The Law

Who to believe, who is implicated, what are the next revelations going to reveal.

In the final days of the run up to the American Elections Julian Assange has orchestrated a drip feed information leak with Hillary Clinton firmly in his sights.
The information is not a smoking gun where a victim lays on the floor in a pool of blood and the killer has a gun in his hand. Much of what has been levelled at Mrs Clinton seems to be, breaches of protocol (her use of a private email account) or innuendo such that the Saudi Arabian government who fund ISIS, also fund the Clinton Foundation and somehow this fact implies there is a connection between the crazies in Syria and the crazies in Washington.
Of course the whole business reveals the less then transparent dealings in the Capital of "capital" where a politically designed, unregulated capitalistic business system has unfettered power. The shady deals and shaky regulation makes a mockery of the of the importance of an independent judiciary. The opaque structure within a market led economy which demands freedom to wheel and deal has no sense of an "inter -connection" between it and society at large. The deals and the bribes are part and parcel of the way a contract is secured and if it is thought that "jobs are at risk" or tax revenues may dry up then the "end", proceeds any ethical consideration.
Wikileaks has been extremely useful in revealing warts and all much of what was hidden, dotting the I and crossing the T, but it has been done at a cost. The relationship between a population and its leaders can only prosper if the people believe that the law applies equally to the rich and powerful. If that trust is lost then anarchy is never far behind and whilst we may feel far removed and superior to the countries, such as in the Middle East, breaking down as I write we mustn't be so sure.  If the delicate balance begins to turn in our own country then forces which are prevalent in all societies might just tip that balance the wrong way.

 One of the saddest sights this morning was to see the newspaper headlines, virtually across the board, damming the judges for doing what they are paid to do, rule on the law. The issue of whether Parliament has the right to be involved, over the head of government, when "statutes", which are the province of parliament, are to be changed especially since there is no written constitution in place, only Parliament as a collective can change a statute.

Article 50, part of the constitutional membership agreement to join the EU, which will trigger our exit from the EU, will on its application set aside an existing statute taken at Maastricht when we joined the EU and therefore it needs parliaments approval to set it aside. That's the law and seems to me that as countries tread their own line in this increasingly turbulent world, only the precision of law can possibly fend off the tyranny of the fascist.