137

CONTINUING WITH THE SIDE NOTE BELOW, APPARENTLY, DESPITE THE FACT THAT THE GOVERNMENT IS TREATED AS HAVING THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TO PROSECUTE, MOST CHALLENGES TO A PROSECUTOR'S DECISION NOT TO PROSECUTE BY THE VICTIM COULD FAIL. TALK ABOUT INJUSTICE!

THE EXCUSE FOR THAT SEEMS TO BE SOMETHING PEOPLE MADE UP THEN USED IT TO CONFUSE THEMSELVES CALLED "SEPARATION OF POWER".

WHERE DOES IT THE CONSTITUTION SPEAKS ABOUT A "SEPARATION OF POWER"? THE CONSTITUTION IS WHAT THE CONSTITUTION IS. THERE IS A SEPARATION OF POWER AND THERE IS ALSO NO SEPARATION OF POWER. THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH CAN MAKE WHATEVER LAW IT WANTS TO OVERRIDE THE JUDICIARY AND CAN ALSO FORCE THE EXECUTIVE WITH 2/3 OF THE VOTES.

THIS IS A JOKE. JUST LIKE YOU CAN OVERSTEP YOUR AUTHORITY, YOU CAN ALSO UNDER PERFORM YOUR JOB. THE CONSTITUTION ASSIGNED TO CONGRESS THE TASK OF APPLYING THE GOOD BEHAVIOUR REQUIREMENT ON THE JUDICIARY? IT SHOULD DO THAT. THE CONSTITUTION ASSIGNED THE TASK OF ADJUDICATING OF ANYTHING ARISING UNDER IT AND A VICTIM COMES WITH A STRONG CLAIM BASED ON THE DUE PROCESS AND EQUAL PROTECTION AGAINST A PROSECUTOR'S REFUSAL TO PROSECUTE? THEY SHOULD RULE BASED ON THAT NOT ON THE THING MANUFACTURED OUTSIDE CALLED "SEPARATION OF POWER".

BUT AGAIN AND AGAIN AND AGAIN, WE SEE THAT IT IS NOT JUST IN RELIGIONS SOMETHING CAN GET USED AGAINST ITS INTENDED PURPOSE AS DEMONSTRATED HERE BY  HOW THE SEPARATION OF POWER WAS MOVED FROM ITS ORIGINAL PURPOSE OF PREVENTING TYRANNY THROUGH INTERFERENCE OF POWER TO THAT OF EMPOWERING TYRANNY BY REFUSING TO APPLY POWER TO INTERFERE WHEN REQUIRED. 

ISN'T IT FUNNY WHEN A COURT TELLS THE VICTIM THAT HE LACKS STANDING TO CHALLENGE THE PROSECUTOR? HEY, COURTS, IT IS CALLED "JUSTICE SYSTEM" NOT "THE WORLD YOU LIKE TO CREATE SYSTEM".