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!!!!???"