Friday, October 23, 2020


For reasons that I don't fully understand--some sort of mystique, I guess--many conservative commenters on  the internet are convinced that RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) can be applied to all sorts of political corruption. This conviction is often accompanied by a conviction that a failure on the part of DoJ to charge under RICO is itself evidence of corruption in DoJ. This is simply not the case. 

Unfortunately, a number of commenters here seem to believe that the Biden Crime Family can be prosecuted under RICO. I have to take some responsibility for this, since I adopted Rudy Giuliani's colorful name, "the Biden Crime Family." Let me be clear. I am not now saying that a RICO prosecution of the Bidens and their associates is not possible. The possible criminal violations may, in fact, fulfill the technical requirements of the RICO statute. Nor do I claim any expertise in RICO matters.

However, I believe that longstanding DoJ guidelines make it unlikely that RICO would be applied to any of those persons who have committed crimes either--as with former officials of the FBI, DoJ, or the Obama White House--in the course of opposing the presidency of Donald Trump or simply committed crimes by enriching themselves by trading on their public positions of trust in the US government.

Here's why. Longstanding DoJ guidelines (DoJ Justice Manual) militate against any expansive use of RICO when the interests of justice can be served by prosecuting the underlying crimes. Here are some selections from the Justice Manual. As you will see, there is--in essence--a presumption against using RICO when there is no "special RICO purpose," which usually refers to "gang" type organizations in a traditional sense. You can disagree with DoJ's policy in this regard, but it is what it is. The DoJ view is that RICO was never intended to replace traditional conspiracy prosecutions. Please read these guidelines carefully:

9-110.100 - Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO)

On October 15, 1970, the Organized Crime Control Act of 1970 became law. Title IX of the Act is the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Statute (18 U.S.C. §§ 1961-1968), commonly referred to as the "RICO" statute. The purpose of the RICO statute is "the elimination of the infiltration of organized crime and racketeering into legitimate organizations operating in interstate commerce." S.Rep. No. 617, 91st Cong., 1st Sess. 76 (1969). However, the statute is sufficiently broad to encompass illegal activities relating to any enterprise affecting interstate or foreign commerce.

9-110.200 - RICO Guidelines Preface

... It is the purpose of these guidelines to make it clear that not every proposed RICO charge that meets the technical requirements of a RICO violation will be approved. Further, the Criminal Division will not approve "imaginative" prosecutions under RICO which are far afield from the congressional purpose of the RICO statute. A RICO count which merely duplicates the elements of proof of traditional Hobbs Act, Travel Act, mail fraud, wire fraud, gambling or controlled substances cases, will not be approved unless it serves some special RICO purpose. ...

9-110.310 - Considerations Prior to Seeking Indictment

Except as hereafter provided, a government attorney should seek approval for a RICO charge only if one or more of the following requirements is present:

  1. RICO is necessary to ensure that the indictment adequately reflects the nature and extent of the criminal conduct involved in a way that prosecution only on the underlying charges would not;
  2. A RICO prosecution would provide the basis for an appropriate sentence under all the circumstances of the case in a way that prosecution only on the underlying charges would not;
  3. A RICO charge could combine related offenses which would otherwise have to be prosecuted separately in different jurisdictions;
  4. RICO is necessary for a successful prosecution of the government's case against the defendant or a codefendant;
  5. Use of RICO would provide a reasonable expectation of forfeiture which is proportionate to the underlying criminal conduct;
  6. The case consists of violations of State law, but local law enforcement officials are unlikely or unable to successfully prosecute the case, in which the federal government has a significant interest;
  7. The case consists of violations of State law, but involves prosecution of significant or government individuals, which may pose special problems for the local prosecutor.

The last two requirements reflect the principle that the prosecution of state crimes is primarily the responsibility of state authorities. RICO should be used to prosecute what are essentially violations of state law only if there is a compelling reason to do so.

I simply don't foresee that DoJ will consider that any of the matters in the Russia Hoax and related "sprawling" investigations or in the matters involving the Biden Crime Family will be considered as qualifying for RICO prosecution under these guidelines. Rather, I would foresee the underlying crimes being prosecuted under a criminal conspiracy theory. Maybe I'll end up being wrong about that, but I really don't believe so. If you hold your breath waiting for me to be proven wrong you may regret it.


  1. Rudy recently mentioned the Biden Crime family is similar, if not identical, to an organized crime family the way the money is made by one member and then given to another (Hunter has to give "pop" 50% of everything)…-->

    Here's Rudy:

    1. I understand that. But Rudy Giuliani no longer works for DoJ. He's essentially a publicist and legal adviser for Trump. He can say those things for political effect because the alleged criminal acts by the Bidens may fit the technical definition of RICO. But fitting the technical definition doesn't mean it fits the DoJ policy guidelines. Did you read what I quoted above?

      "It is the purpose of these guidelines to make it clear that not every proposed RICO charge that meets the technical requirements of a RICO violation will be approved."

      I have no problem with Rudy making those statements--they're true as far as they go. But as an accomplished FORMER prosecutor who won't be making any charging decisions against any Bidens and whose opinions nobody in DoJ will pay any attention to if it comes to indictments, Rudy knows that being "susceptible to a RICO indictment" does NOT mean that it's likely to happen.

      As I said, I may be wrong and in a few months Barr may announce RICO indictments against the entire Biden Crime Family--and maybe Obama thrown in. I'm not holding my breath, but if it happens I'll rejoice. I just don't think it's likely in the circumstances and I think people should chill a bit as far as RICO goes.

    2. Very interesting. Thank you.

  2. SWC has long argued that the fact pattern doesn't align well with RICO; you need a "racketeering enterprise" to apply it, and the Soft Coup doesn't really fit the traditional meaning of "racketeering."

    The Biden Crime Family antics fit into a white collar crime/influence peddling conspiracy better than they mimic the Soprano family mafia/racketeering enterprise.

    1. The key is the bit about "serving a special RICO purpose." Rudy did prosecute Milken as a RICO. But I wouldn't want to use that case as an example that would be followed generally.

  3. If any of them also believe Americans can be sentenced to Gitmo, a Venn diagram may identify Qdiots.


  4. Replies
    1. It seems to be the case, but so far I haven't seen that those emails were business related. It's weird. If they were business related, that would be something.

    2. The one I saw was signed "Dad", which would seem to defeat the purpose of the pseudonym. Strange. Maybe there'll be more.

    3. The account I read of this stated that it was unclear whether Joe was using the pseudonym when sending--which would be weird because it was plainly from his ordinary personal e-mail address--or if Hunter had "tagged" e-mails from that account on his end. If so, why would either of them think it cute, funny, or whatever to use the name of a fictional character that, as a foreign agent, had insinuated himself in the upper echelons of the U.S. gov't.
      Tom S.

  5. I agree, I've had this debate with a few Rudy fans. People often do not understand or over simplify things from a legal standpoint. RUDY SAID IT AND HE KNOWs!!! One even told me Rudy can/could/will in fact prosecute the Bidens himself "because he is an attorney".

    If I recall correctly you recently said the same thing about the use of the term treason.

    Both get used as a quazi political term. Trump like to say treason because in many ways what he has been through is treasonous.

    I've been rounds with that in a few discussions and had good luck with people understanding and even going out to find those other statutes on their own to say "hey cool I learned something".

    Rudy likes using RICO in selling the Biden family as an organization of crime. Arguably true, but it's also because Rudy is just happy to have a camera on him and wants to again feel relevant. 😁

    Sorry, the guy makes me nuts. I wish that hard drive would have ended up with wikileaks because we would have it all by now.

    1. Rudy is an American Hero and will continue to act in Americans best interest.

    2. MG I wouldn't argue with his intentions being on the right side of history.

      It's his delivery and overboard showmanship, refusing to answer reasonable questions, refusing to have fair debate (even when the person is in agreement) is just a bad look.

      Rudy (and 2020 in general) is making Alex Jones look sane, plausible, rational and palatable.

      My other issue is the drip... 12? Days out from the election now. Dump the data and let the 4chan and reddit kiddies do their things, Let Sundance and Shipwrecked have at it, let Applebaum and his AI at the photos, let Bill Binney and his very patriotic friends at the meta data. The MSM doesn't stand a chance against the sunlight. πŸ‘

    3. Yeah, I am not even sort of a fan of this drip drip. The entire contents should have been dumped to public sources at least a couple weeks ago.

      On the note of RICO application, I too have assumed it is implausible. That said, I am no different than any other social media prosecutor or social media virologist, et al... no idea.

      I think what we are seeing is just the exasperated pleas of concerned citizens, grasping at straws and hoping for SOME creative method for going after this corruption occurring in broad daylight with no consequence at all.

      I am very sympathetic to that - we are on the verge, even if all our hopes and dreams came true with the election results - of losing all control of our Leviathan and the people's trust in the government. About the only thing both left and right agree on, at this point, is that the government is deeply corrupted and irredeemable. Our solutions to the problem differ heavily, but when that happens, there is no longer consent of the governed, regardless of party.

  6. Funny... After the above I end up at the treehouse and Sundance has a great blurb on a Sidney Powell, Tom Fitton interview with Lou Dobbs... RICO mentioned at least 4 times. I surrender!!!

    I agree heavily with what Sundance says and Lou, Sidney and Tom get into. Were beyond the DoJ or FBI being able to investigate anything or one anymore. A special council appointment would be a minimal step in the right direction.

    I've been encouraging a lot of people to sit down and read the Declaration Of Independence, it's an amazingly eloquent document that may need to be dusted off for version 2.0 here shortly... What else do you do?

    1. I watched that last night. Fitton's closing segment was strong, expressing the disillusion of so many. OTOH, I look at the amount of investigation that has been done, the increasing pace of revelations, the clear targeting of Team Mueller and most recently the subpoena for Dan Jones and likely others which points at the heart of the Clinton organization and the Deep State with its Senate allies, and I remain hopeful.

  7. The only people going to gitmo will be individuals like me who will not bend over for these nazi never trumpers.

    1. No, no Gitmo for us. S-21, coming to a town near you.

      Been reading a considerable about concerning the Khmer Rouge lately and think our American revolutionaries have much more in common with them than the relatively vanilla Bolsheviks. They have just flipped from nesting in the hinterland to propagating in urban centers; which makes sense in that those are the heart of ignorance in 21st century America.
      Tom S.

  8. I was thinking early this morning how I would personally like to see this all turn out.

    I would like to see Brennan, Comey, Schifty, Weissmann and 'Judge' Sullivan be arrested in televised early morning raids and cuffed and frog marched in their pajamas to cells in Rikers Island.

    I'd like to see them charged with treason, sedition, and honest services fraud and RICO...and a thousand counts of §1001 false statements...and criminal conspiracies to commit all of the foregoing.

    I would like to see them prosecuted by Shipwrecked Crew and Sidney Powell and tried in a re-constituted Federal Star Chamber established by Republican majorities in Congress after the 2020 election before a nine judge panel in wigs and scarlet robes consisting of Donald Trump, Melania Trump, Michael Flynn, George Papadopoulos, Carter Page, Dan Bongino, Sundance, Q and Mark Wauck.

    I'd like to see each one of them up in the dock turn state's evidence on Obama, both Clintons and Biden. And then see all of them charged and convicted of the same crimes.

    Upon conviction, each one would be sentenced to death after serving 100 consecutive life sentences in solitary confinement in GITMO. Then justice might be served.

    Then I woke up.

  9. It's very clear now that Barr has decided to go radio silent at DOJ until after the election.

    The upside to this decision is that it somewhat insulates DOJ/FBI against accusations of political bias and election interference in the wake of Comey's infamous re-opening of the Clinton email investigation in late October 2016. But this decision also comes with a huge price tag.

    My direct perception of public opinion in my community leads me to believe that most ordinary citizens now regard the FBI (and to a lesser degree DOJ) as a brazenly corrupt institution that should never be trusted, and in addition, represents an actual clear and present danger to our nation's rule of law.

    If Barr doesn't move fast and strong post-election (regardless of who wins), his legacy will be to have cemented that perception into folk wisdom.

    People living inside the DC may not care about that consequence, but God help the next field FBI agent that needs the help of the public-at-large.

    Will Barr become the next Churchill or Chamberlain?

    1. "...FBI (and to a lesser degree DOJ) as a brazenly corrupt institution...."

      You need to work the judiciary in there as well.
      Tom S.

  10. O/T

    I found this article interesting because it makes perfect sense...and Bush will never do it.

    For many reasons. For one, Trump repudiates the Bush Doctrine of Endless War and Global Hegemony.

    But for many other reasons, as well. We certainly haven't gotten to the bottom of the Clinton/Bush/Obama can of worms yet.

    1. My only quibble is when he says the Dems lost their minds when Trump one. We all know this has been a long time coming.

      His important point is that Hillary would've crushed any of the others--absolutely true--and that Trump fights. Those who object to Trump's personality are missing the forest for a single tree.

      If Bush were loved the USA like Trump does, rather than the Uniparty New World Party the Bush-Clinton-Obama-Soros champions, he'd endorse Trump.

    2. "If Bush were loved the USA like Trump does...."

      But, then he wouldn't be "Bush".
      Tom S.

  11. I'm sure that you meant "Dems lost their minds when Trump WON".
    I don't mind Dubya's refusal to endorse DJT, insofar as him doing this would hurt DJT's rep, for being opposed by
    the globalists.
    Such an endorsement would likely cost DJT as many votes as it would gain him.

    1. And, such an endorsement would dilute what, according to The Derb, should be a major theme of the DJT campaign, that of DJT's wealth having come, from delivering towers etc. of real use to people (in the pvt. sector), vs. Biden's wealth having come from *trading on* his political ties (selling his office, in the public sector).
      See "The Moral Case for Trump—He Made His Money In Business, Biden Made His In Politics", at

  12. I will write more tomorrow on why I believe a prosecution based on the Federal RICO statutes in not only available, but compelling.

    Several have mentioned the lack of an enterprise, but they are mistaken.

    The statute states that an element is an organization, which includes an associate in fact organization/enterprise. Examples of enterprises are offices of Governors, Sheriffs, Prosecutor offices, city or county officers, and even courts. Certainly the Office of a Vice President is an organization/enterprise.

    1. Feel free to write your usual BS re RICO, but I won't enable it.