As I urged in a recent post, we need to spread the word about my lawsuit, the threat posed to free speech by the lower court's ruling, and the need for a reversal by the NYS Court of Appeals
I've tweeted these folks, but now I'll share the article, and I hope all y'all will, too: @TuckerCarlson @InfoWars_tv @joerogan @Timcast (Tim Pool, no "e") @KimIversenShow. I've found that the best way to tweet stuff like this is to reply on an existent, most recent/appropriate thread of theirs. So I go to their Twatter feed and decide where to cut in.
You're up against a formidable machine Mark. If the fate of your case lies in the "opinions" and "whims" of a single judge, and/or a small group of "legal experts", it's a crapshoot.
If only you could DEMAND a jury of your peers hear your case, regardless of what a single judge or panel of judges deems worthy or not. Now that would be something, wouldn't it? Like actual justice or something like that.....sigh.
Wishing you continued good luck. You're gonna need it, in spades.
Interestingly, Judge Goetz. who granted the motion to dismiss in the first place, is a conservative. So I thought that he might be sympathetic; but it didn't work out that way. Whether it was due to NYU's clout I have no way to know.
The system that's in place, the "legal" system, is designed in just this way where a single man's/woman's OPINION can prevent a case from being heard. Thus, it is the system that can be so easily corrupted by design.
In a "LAWFUL" system, the judge's "opinion" matters not. All cases must be heard by a jury of one's peers. This greatly reduces any possibilities of corruption, but more importantly, allows the case to move forward.
Many complain to me that there would be zillions of frivolous cases clogging the court system if such a process was allowed. And I say, not if the the person who filed the case could be held liable for all costs and expenses incurred by the defendant, as well as punitive penalties for bringing an absurdity into court, which would be automatically determined by the jury during the trial.
Such a type of court is still accessible, but you have to know what you're doing as I briefly explained in my comment the other day. It takes knowledge of how the legal system vs the lawful system works. Knowledge you can't just gain in a couple days/weeks unfortunately.
Ultimately though, it's the elimination of all the "actors" involved (judges, attorneys, etc.) in the process, making it a "man on man" affair. Your CLAIM (not a lowly "complaint") looks like this:
I, a man, Mark Crispin Miller CLAIM a man, claim the following wrongdoers, John Smith, a man Peter Jones, a woman Lisa Johnson, etc. caused me wrong and harm. See exhibits A, B, C (a photograph of each man/woman leaving no room for confusion)
This is the end of the claim you file as a MAN. You don't need to explain how, or why you feel these people caused you wrong or harm. That's up to the jury to sort out.
You then serve each of these "wrongdoers" with their notice to appear. The court clerk, a PUBLIC SERVANT, must then, by LAW, grant you a date/time/room where your case can be heard, in the PUBLIC COURTHOUSE, with a magistrate (judge), who is another PUBLIC SERVANT on the public taxpayer dole.
You file your case in a "court of record" and you DEMAND a jury of your peers (not a "jury trial"). That's it.
The clerk and others will likely try to RE-FILE your private property (claim), turning it into a "complaint", in relation to a "statute" (a man-made rule), which would suck you back into the legal system. This is the trickery you must understand. In such a situation, you would have to return to the courthouse and inform the clerk that you didn't give him/her permission to change your private property (case/claim). And it might take some serious back-and-forth because the clerk will simply say they were only trying to help you as your case/claim didn't fit with their "paperwork" that he/she will say needs to be linked to their codes/statutes, etc. etc. And he/she will be "right" for all intents and purposes. Because he/she has never dealt with a man/woman filing a CLAIM in said courtroom before. He/She simply doesn't know any better.
So you would have to be able to stand your ground and calmly explain to the clerk that your status and capacity is that of a MAN, not a "plaintiff" or "person" or "individual" or "citizen" or "resident", etc. You're just a MAN who is CLAIMING that another man/woman has caused you wrong/harm. Nothing more.
Should you get this far, you would then present your case to the jury. There's no "discovery" or "motions" or anything of the like involved. That the wrongdoers would bring along attorneys is no matter. They can if they want. They can argue codes, statutes, ordinances until their heart's content. It's all irrelevant and you can say so by objecting should any of it be brought up.
The only thing in question is, did the men/women you claim caused you wrong or harm do so? That's for the jury of your peers to decide. It's not up to the judge. He/She is simply there to ensure a smooth proceeding where all sides get to have their say in an honest, honorable manner.
Sound too good to be true? Such a simple, natural process, isn't it?
Unfortunately, dozens more curve balls would be thrown at you along the way that, without understanding what was going on, would likely thwart your efforts and get you sucked back into the legal/maritime/in-rem jurisdiction, where the whims/opinions of judges once again take precedence over a simple, just decision as determined by your peers.
This is the way the LAWFUL system should be, and once was, prior to 1938, and more specifically, prior to 1878. And said system was never eradicated, simply buried and obfuscated. Such a court/jurisdiction is still accessible to this day. But very few understand how to access it.
But hey, maybe the state court of appeals will hear your case and all this will be unnecessary. Fingers crossed that, you, a man, were clearly defamed by your fellow-man and that justice will be served. Good luck!
I don't know, a lot of people around me have consumed an enormous amount of propaganda and have me feel like I'm walking in the twilight zone nowadays.. And when I give them evidence to contradict the propaganda, many of them cling to their old ideas as if their life depended on it. 🙄
This is classic "cognitive dissonance" brought on by a lifetime of one "outsourcing their intellectual sovereignty" to the "experts and authorities". As psychologist Nathanial Brandon stated in his book "The Psychology of Self-Esteem", those who have done this come face-to-face with a sense of "Metaphysical worthlessness" as they contemplate the error they've made via "blind trust in authority".
As such, it's quite clear that they feel their lives do indeed "depend on" clinging to the propaganda so as to avoid feeling metaphysically worthless, which could lead to very detrimental results for said person.
It's a bona-fide psychological/metaphysical defense-mechanism that they're running.
It sounds like you just described exactly what's wrong with my state senator Will Brownsburger, and the majority of constituents that keep him in office.
A huge portion of humanity is afflicted with this psychological sitaution. Typically, the "better educated" (more institutionally brainwashed) amongst us, as hard as that is to believe. The greater exposure to alleged "experts", the greater the BELIEF in what they mistakenly claim is true, the more likely the individual has outsourced their intellectual sovereignty, rejecting their own god-given common sense in the process.
And it is the unwinding of this situation that can be very, very difficult. Handle with care!
Larken Rose made an excellent documentary a few years ago about how to handle these situations called "Candles in the Dark". In a nutshell, the best we can do to help these brainwashed people is to find a topic/subject that they're willing to engage with you in conversation, and slowly ask them questions that you know they can't answer straightaway or justify, and then walk away allowing them to independently realize what they were believing in was actually false. In a nutshell, you can't "tell them they're wrong". You have to get them to figure it out on their own.
I've seen this work with a few people in my life, but it's a long, slow process. Nonetheless, it works better than telling them they're an idiot for believing the nonsense they believe in.
Top interview MCM, they've picked on the wrong bloke I think. For every detractor, there are more supporters. What you are doing is extremely important in terms of documenting the truth for future generations. I'm just one fella from Australia but I'm most definitely in your corner.👍🇦🇺
I'm a very well read 67 year old blue collar guy here in Scarborough Ontario CHINADA.
I'm smart because I read and learn from amazing folks like you all my life.
I've read the book Propaganda and RAPE OF the MIND by a Dutch Dr written in 1954 about my parents generation in Holland where they left to come here to now CHINADA for FREEDOM.
Everything you were charged with was 180 degrees wrong and that's our inverted upside down world today.
That's in how my opinion how SATAN does his work.
Good vs EVIL is happening.
You are the good in this crazy fight they forced you into.
I 🙏 for you and support you and the rest of our leaders in all the crazy fights going on around us.
Yep believe it or not obadma bad mouthing alex Jones intriqued me to check out AJ talk show. Aj nor his lawyer could counter the witnesses due to threats of contempt by judge, the court sounded like a scripted character roast. When I say AJ is worth listening, people are so swept up in the decades of propaganda agst AJ that they wont. Character assassination Worked on trump and Alex Jones and more, that's why people will cave to these court injustices. best to you, Mark
I am glad to hear the acknowledgement that the culling and control. At this point their is NO difference between The 3rd Reich ,Mao and the USA. Thank you for pointing out the difference between democide and genocide.
Wow, your interview was incredibly articulate and engaging. So sorry for what you have gone through. Thank you for your courage and standing by your convictions and for speaking truth. You are helping all of us tremendously. You are a true educator and leader. Seems like you’ve been prepared for such a time as this!
Eloquent presentation, Mark. I think about your situation often. Thomas Jefferson supposedly said given a choice bdtween the First Amendment and the Constitution, he'd take the First Amendment. Many agree with him, including myself.
He got mad at me for giving info about howbad.info site. I did everything to prove to him it was legit. I stayed loyal, even though he was pissed. And guess what happened? He had Dr. Tenpenny on, and she brought up the site and said why it was good. She also verified that different shot lots have different effects and that, like I said, since the jabbees were in a trial, there were some placebos. Shit works out if you give it time. BUT, if you're on his own site as opposed to the Rumble site, he will make his belief in Christ very upfront, but again, it's his site. Frankly, I was amazed at how he refrained from Greggus Interruptus while the professor was recounting his story. Also, it's a lot of fun to watch live election returns with Greg. He went ballistic in 2020. He will spout a few cusswords on those evenings, live.
It's not his religious perspectives at all. My comment was based on an interview he did with Karen Kingston and his denial about Trump's involvement with warp speed. He has a real bias when it comes to Trump. So much that Greg Mannarino won't go back.
Greg ALWAYS says that Trump needs to "admit and apologize"--admit he was duped and that Big Pharma did not adhere to the contracts they signed (re quality, efficacy), then apologize, so I'm not sure what you're talking about. I personally don't think anyone who chose to get jabbed deserves an apology. And I personally couldn't care less about Greg Mannarino's misinterpretation, either.
I knew it. Some jabbee looking to foist the blame on someone else. All we #purebloods ARE in a class by ourselves: CRITICAL THINKERS AND RESEARCHERS, not people who make a god of govt and then believe every effing thing they're told. Away with you. If you got jabbed, then you deserve the consequences. It's that simple and true.
I didn't take this jab. Have prevented at least 10 family or more from taking it. What's your count? Pure blood ... you've never taken any other jabs in your life. Please....
PS I've never had the flu once in my 67.5 years. Never taken ANY flu shot EVER. My last cold was in NYC, thirtysomething years ago, probably from hanging onto the filthy subway pole and not being able to wash my hands quickly enough.
Not at all. I have no issue with anybody's perspectives if they aren't harmful. My issue is with Greg banning people from commenting on guests he hosts. My particular issue was with Karen Kingston and her denials of DOD involvement and his denial of Trump's warp speed agenda.
Well done. Sites like USA Watchdog are now producing the investigations and free-thinking content that hundreds of daily newspapers used to provide.
I've tweeted these folks, but now I'll share the article, and I hope all y'all will, too: @TuckerCarlson @InfoWars_tv @joerogan @Timcast (Tim Pool, no "e") @KimIversenShow. I've found that the best way to tweet stuff like this is to reply on an existent, most recent/appropriate thread of theirs. So I go to their Twatter feed and decide where to cut in.
We listened almost as it happened.
This was a great interview! It explained the lawsuit well and the rest was riveting.
Loved the contrast but also the simpatico between Professor Mark Crispin Miller and Greg Hunter.
You're up against a formidable machine Mark. If the fate of your case lies in the "opinions" and "whims" of a single judge, and/or a small group of "legal experts", it's a crapshoot.
If only you could DEMAND a jury of your peers hear your case, regardless of what a single judge or panel of judges deems worthy or not. Now that would be something, wouldn't it? Like actual justice or something like that.....sigh.
Wishing you continued good luck. You're gonna need it, in spades.
Thanks, Mika.
Interestingly, Judge Goetz. who granted the motion to dismiss in the first place, is a conservative. So I thought that he might be sympathetic; but it didn't work out that way. Whether it was due to NYU's clout I have no way to know.
The system that's in place, the "legal" system, is designed in just this way where a single man's/woman's OPINION can prevent a case from being heard. Thus, it is the system that can be so easily corrupted by design.
In a "LAWFUL" system, the judge's "opinion" matters not. All cases must be heard by a jury of one's peers. This greatly reduces any possibilities of corruption, but more importantly, allows the case to move forward.
Many complain to me that there would be zillions of frivolous cases clogging the court system if such a process was allowed. And I say, not if the the person who filed the case could be held liable for all costs and expenses incurred by the defendant, as well as punitive penalties for bringing an absurdity into court, which would be automatically determined by the jury during the trial.
Such a type of court is still accessible, but you have to know what you're doing as I briefly explained in my comment the other day. It takes knowledge of how the legal system vs the lawful system works. Knowledge you can't just gain in a couple days/weeks unfortunately.
Ultimately though, it's the elimination of all the "actors" involved (judges, attorneys, etc.) in the process, making it a "man on man" affair. Your CLAIM (not a lowly "complaint") looks like this:
I, a man, Mark Crispin Miller CLAIM a man, claim the following wrongdoers, John Smith, a man Peter Jones, a woman Lisa Johnson, etc. caused me wrong and harm. See exhibits A, B, C (a photograph of each man/woman leaving no room for confusion)
This is the end of the claim you file as a MAN. You don't need to explain how, or why you feel these people caused you wrong or harm. That's up to the jury to sort out.
You then serve each of these "wrongdoers" with their notice to appear. The court clerk, a PUBLIC SERVANT, must then, by LAW, grant you a date/time/room where your case can be heard, in the PUBLIC COURTHOUSE, with a magistrate (judge), who is another PUBLIC SERVANT on the public taxpayer dole.
You file your case in a "court of record" and you DEMAND a jury of your peers (not a "jury trial"). That's it.
The clerk and others will likely try to RE-FILE your private property (claim), turning it into a "complaint", in relation to a "statute" (a man-made rule), which would suck you back into the legal system. This is the trickery you must understand. In such a situation, you would have to return to the courthouse and inform the clerk that you didn't give him/her permission to change your private property (case/claim). And it might take some serious back-and-forth because the clerk will simply say they were only trying to help you as your case/claim didn't fit with their "paperwork" that he/she will say needs to be linked to their codes/statutes, etc. etc. And he/she will be "right" for all intents and purposes. Because he/she has never dealt with a man/woman filing a CLAIM in said courtroom before. He/She simply doesn't know any better.
So you would have to be able to stand your ground and calmly explain to the clerk that your status and capacity is that of a MAN, not a "plaintiff" or "person" or "individual" or "citizen" or "resident", etc. You're just a MAN who is CLAIMING that another man/woman has caused you wrong/harm. Nothing more.
Should you get this far, you would then present your case to the jury. There's no "discovery" or "motions" or anything of the like involved. That the wrongdoers would bring along attorneys is no matter. They can if they want. They can argue codes, statutes, ordinances until their heart's content. It's all irrelevant and you can say so by objecting should any of it be brought up.
The only thing in question is, did the men/women you claim caused you wrong or harm do so? That's for the jury of your peers to decide. It's not up to the judge. He/She is simply there to ensure a smooth proceeding where all sides get to have their say in an honest, honorable manner.
Sound too good to be true? Such a simple, natural process, isn't it?
Unfortunately, dozens more curve balls would be thrown at you along the way that, without understanding what was going on, would likely thwart your efforts and get you sucked back into the legal/maritime/in-rem jurisdiction, where the whims/opinions of judges once again take precedence over a simple, just decision as determined by your peers.
This is the way the LAWFUL system should be, and once was, prior to 1938, and more specifically, prior to 1878. And said system was never eradicated, simply buried and obfuscated. Such a court/jurisdiction is still accessible to this day. But very few understand how to access it.
But hey, maybe the state court of appeals will hear your case and all this will be unnecessary. Fingers crossed that, you, a man, were clearly defamed by your fellow-man and that justice will be served. Good luck!
I don't know, a lot of people around me have consumed an enormous amount of propaganda and have me feel like I'm walking in the twilight zone nowadays.. And when I give them evidence to contradict the propaganda, many of them cling to their old ideas as if their life depended on it. 🙄
This is classic "cognitive dissonance" brought on by a lifetime of one "outsourcing their intellectual sovereignty" to the "experts and authorities". As psychologist Nathanial Brandon stated in his book "The Psychology of Self-Esteem", those who have done this come face-to-face with a sense of "Metaphysical worthlessness" as they contemplate the error they've made via "blind trust in authority".
As such, it's quite clear that they feel their lives do indeed "depend on" clinging to the propaganda so as to avoid feeling metaphysically worthless, which could lead to very detrimental results for said person.
It's a bona-fide psychological/metaphysical defense-mechanism that they're running.
It sounds like you just described exactly what's wrong with my state senator Will Brownsburger, and the majority of constituents that keep him in office.
A huge portion of humanity is afflicted with this psychological sitaution. Typically, the "better educated" (more institutionally brainwashed) amongst us, as hard as that is to believe. The greater exposure to alleged "experts", the greater the BELIEF in what they mistakenly claim is true, the more likely the individual has outsourced their intellectual sovereignty, rejecting their own god-given common sense in the process.
And it is the unwinding of this situation that can be very, very difficult. Handle with care!
Larken Rose made an excellent documentary a few years ago about how to handle these situations called "Candles in the Dark". In a nutshell, the best we can do to help these brainwashed people is to find a topic/subject that they're willing to engage with you in conversation, and slowly ask them questions that you know they can't answer straightaway or justify, and then walk away allowing them to independently realize what they were believing in was actually false. In a nutshell, you can't "tell them they're wrong". You have to get them to figure it out on their own.
I've seen this work with a few people in my life, but it's a long, slow process. Nonetheless, it works better than telling them they're an idiot for believing the nonsense they believe in.
It is a huge problem
Top interview MCM, they've picked on the wrong bloke I think. For every detractor, there are more supporters. What you are doing is extremely important in terms of documenting the truth for future generations. I'm just one fella from Australia but I'm most definitely in your corner.👍🇦🇺
Great interview MCM!!
I'm a very well read 67 year old blue collar guy here in Scarborough Ontario CHINADA.
I'm smart because I read and learn from amazing folks like you all my life.
I've read the book Propaganda and RAPE OF the MIND by a Dutch Dr written in 1954 about my parents generation in Holland where they left to come here to now CHINADA for FREEDOM.
Everything you were charged with was 180 degrees wrong and that's our inverted upside down world today.
That's in how my opinion how SATAN does his work.
Good vs EVIL is happening.
You are the good in this crazy fight they forced you into.
I 🙏 for you and support you and the rest of our leaders in all the crazy fights going on around us.
Yep believe it or not obadma bad mouthing alex Jones intriqued me to check out AJ talk show. Aj nor his lawyer could counter the witnesses due to threats of contempt by judge, the court sounded like a scripted character roast. When I say AJ is worth listening, people are so swept up in the decades of propaganda agst AJ that they wont. Character assassination Worked on trump and Alex Jones and more, that's why people will cave to these court injustices. best to you, Mark
Brilliant interview!
I am glad to hear the acknowledgement that the culling and control. At this point their is NO difference between The 3rd Reich ,Mao and the USA. Thank you for pointing out the difference between democide and genocide.
Great interview, whch I will be sharing.
Please to meet you Mr Miller.
Great Inter-View !!
Greg Hunter !
We Love Ya too...
"Really Appreciate It."
I thought this was a brilliant interview - well said MCM.
Exceptional informative Interview I shared with all of my contacts
Wow, your interview was incredibly articulate and engaging. So sorry for what you have gone through. Thank you for your courage and standing by your convictions and for speaking truth. You are helping all of us tremendously. You are a true educator and leader. Seems like you’ve been prepared for such a time as this!
Eloquent presentation, Mark. I think about your situation often. Thomas Jefferson supposedly said given a choice bdtween the First Amendment and the Constitution, he'd take the First Amendment. Many agree with him, including myself.
Greg is a nice guy but he has trouble accepting comments that differ from his preferred narrative.
He got mad at me for giving info about howbad.info site. I did everything to prove to him it was legit. I stayed loyal, even though he was pissed. And guess what happened? He had Dr. Tenpenny on, and she brought up the site and said why it was good. She also verified that different shot lots have different effects and that, like I said, since the jabbees were in a trial, there were some placebos. Shit works out if you give it time. BUT, if you're on his own site as opposed to the Rumble site, he will make his belief in Christ very upfront, but again, it's his site. Frankly, I was amazed at how he refrained from Greggus Interruptus while the professor was recounting his story. Also, it's a lot of fun to watch live election returns with Greg. He went ballistic in 2020. He will spout a few cusswords on those evenings, live.
It's not his religious perspectives at all. My comment was based on an interview he did with Karen Kingston and his denial about Trump's involvement with warp speed. He has a real bias when it comes to Trump. So much that Greg Mannarino won't go back.
Greg ALWAYS says that Trump needs to "admit and apologize"--admit he was duped and that Big Pharma did not adhere to the contracts they signed (re quality, efficacy), then apologize, so I'm not sure what you're talking about. I personally don't think anyone who chose to get jabbed deserves an apology. And I personally couldn't care less about Greg Mannarino's misinterpretation, either.
I guess you've never been tricked or fooled before to make such claims about the jabbed. Must be nice to be in a class by yourself.
I knew it. Some jabbee looking to foist the blame on someone else. All we #purebloods ARE in a class by ourselves: CRITICAL THINKERS AND RESEARCHERS, not people who make a god of govt and then believe every effing thing they're told. Away with you. If you got jabbed, then you deserve the consequences. It's that simple and true.
I didn't take this jab. Have prevented at least 10 family or more from taking it. What's your count? Pure blood ... you've never taken any other jabs in your life. Please....
PS I've never had the flu once in my 67.5 years. Never taken ANY flu shot EVER. My last cold was in NYC, thirtysomething years ago, probably from hanging onto the filthy subway pole and not being able to wash my hands quickly enough.
Preferred narrative is an interesting twist. Would it be a wild guess that he is unabashedly a Christ follower for you?
Not at all. I have no issue with anybody's perspectives if they aren't harmful. My issue is with Greg banning people from commenting on guests he hosts. My particular issue was with Karen Kingston and her denials of DOD involvement and his denial of Trump's warp speed agenda.
Did you send it to Jimmy Dore or Redacted? Or contact Mike LaChance?
How does one do that?
I sent you an email.
Mark, getting you on the Jimmy Dore show (https://rumble.com/TheJimmyDoreShow) would be epic, or Garland Nixon (https://rokfin.com/garlandnixon).