually, no, you *don't* have to do it that way.  You can still stand for free speech principles instead of what the Heir sees as caving into dark and hidden advertisers buying media silence on how such a Disarray type headline is not actively supported by the evidence on the ground.  It's actually contradicted with respect to the first Donkey in Bachelor Blue State to get a second term since 1977.  The only reason why it's "close" is because this sort of thing never happened before.  The Heir also wonders how Donkeys are in Disarray all over the country when a Donkey Senate leader in BBS that no-one else in the country's has ever heard of loses his seat.  He also doesn't think the media should overgeneralize based on Terry McAuliffe whom the Heir doesn't see as really all that popular in Virginia when as chair of the DonkeyNC back in 2004 he allowed the loss of the Last Meaningful Election Ever, and that was nearly 20 years ago.  He sees McAuliffe as part of an increasing old guard as opposed to up-and-comers like Eric Adams for example, or Sheila Oliver in BBS, or Wendy Wu in Boston (he *thinks* that's her first name).  Those are the kinds of leaders the people will be wanting among the Donkeys For The People.  So he's hoping that the media will issue a mass retraction in the next seven days rather than dust this biased "coverage" under the rug with the use of media cycles.

As strange as it might sound, the Heir's not exactly jumping for joy that a ballot provision to defund the police failed in Minneapolis.  The failure did confirm for him that for the most part the electorate did not buy into the radicalism that impressed the Heir as to what DTP was ultimately about.  He read online articles about voters being unsure about the vagueness of what form a post-police public safety situation was supposed to take.  But the Heir's thinking that the voters didn't want radicalism to permanently damage democracy in Minneapolis if they saw that DTP wasn't necessarily about the police but about the concept of radicalism to seize control and defeat reason and sanity any way they can, through any political issue they can.  The Heir has never doubted the Ed Snowden influence in DTP, but he does believe the more troubled precincts in Minneapolis probably need a Camden City -style overhaul to reform the system to make it more fair for the residents.  But that's not how he believed the voters viewed the ballot measure.  He saw the DTP'ers dismiss the election results as a result of voter misinformation, but he believes they just have to say that just to save face.  They really don't want to deal with the embarrassment of public opinion not being on their side.  So the Heir sees them as having preset responses to the results regardless of how the results would turn out, instead of maturely using this present defeat as a stepping stone towards ensuring true reform and balance for all residents in the city.  He's never believed DTP really cared as much for the pragmatics of true reform as much as just using electoral politics to make a political statement.  As per the Heir's dealing with Flaileef over the years, he sees that kind of mentality as patently unhelpful.

The Heir sees just as much hot air produced at the climate summit as produced by global warming itself.  With the exception of possibly Biden, the Heir doesn't see most of the world leaders doing anything meaningful once they've gone home.  He heard Boris Johnson on audio use a lot of hyperbole and fatalism, but he wonders what Johnson is saying or doing now back in London.  He doesn't think the Queen imploring world leaders to do something about global warming by itself will have much effect, particularly since many countries at the summit no doubt don't have or acknowledge royalty themselves.  The Heir disagrees with the premise made at the summit that this is somehow humanity's last chance to do something about global warming.  It's never too late to to do the right thing, though doing so includes the Heir himself doing away with space tourism, since he's still mentally calculating how many passenger car fuel tanks of fuel go into just sending up one rocket, and how much fossil fuel emissions both from the rocket and the production of the fuel itself have added to the average temperature of the planet.  He didn't hear them criticize *that* at the summit.

The Heir wants to boycott Wauwei (as soon as he learns to dang spell it) the first chance he gets, because he believes that its executive that managed to escape back to China from North America is still guilty as sin for whatever it was she did.  He doesn't remember offhand what she was accused of, but he's pretty sure she's guilty.  Sure that goes against the presumption of innocence, but since China successfully strong armed Canada into giving her back in a "hostage" exchange since China unjustly captured and imprisoned two innocent Canadian citizens, he doesn't believe that he's bound by that presumption where common sense is concerned.  So this yet another mark the Heir makes against China, and he places a mark against Canada for caving into China and not standing for principle.  It's perfectly fine by him if the Canadian citizens who were returned end up  helping make the case against China's self-styled legitimacy, and also publicly share their opinions as to the amount of guilt the Wauwei executive bears for she's accused of.  The Heir thinks they should hold their own once China tries to respond with an up-is-down contention against them in response.  This is also why the Heir believes that Janet Yellen in turn should hold her own when meeting with China's finance minister when the minister asks that China get a get-out-of-jail-free card for everything they've ever done, including the unjust detention of tourists for the sake of a political vendetta, just so they can use their economic power to strong arm the rest of the world to what China wants them to do.  The Heir says...

..."no way, no how."

The Heir morally opposes today's Space Tourism flight as he did the last one.  He really doesn't care that "Captain Kirk" was on this particular flight, since he sees the space billionaires as cynical enough to try to use celebrity endorsement to try to sell their ghastly industry.  Despite their propagandistic control of at least the audio media, they saw how there was at least a "silent majority" type opposition to the industry at large.  Captain Kirk's flight the Heir sees as no less destructive to the environment as the Bezos flight.  He estimates that every single launch uses the equivalent of 1000 passenger car tanks of fuel (at least) just to get the ships off into space.  He dreads to think what they use to get the ships back down to Earth again.  This flight takes place just mere hours after the UN recommends industrialized countries to spend more of their GPA to battle climate change, but the media the Heir doesn't see as wanting to make a connection between the two stories.  Maybe once there's a Frances Haugen in one of the media's offices who will whistleblow the media's unholy alliance with the space billionaires, the Heir's hoping.   Good thing the Heir uses audio for his information and therefore he's spared any of the distracting and distorting visuals he's sure everyone else is exposed to, so he can immediately sense there's something wrong.  So the next time there's a space tourist flight, the Heir will be there once again to remind people how that flight, too, will put the final nail in the coffin of our efforts as a collective humanity to get climate change under control.

We're taking no prisoners, and specifically the Heir isn't.  Just days after a jury returned a felony conviction of R Kelly, the Heir heard on audio this morning that the British Metro Police announced they will not pursue any charges or investigations into Prince Andrew as per his assault of a Jeffrey Epstein survivor.  As a result, the Heir's calling for a worldwide discussion of the necessity of a British Monarchy, since he sees the Queen as having the power to dissolve the Metro Police *at will* and for any reason whatsoever.  In that sense, the Heir doesn't see the Metro Police as truly objective if they believe they can lose their jobs if they end up charging Prince Andrew with a crime.  The Heir doesn't remember there ever being a time when either the Metro Police or Scotland Yard had ever taken a member of Royalty into custody without official retaliation.  Incidentally, the Heir was checking in last night into the latest on Cosby's third month of newfound freedom.  If Cosby does start a new show, the Heir wants to join an organized boycott rally of some sort accordingly.  The Heir understands that Andrea Constand had undergone personal healing therapy over the past few years or so, but he's concerned that any time a survivor goes public about undergoing therapy, potential assailants may end up rationalizing their crimes on the basis of, oh well what does it matter if the person is just going to undergo therapy anyway?  The Heir states that an integral part of any therapy of ensuring official justice so that young men and boys don't believe that they can have their way with any partner or acquaintance if they think they'll always get out of jail on a technicality.  The Heir's main aim in justice is about avoiding sending the wrong message.

"For every criminal that gets off scot-free, at least 100 young people will become personally corrupted.  They don't believe they need to be held to account for *anything* if Person X gets off scot-free.  They are likely now engaging in disorderly person offenses in the UK upon hearing news about Prince Andrew."

The Heir continues our newfound tradition of not taking prisoners as per our Cultural Update by continuing to press for accountability in the California oil spill.  Today's audio tried to downplay the disaster by apparently citing some kind of "report" that claims that not as many birds were affected by the oil spill, or that it's "not clear" what caused the oil spill, or that the pipeline that ruptured somehow may have been breached for up to "a year."  This after the same audio reported the likelihood that a German goods carrier put down anchor on or near the pipeline and then failed to bring the anchor up when it started going again, and that the anchor caught onto and dragged the pipeline for nearly a hundred feet.  That is more substantive to the Heir than a "report" clutching at different possibilities as to why the oil spill is "not so serious," so he's suspicious about this new report and where it came from.  He's sure the progressives will solely blame the oil industry which he sees as such a predictable go-to, and not on industries that are demanding such oil, such as the burgeoning space tourism industry underwritten by Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos, and in their interests in seeing such a "report" come to light.  See my (Happy Bachelor's) previous base share on the likelihood that the ruptured pipeline was supplying oil for refinement for space tourism.  He sees Musk and Bezos using campaign and charity contributions as a bribe for progressive silence, to the point where the progressives effectively endorse everything Musk and Bezos want to do, no matter how unprogressive those things are.  In a closely related issue, since the Heir still sees Mark Zuckerberg and Facebook as progressive bastions, since the Heir sees the two as part of the progressives' own activist infrastructure, he doesn't believe Frances Haugen's revelations go far enough.  There's a lot more that her documents should have showed, such as Facebook's participation in forced obsolescence, the effort to get the public to falsely believe that one thing should replace another.  This the Heir goes into detail in the Cultural Update, but suffice it to say that he's actually disappointed until and unless there's an update, amidst other audio about current events that seem to seek to steer away from the revelations of Frances Haugen.

As per announcement that we're not taking prisoners anymore (i.e., the Cultural Update), the Heir wants to connect a disconnection.  He wants to connect between the tragic oil spill in California and the so-called space tourism industry.  It was less than a week ago that on one of the Heir's ethereal space channels on YouTube that the Ed Snowden-lite Elon Musk made an editorial proclamation against A.I., and regardless of whether you agree with him or not, the Heir doesn't believe that Musk's opinions count for anything.  The space channel features compelling space animations and space age music the Heir finds pleasant and entertaining.  The a/v content uses as voiceovers *factual* commentaries by actual *scientists* about things like if and when we can make it to an earth-like planet outside our solar system, or whether we'll achieve warp drive, or whether we can beat Relativity in space travel so that people don't have to travel thousands of years into the future to find the planet Vulcan or something, only to come back to find everyone they knew is dead.  The A.I. video, which the Heir only saw the thumbnail of, and did not dignify the Elon Muskization of society to bother watching, he sees as an *unwelcome* intrusion that he sees contrary to the space channel's mission.  Elon Musk is just a corporate executive.  He's not a scientist, so the Heir wonders what makes *his* opinions better or superior to anyone else's, particularly since Elon Musk also spends time smoking pot on YouTube.  Add that to the fact that you had that oil spill happen, because here's the Heir's take on that.  We're still gathering the facts to present on audio as to what's causing the spill, but the Heir suspects the oil is in a pipeline that's meant for a refinery that *specifically* makes fuel for the NASA launch pads, including Elon Musk's SpaceX program, and the space tourist launches that take place.  The Heir's wondering if another Billionaire Space Launch is due in two weeks, and if it is, the Heir expects an official report on the spill to be intentionally delayed *after* the launch, and for audio coverage of the spill to follow suit, because Elon Musk, and Jeff Bezos, and Richard Branson the Heir suspects as not wanting coverage of an oil spill to be an embarrassment to them the next time they want all other media to cover them going into space.

  The Heir asks the progressives accordingly, while we're both walking down the street, "While we're trying to promote voting rights and fight voting restrictions, what exactly is *democratic* about our being made ignorant of the oil spill just so the billionaires can go back to space again?"

So as per our announcement that we're essentially taking no prisoners anymore, the Heir takes exception to some implications made at a recent demonstration in Philadelphia.  What he heard on audio were speakers saying something to the effect of, Donkey Presidents have had a history of certain actions, clearly implying to the Heir that if you have support or admiration of said Donkey Presidents, then you yourself must be guilty of condemning some migrants to death, and particularly if you're a registered Donkey citizen yourself.  They have no idea that that's how their comments would be taken, so the Heir thinks they really should have done their political homework if they had any hope getting extra support.  That said, the Heir wants to hear more from Jen Psaki than just, we're trying to tell people that now is not the time, because how exactly are they adequately getting that message out?  Just announcing it from a press podium possibly without it going on VOA towards the Caribbean, for example, means you're likely going to get migrants at your border who didn't hear anything about how now is not the time.  He's wondering whether that one bias incident in Texas a few days ago only served as a conversational stalking horse diverting from larger questions about how we're treating the migrants.  The Heir doesn't want the head of Homeland Security to *only* talk about and answer questions about just that one incident before committee, and the Heir hasn't heard on audio yet whether such a hearing is scheduled in the immediate or foreseeable future.  In short, the Heir thinks the demonstrators are incorrect as per their character assessment of Biden, but that Biden needs to help himself out by providing a better explanation about what happened and why.  The Heir also takes Colbert to task, or maybe his cyberstaff, regarding alarmist/fatalist thumbnail titles about a week ago regarding a supposedly impending end to democracy, and there was another title the Heir was made not to play that video either.  But the democracy thing the Heir holds as equivalent to when he saw an INN thumbnail title of Eric Swalwell claiming that democracy is somehow on "life support."  The Heir thinks very little of hyperbole, because if either Swalwell or Colbert's cyberstaff had ever exaggerated through the titles, how does the Heir know that the other titles *weren't* exaggerated?  He did see a recent video, but how does he know that the title for the video he just saw *also* wasn't exaggerated?

"That was a *question*, Colbert cyberstaff, so please don't ignore it if you really think those were *rhetorical* questions."

OK, so now our migration is mostly complete as per this announcement, though the Heir will check over any places that still need to be part of the migration, the Heir gets to take his downtrodden state from the last eight years or so, and send a shot across the bow in the form of a skepticism regarding the progressives' apparent book plug on behalf of Bob Woodward.  To make a long story short, the Heir's observed the progressives' citation of Bob Woodward's new book as an apparent account of "how close we came."  The Heir must point out, however, that history is replete with all sorts of dodged bullets, as well as hit bullets.  He's concerned that the progressives' only contention about "how close we came" comes in the form of a phone call Mike Pence had with Dan Quayle.  Again the Heir points out that politicians have phone calls with each other all the time, and it's no use fetishizing any one phone call.  They don't cite any other calls Mike Pence may have had that day that influenced his decision, though what the Heir reads in the citation which the progressives apparently missed was that going into that phone call, he sees Mike Pence as *already having made up his mind* that he was going to follow convention and oversee the certification of the results.  He just needed reassurance.  Even if he didn't follow convention, the members of Congress likely didn't need his participation, since the Heir's not aware of any constitutional provision that *requires* a vice-president to be present if certification of results were to have any validity.  It just needed what the constitution says it needed.  It's grievous to the Heir that the progressives apparently used Bob Woodward's new book to avoid responsibility for having failed, for a third time, to uphold the rights of survivors, because this all happened at the same time gymnasts testified on Capitol Hill as to the abuse they suffered at the hands of Larry Nassar, and the progressives made no attempt to add to the public record the shameful accounts of how Cosby and Cuomo got off scot-free, as per the Heir's previous accounts thereof here on this shares base through my writing as the Happy Bachelor.  So now it's Cosby, and then Cuomo, and now it's Larry Nassar.  Three strikes and the progressives are out, having failed on both moral and justice grounds.  And now that we've migrated our edutainment series to primarily talk about Tropical Soul And Principle, whatever the progressives have to say for themselves now, the Heir, the Tropical Soulvangelical, gets to dispute each and every one expected protestation on their part in response to being criticized as above.

"Where were you when the survivors needed you?  Three times!"

So for those of you following The Happy Bachelor Shares Base (supported by Blogger), you've mostly endured and/or followed the Heir's latest social outrages, informed by the his skepticism of the moral state of society at large.  We want you to know that within the next few days to a couple weeks or so (hopefully it won't take long), we'll be migrating both this shares base and our (eventual return to) audio content toward the main themes of principle and a simplicity and meditative state of mind we've called "tropical soul."  There will still be Happy Bachelor type content consistent with the four pillars of sex, classiness, music and food, but we're finding that as society at large descends deeper into personal corruption, we just cannot sit by the sidelines and merely do a complaint du jour.  We need to make a more formal stance over the long term in favor of things like tropical soul and principle.  Definitely know the title of this shares base will change to accommodate those things, along with a separate announcement page explaining the history of where this upcoming migration is coming from and what to expect in the foreseeable future.  That said, you may be interested to know that while we've been going in this general direction for some time, the Heir's come to a dead end in his making of his DIY audio player using a particular type of computer board, and it's become clear he needs to use another type he's been seeing online.  We'll spare you the technicals to let you that what this has to do with our upcoming migration is that we would have preferred to put the migration off till the Heir gets a useable player that replaces anything mediocre that comes off the shelf.  He's been at it for three years, and frankly that's a long time to put off standing for the cause of principle.  He'll still continue going DIY with the player and other things, and we're still looking to get back on audio, maybe in some kind of alt broadcast on an offline analog basis, since we've been oriented and informed by audio mainly on terrestrial analog radio.

Keep it tuned here as we embark on an "exciting" new chapter in what we do.

The Heir's been working on a number of projects designed to effect a transition to eventually make the Happy Bachelor subculture as independent as possible from a larger culture he's pointed out as personally corrupt and favoring forced obsolescence.  The DIY music player with the Third Pillar is one of those, but amidst the projects he hasn't had a chance to comment on current corrupt elements in the larger culture.  For one thing, he noticed that while we were doing the 20th anniversary of 9/11 a week ago, there was a striking dearth of immoral acts, and he wonders if that's because the would-be immoral actors found themselves admonished by how George W. Bush had pointed out how "feel good culture" had led to something like 9/11 to begin with.  This the Heir sees as what he's learned in criminal law as Consciousness Of Guilt.  The personally corrupt knew that what they're doing is wrong, despite their denials, and so they weren't prepared to defy 9/11 on its 20th anniversary.  The Heir also wants to go back to highlights in the testimony of women athletes who were abused by Larry Nassar to see whether there were renewed condemnations of Cosby and Cuomo, either explicit or implied.  Cosby was sprung in July, and Cuomo was failed to be impeached in August, so those two the Heir sees as continuing elements of evidence of personal corruption in the culture.  But another personally corrupt person the Heir sees as having reaped what they sowed was that member of QAnon with a reputation of anti-mask and anti-vaccine who died of Covid-19.  Unfortunately that segment with the INN the Heir was hoping as being able to pontificate more explicitly than they did, and hence the segment wasn't even about the QAnon member or the chickens coming back home to roost as much as general ignorance and denial regarding the pandemic and the importance of masks and vaccines.  The Heir already knows those things, but he suspects they used the segment title that they did in order for *someone else* to point out how the chickens were coming back home to roost.  Unfortunately the segment itself wussed out in not doing so themselves, because the Heir doesn't think that something like QAnon, which he sees as a descendent movement to the Anonymous hacking group, not to mention Ed Snowden, really deserves social respect not to be told that their chickens are coming back home to roost.  So the Heir's still looking for someone to follow in waving the banner of principle, and things like intuitive simplicity and transparency in crafts.  While he's looking for such a thing, he's working hard to make it happen himself for all of us in the Bachelor household.

And now, it's time for the Heir to speak about abortion, after hearing on audio about the situation in Texas, and how the Supreme Court declined an immediate intervention.  All this time for over 15 years we've been doing this gig, the Heir's made it a practice to not comment on issues he sees as divisive and in such a way that it makes it easy for a conformist society to pidgeonhole him as a person as being on one "side" or another.  But just now the Heir's made a pro-choice donation, and while that's all the details about that donation he's ever going to talk about, he *does* want to make a point about whether our country's founders *ever* intended for the judiciary to be at odds with the citizenry.  Looks like he's going to have to do a word search in an online version of the Federalist Papers, but he suspects the answer to that question is *NO*.  So he thinks very little of these bite-around-the-edge proposals, mainly only on cable news shows on visual, such as increasing the number of Supreme Court Justices to 12 from 9.  He's wondering exactly what problem that would solve, and whether it can really happen anyway *if* you need to amend the U.S. Constitution in order to do that.  Most proposed amendments the Heir has seen in the past ended up in the dustbin in some capacity.  But just the fact that these pie-in-the-sky proposals exist the Heir sees as a distraction from the fact that the partisan figures making these proposals have no real solutions and are caught flat-footed where an increasingly dysfunctional and socially hostile judiciary is concerned.  The Heir looks at the otherwise lamentable referendum on legal pot in Bachelor Blue State as a model for how to go forward in some capacity.  The referendum at least proposed changing the state constitution to allow for legal pot, and the Heir can't exactly imagine how anyone's going to overturn that at the Supreme Court, or try to get the Supreme or *any* court to overturn the will of the people reflected in the referendum (except maybe on a technicality, but the Heir's not seeing that here).  But again, these are the kinds of pragmatic strategies the Heir expects the progressives to put down as not fire-in-your-belly enough, solely because it's borne of a very much due and well justified political skepticism.  That said, the abortion situation the Heir hears in Texas he sees as a springboard to have this kind of discussion regarding judiciary vs. the people, particularly when he doesn't see any consequences for the judiciary, encouraging them to make more and more rulings against the people, the way it seems to the Heir.

The Heir remembers how when Karl Hastie declined to impeach Cuomo, there was outrage coming from other members of the New York assembly, and Hastie compromised and said he was going to issue a report.  But the Heir hasn't heard about when that report is coming out, and if it already has, whether those assembly people dismayed by the declination may decide to file articles of impeachment on their own, to try to prevent Cuomo from running for public office again.  The Heir wishes they would, so that Bachelor Blue State isn't surrounded by sex offender friendly states like Pennsylvania is with respect to Cosby getting out of jail this past July.  The Heir sees Pennsylvania as having morally failed its residents, and hence has lowered credibility for the future any time the state makes a request or a move of some sort in the country.  Same thing for New York State, because otherwise the Heir will feel more sympathy for vigilantes making a move against rich and powerful criminals where the system has failed, even though he doesn't have to agree with all their methods.  He will feel more sympathy for the vigilantes and less respect for Cosby and Cuomo jurisdictions.  He wishes Antifa would assert itself more accordingly and not limit the targets of their ire to *only* fascist type influences.  This means that ordinary people being punished more than Cosby and Cuomo for lesser offenses the Heir sees as having a possible argument for having their case thrown out and the arrest and the offense wiped clean from their permanent record, particularly if it's something as little as an out tail light.  The Heir will never forget what happened in the two states until and unless they recant and express sincere contriteness and try to make amends.

We in the Bachelor just finished listening to Biden's remarks on the situation in Afghanistan, on our analog radio, as a kind of fireside chat. But the Heir wanted to hear Biden's responses to what the Heir sees as misreporting and misanalysis on the Taliban insurgency and their takeover of Afghanistan. Time will tell for the Heir whether Biden's remarks will necessarily make a whit of difference to a media campaign that the Heir sees as a kind of geometric proof. The Heir previously criticized, among other things, the media's portrayal of the insurgency as a spectator sport with guns and tanks. But it was entirely predictable to the Heir that the coverage would move to what is effectively an indictment of Biden himself. So here's the geometric proof the Heir's seeing: 1) Biden announces withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan; 2) The gains the Taliban made must be played up in tragic and horrifying terms; 3) Now that the Taliban have taken over Afghanistan, it must be Biden's fault because he withdrew troops. The Heir didn't hear Biden criticize this coverage, because the Heir's wondering whether Biden's playing the media just a little to stoically diplomatically, since they've been anti-Biden from the beginning. The Heir observed that when the ransomware attacks went on, the media did everything they could to make us look far more defenseless than we necessarily are, just so they can lay *that* one at Biden's feet. When the FBI successfully counter-hacked the ransomware people to get most of the ransom back from the hackers, the Heir observed that the media quickly moved to the next Presidential "crisis," and the Heir's never seen the media ever substantiate, and he's always seen them spin. That's the beauty of audio, that you can actually *hear* the words they're trying to use, without the distraction of visual that might make a person convinced of the media's case against Biden, as opposed to their stopping to think, well, wait a minute, isn't this biased and arbitrary? Let's stay tuned people, as the Heir witnesses what the media has to say for itself now that Biden's made his remarks.

One "background" news item the Heir hears on audio is regarding the conflict with the Taliban in Afghanistan.  Sure, it's obvious to the Heir that the media's trying to make the case as to why we should stay in there indefinitely, despite the popularity of ending military operations, but here's the way the Heir hears them portraying it.  They're making it look like it's The Good Guys Versus The Bad Guys.  Presumably, the good guys are Kabul, and the bad guys are the Taliban, and the conflict is nothing more than a spectator sport with guns.  The Heir hearkens back to a trust-funded BBC World Service that used to do thoughtful documentaries as to why such conflicts are far more nuanced and not as cut-and-dried.  So once the Heir gets back to DX'ing the shortwave bands, he wants to hear what he calls the VTLA, the Voice of Tradition for a Liberated Afghanistan, which would be a Taliban station directed at the US and Europe, as well as Southeast Asia, to make the case for a Taliban perspective.  Don't get the Heir wrong here.  We're talking about a brutal social group.  But he's also sure that the citizens in "Taliban territory" are not all that unwelcoming to the Taliban because they see Kabul as an oppressive corrupt influence.  The citizens the Heir surmises have to pay regular bribes to Kabul just to be able to get food and medicine, as well as regular electrical, water and sewer services.  We're talking about areas with very few economic opportunities.  Plus, the Heir's sure that the VTLA would have found out about the Heir's discontent with a personally corrupt society here in the US, and uses the examples the Heir has talked about in their regular broadcasts, to educate the Americans not only about how wrong they are about the Taliban, but how wrong they are about themselves.  And, ultimately, just plain wrong.

"These are the kinds of things to think about the next time you hear about the Taliban 'conflict' on audio."

The Heir's been reading the local paper, printed on *actual paper*, so that when he turns the pages, the paper makes a distinctive rustling sound.  He hasn't yet come across an item in the local paper that's caused him to rustle the paper with indignation.  But he did read that Bachelor Borough and surrounding towns in Bachelor Blue State have passed ordinances prohibiting pot stores and related businesses from opening up in those towns.  That's a sex shop law that the Heir for once can support, and it's answer he sees to that whole Let's Pot Everyone impulse that led up to pot getting legalized in the state.  The ordinances are acknowledgably tough laws, but the Heir doesn't see that as going far enough.  He's pretty sure there are towns that are not likely to make the August 21 deadline only because those towns only meet 2-3 times a week to introduce ordinances and vote on them.  So if Town X about 15 miles away passes an ordinance on the 25th, but it's the 21st, somehow that's not supposed to count?  The Heir's hoping there's a provision in the new pot law that allows towns that didn't make it by the deadline to petition for a 60 day extension in court, or to otherwise appeal a post-8/21 hegemony by the state.  To be sure, BBSC and some towns in that area have committed to allowing for pot shops and so forth, but again an 8/21 deadline the Heir sees as not allowing a town enough time to decide for themselves *and* make use of the new covid19 relief money that's come from Washington through BBSC.  They're divided between legislating on pot and legislating on making use of the relief money before it expires about maybe next April or so, on a use-it-or-lose-it-basis.  Also if a pot shop opens up right after 8/21 and yet the town hasn't had a chance to say no until about 8/25, they should at least have the ability the Heir supposes to say, no new shops after the one that just opened up eventually leaves the town in some manner.  All this he sees as gravely disappointing what he calls The Potters in their vision for BBS despite the fact that some 2 million voters voted against legalizing pot in the state, because that's at least one way BBS can reach out to those those voters who voted against it.  It wasn't a landslide by any means.

MeToo has come back in the form of Cuomo, so the Heir hopes that forces the progressives' decision to use the voting rights issue to effectively tell Cosby's survivors to go jump in the lake after Cosby was let out of jail to kind of give them pause about that decision.  What he generally sees the progressives doing is getting all hot and heavy on a given issue at one point in time, often making it existential, and then 6-12 months they're onto something else, making *that* item existential.  It may very well be that as survivors speak out on Cuomo, a fair number of Cosby survivors would do so as well.  The Heir sees it as in the progressives' best interests to *not* snub the Cosby survivors a second time *and* see about placing the decision the PASC made a month ago under official oversight for the public record.  The Heir understands about voting rights, he agrees and hopes for passage for the voting rights acts, and he opposes the voting restrictions that are coming out.  But he acknowledges that at least one limit to this talking point memo of Nothing Else Matters Unless Voting Rights Pass is how he interpreted that a month ago to mean that the Cosby survivors are somehow not supposed to get justice in light of Cosby getting out of jail, just because doing so is not as important as voting rights.  A lot of the hot heaviness I the Mentor noted above involves what the Heir sees as progressives looking for ways to make people write a blank check, so if you could do a geometric proof that says if A is true and B is true then C is outright *absolutely* true, that the Heir sees as the progressives exploiting logic.  You can agree with A and B, and still oppose the C of Nothing Else Matters if your sense of Principle drives you accordingly.  This we in the Bachelor see as the limits of logic and science and rationality that the progressives so claim to uphold.  Once the wrong conclusion rubs up against the need for principle, principle has to win out if we as a society are to combat society's personal corruption.

The Heir protests the Blue Origin flight, and he doesn't give a rat's ass about both the youngest and oldest people on board to ever travel space, which the Heir believes is meant to blunt criticism such as his.  He protests the flight on both an environmental level and on the anti-green infrastructure level.  The Heir sees it as more worth celebrating if Jeff Bezos and Richard Branson highlighted the very first American bullet train going from Boston to Miami, or from Philly to Chicago to San Fran.  But he also believes that he's the only one critical of this flight, because not even green folk are protesting it.  He's not even seeing criticism on the Insurgent News Network, which in light of the voting rights fiasco, is making him more cynical.  He sees a network only defending democracy when it's politically expedient, not when it's not.  The INN has apparently joined everyone else in serving as a transmission belt for an infomercial on steroids, the Heir observes.  So this is the *only* criticism of the flight you'll ever see online or anywhere else, because there's absolutely no dissent.  So much for finding anything on the internet.  We're hoping that Google doesn't see this criticism as a violation of terms of use, but we didn't use swear words or porn or intimidating threats to people, so that should count for something.  How about environmental protestors a block away from the launch pad, booing as the shuttle goes off into space, and then booing again once Jeff Bezos and company get off the flight?  Stay tuned.

It's been 10 days or so into the Cosby Issue, and the Heir *finally* found some more video footage where the Insurgent News Network had an actual substantive discussion accordingly.  He's clued into possibly why INN and the progressives and others never commented on it, whereas the Heir's been talking about it for 10 days now, and he's never forgotten.  And I The Mentor don't think he ever will.  So the video segment involved a legal analyst alongside one of the prosecutors against Cosby explaining how oral agreements are supposed to work between opposing legal teams.  The analyst used a Latin term for that kind of agreement that the Heir can't remember offhand, but the analyst contends that such an oral agreement leading to a jail-springing of a man likely having assaulted 60 women is such a rarity that the analyst believes that such a thing is unlikely to happen again in our lifetimes.  But the Heir made clear that when an obscure legal practice results in a disaster of an injustice, we still need to have a public social discussion about it, because seeing how the progressives largely ignored the Cosby Issue in favor of the Trump Issue, how does the Heir know that Trump won't be let off all cases and accusations and convictions based on yet another obscure legal practice?  What if Trump can't be charged with financial crimes, or sued for sexual assault, or charged with his part in the 1/6 insurrection, or pressuring both Georgia and Arizona to magically come up with 27,000 votes?  What if just *one obscure legal practice* scuttles all of that?  The Heir imagines that there would be riots and unrest and certainly a reprise of the Resistance, and he's wondering, where's the Resistance now that we need them?  Where was the Resistance when Cosby unjustly got out of jail because of an obscure legal practice?  The Heir's question is, what if Charlie Manson got out of jail because of an obscure legal practice?  What about Al Capone?  And how can we possibly teach our children right from wrong if they think going to jail is no big deal if they can get out on an obscure legal practice or a "technicality?"  That's how the Heir hears a roaring silence from the progressives, and that's why he sees their existential campaigns regarding voting rights and neo-Fascist groups as empty gestures.  The Cosby Issue was the one issue the Heir believes the progressives could have taken action on, and agitated all of America to do the same...

"...and they abdicated."

Here are some other actionable options the Heir's thinking about to make sure PASC understands there are consequences for making such an unsound decision that let Cosby out of jail.  He doesn't remember offhand whether he's already made these suggestions, but one of those is about a bar review on the court as to whether those Cosby-goes-home Justices had demanded and received adequate proof from Cosby's petitioners that a prosecutor's agreement was ever made to begin with.  This is about a legal bar's requirement that legal professionals be as truthful as possible in official proceedings, and since the Heir sees the Justices as legal professionals as Cosby's petitioners, it just stands to reason that they, too, are subject to the rules of the bar.  This the Heir was thinking about when he heard about how Giuliani lost his legal license because the bar found that he was untruthful in his official legal statements, so the Heir's wondering, why can't such a procedure apply here?  Another thing the Heir was thinking about is a popular voting referendum preventing a questionable decision process as made by the PASC, again, *if* the PASC never demanded proof of a prosecutor's agreement.  Otherwise, Cosby's team has the ability to untruthfully tell the court that the sky is green, and the court has the privilege of making an arbitrary ruling/decision that the sky is apparently green.  This again gets to the Heir's misgivings about the apparently unlimited power of the judiciary as constitutionally accepted, since as far as the Heir knows, the concept of jurisprudence is not found nor required by the U.S. Constitution.  The Constitution *implies* or *insinuates* jurisprudence, but the Heir doesn't believe that's good enough.  For example, he's wondering where the jurisprudence is in equating an assault rifle with a swiss army knife.  He sees this as going beyond debates about packing courts with progressive/wishing-to-conserve type Justices for the sake of a given political group getting more power than the other, and more about yielding more enlightenment to the populace and to the country at large.  After all, the Heir recognizes the 4th of July as partly being about the country's founding being based on Enlightenment type concepts.

The Heir's already not a Jason Johnson person, but even though the Heir did want to hear what Mr. Johnson had to say about letting Cosby go, even now in 7/21 Mr. Johnson still echoes the assumption that one must separate the artist from the art.  The Heir then came across an Ed Snowden-type Vox article that actually tries to tell people that anyone who doesn't agree with that is somehow a "philistine."  The Heir doesn't quite know what that is, but it's been historically used as an insult to cultural dissenters.  Looks to the Heir as though Mr. Johnson and Vox don't really support survivors in ways that are actually meaningful.  So the Heir found an article on a site that's not as well known as Vox but talks about arts and entertainment that makes the point that when it comes to certain acts, you *can't* and *shouldn't* separate the art from the artist, because the money the artist gets from the art goes toward the atrocities.  The Heir defines as his red line on what acts constitutes non-separation as the artist being credibly accused of a felony, like Cosby was and still is.  The arts site had it more down with Law And Justice and principle than Vox ever did.  This concept of calling a Law And Justice person who believes in the concept of principle a "philistine" reveals the personal corruption of the source using that slur in the first place, and undermines our ability to teach our young people right from wrong.  It's no coincidence to the Heir that shortly after Cosby was released, the Heir was nearly cut off by reckless motorcyclists on his way home from his shift on the Bland Barns Catering Counter, and this certainly *wasn't* among those more conscientious bikers the Heir has come to know from the Harley-Davidson community.  This was a husband and wife team who apparently thought that if Cosby could get out of jail after assaulting 60 women, they're somehow free to drive as recklessly as possible as if they were on a dirt course.  The guy was even doing a wheelie.  That there is proof for the Heir that personal corruption even in 7/21 is alive and well, 8 years after Ed Snowden and 7 years after forced obsolescence.  So don't try to tell the Heir that he's wallowing in the past with Ed Snowden.

It's been about four days since Cosby's been let out of jail, and the Heir is not anywhere near done with him.  But the Heir's seeing almost no regard for what he now calls the Cosby Issue.  Just about all his societal allies gave not even a mention to the case.  It seems to the Heir that they believe that Cosby is merely a "local" issue or a "personal" issue for the survivors.  Neither of these is true, by the way.  The Heir reminds America that the Cosby Issue is *national,* and *trans-personal* to society at large, albeit through the survivors.  He's wondering where all the MeToo marches are at, and why they haven't been conducted on a Black Lives Matter scale.  Another misconception the Heir wants to clear up is that the Cosby Issue is about "entertainment" and not national politics.  This is where the Heir sees the media and the news failing when they have these arbitrary categories of news.  Cosby is an entertainer and many of his survivors are entertainers, so therefore it's only "entertainment?"  That might be one other way Cosby got out of jail, the Heir figures, that the Cosby Issue isn't taken seriously enough for him to stay in jail.  But it interests the Heir that one of the prosecutors in the Cosby cases has put forth the food-for-thought that the prosecutorial agreement that the "technicality" hinged on never actually existed.  He doesn't know if this is true or not, but the only societal ally the Heir has who mentioned the Cosby Issue, the ever uber Jill Wine-Banks, seemed to have dismissed that possibility out of hand by citing claims that the Cosby Team put forth before the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, when in fact the Heir was hoping for considerably more critical thinking.  If it is true that the Cosby Decision was made on wrong information, the Heir believes that that deserves an audit of some sort from one of the other Pennsylvania branches of government, or perhaps a Federal court.  This is among those suggestions the Heir made through a below post by Me the Mentor regarding the Cosby Issue, but as the Heir grows madder and madder every day by society's upcoming continuing disregard for the Cosby Issue, keep it tuned here as he makes further thoughts known.  Perhaps a legal eagle among his allies would bother to revisit.

"Where *is* everybody!!!!???"

The Heir responds to the appalling decision to let Bill Cosby out of jail partly by encouraging the survivors to bring lawsuit against the state of Pennsylvania itself.  The system he says should not be allowed to get away with freeing criminal sex offenders on a so-called technicality.  Though the Heir doesn't live in Pennsylvania, in which case he'd move back to Bachelor Blue State, he also wants Tom Corbett to declare that he won't appoint a Justice to the state Supreme Court who's inclined in any way to support letting such a chronic sex offender go on a technicality, and who affirms the utmost rights of survivors.  He also wants the Pennsylvania Legislature to make a joint resolution condemning the court decision, also affirming the rights of survivors.  He calls on all streaming services and e-commerce sites to continue to not carry Fat Albert, or any of the Cosby shows, or him doing standup from back in the day.  He also believes that any deep web providers of such content should be hacked.

"Hack 'em."