by Sushi for the Saker Blog
“It’s untidy, and freedom’s untidy, and free people are free to make mistakes and commit crimes and do bad things,” Rumsfeld said. “They’re also free to live their lives and do wonderful things, and that’s what’s going to happen here.”
I suspect most people, and the majority of Trumpists, would agree Trump is an imperfect political vehicle and that Trumpism, as political movement, is under-defined, inconclusive, and inchoate. The best that can be said about Trumpism is that it does not represent the tenets of contemporary Republicanism, or Democratic Bidenism. Trumpism is a startling new ism. That America, a staid state known to reject all forms of novelty and innovation, should seek to exorcise an unknown cancerous ism making sudden appearance within the body politic is perfectly understandable. But what exactly is being rejected, cast out, exorcized? What is the modus operandi of Trumpism? How do we know it?
As best as can be determined, there has been no clear articulation of Trumpism apart from the fact it includes the wearing of a red baseball cap. Donning such an accoutrement today will likely result in the wearer being placed on a no-fly list, suspected of political crimes, disciplined by loss of employment, denied the protections of the First Amendment, refused counsel, labelled as a deplorable, racist, riotous, misogynist, insurrectionist, white supremacist, fascist, terrorist, being actively shunned as one among 78 million other outcasts, publicly derided before being immediately convicted in advance of indictment and then punished to the full extent of the law. America will never tolerate mob rule.
During the entirety of the January 6th, 2021 two- and one-half hour “seizure” of the Capitol no reported fires were set. Unlike the Washington events of June 2020, neither the Capitol, nor the capital, were so much as singed. There was no declaration of independence, no assertion of the Capitol as a satellite province of CHAZ, no manifesto calling for the abolition of the police, the armed forces, and prisons, no demand for full legal immunity, no spray painting of slogans, epithets, or any other attempt at violent redecoration, no attempt to raise a foreign flag, or to alter existing accepted forms governance. There was no degree of looting apart from one lectern. The participants, apart from a half-naked vegetarian dressed in furs and horns and carrying a spear adorned with the stars and stripes, looked much like your average deplorable. There were no signs of rebellion derived from a Monty Python sketch; Monty Python was entirely absent. There were no reports of a dead parrot.
On June 23rd, 2020 President Trump declared “There will never be an ‘Autonomous Zone’ in Washington, D.C., as long as I’m your President. If they try, they will be met with serious force!” This declaration was deleted by Twitter on the grounds it violated the company’s policy against abusive behavior: “specifically the presence of a threat of harm against an identifiable group.” Twitter did not identify this group and Trump did not elaborate.
I am no lawyer. But I think there exists an outside chance the 70 odd Trumpists presently facing criminal sanction for their conduct between 1:30 p.m. and 4 p.m. on January 6th, 2021 may eventually have their day in court. Before they are shipped to the Gulag for re-education, their counsel may wish to plead the following:
That in the months preceding January 6th, 2021 America experienced an outburst of mob violence, a destructive pyromania which levelled entire city blocks. This was coupled with extensive looting, multiple shootings and unlawful deaths, the destruction of $1 to 2 billion in insured property nationally—the highest recorded damage from civil disorder in U.S. history—and clear evidence of insurrection as is to be found in declarations of political independence and demands to abolish the police, the armed forces, and the prisons.
Counsel will likely seek to demonstrate that despite this violent unrest occurring in a number of major cities, minimal legal action was taken, and that the violence, intimidation, insurrection, looting, burning, and associated billions in property damage, was publicly reported as being a benign “peaceful demonstration.” Counsel will then ask how their clients can now be found guilty of what Biden labelled as “Insurrectionists. Domestic terrorists” when on January 6th, 2021 there was no looting (the lectern excepted), no arson, no use of lethal weapons, no coherent political demand or manifesto, and no attempt to subvert or replace the existing political order. Evidence to be presented will show the defendants walked into a public building known as the “people’s house,” (both the Rotunda and Statuary Hall are acknowledged public spaces), entered through open doors, that the police removed barricades and ushered them forward, that the defendants took selfies with obliging police officers, and that defendants were standing in the company of police officers when an unidentified agent of the state executed one of their number with a single shot to the head, with no form of warning, for the misdemeanor of trespass. When at 4 p.m. everyone began to get an emergency text message from D.C. Mayor Bowser saying a curfew would be in effect from 6:00pm, the crowd proceeded to vacate the premises.
At this point in the proceedings, Counsel will state that his clients were present in the Capitol for the sole express purpose of affirming the Constitution of the United States of America.
Counsel will then draw the attention of the jury to Article II Section 1 clause 2 of the Constitution which states as follows:
Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.
Counsel will demonstrate that this Constitutional document was formally ratified and therefore has present application to each state in the union without limit or exception to include the states of Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan, and Georgia.
That the public record demonstrates that in each of these states the executive bypassed the legislature and, over the objections of the legislature, did unilaterally act to usurp the legislature’s sole prerogative to “direct” the manner in which the state shall appoint its allotted electors and in so doing did act in express violation of the provisions found in Article II Section 1 clause 2 of the Constitution of the United States of America.
Each of the enumerated states therefore acted without lawful authority with the express intent to manipulate and ignore statute law duly enacted by the state legislature which statutes explicitly directed the manner of voting required to lawfully appoint that states electors.
In each of Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan, and Georgia, the executive acted in defiance of the will of the elected representatives of the citizens. In plain language, the executive violated both state law and the Federal constitution. They acted out of arbitrary self-interest. Such conduct may represent an element “of the most extensive and inclusive voter fraud organization in the history of American politics.”
That the state executive was under Democratic control, and the objecting state legislature was under Republican control, does not excuse such abridgement of the Constitutional rights afforded the citizens. You have either a written constitution and an applied, well respected body of law, or you have mob rule. When it comes to the law you cannot be half pregnant.
Further, Counsel for the defense is likely to produce for the jury the protections found in the First Amendment notably the right to assembly and the right to petition the Government for a redress of grievance.
Counsel will then suggest that any citizen of a federation bound by the Constitution who gains knowledge that members of that same federation have knowingly acted in violation of the law to further their own political ends, that such knowledge constitutes significant ground for public grievance. The citizen is potentially disenfranchised by such Constitutional violations.
This public grievance is exacerbated by the fact Biden arranged for a “massive ‘election protection program,’ which includes former Attorney General Eric Holder and hundreds of other lawyers” One wants to think a former Attorney General has some understanding of the Constitution and its various provisions. (FOX News October 25th, 2020).
On October 29th, 2020 the organization factcheck.org spoke with T.J. Ducklo, the National Press Secretary, Biden for President, who stated “The President of the United States has already demonstrated he’s willing to lie and manipulate our country’s democratic process to help himself politically, which is why we have assembled the most robust and sophisticated team in presidential campaign history to confront voter suppression and fight voter fraud however it may present itself. The American people will decide the outcome of this election on November 3rd through a free and fair election, as they always have” (factcheck.org October 29th, 2020)
Given a demonstrated concern over the manipulation of the democratic process leading to the creation of the “most robust and sophisticated team in presidential campaign history to confront voter suppression and fight voter fraud however it may present itself,” it seems reasonable to assume that this “robust and sophisticated team” would be sensitive to the enumerated violations of the Constitution. If you choose to believe FOX News and T.J. Ducklo, Biden had the assistance of a former A.G. and “hundreds of other lawyers” to achieve this worthy goal. With that amount of legal horsepower, it is difficult to understand how they overlooked such egregious violations of Constitutional law “however it may present itself.”
It will be argued the persons attending the Mall and the Capitol on January 6th, 2021, participated in an assembly joined for the express right to petition the Government for a redress of grievance. This assertion is proved by the fact that immediately before entering upon the grounds of the Capitol the grievers did attend a rally convened by the 45th President of the United States. That the President of the United States is bound by an oath which demands:
“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”
That the President of the United States, one Donald J. Trump was, on January 6th, 2021, lawfully executing his responsibility to preserve, protect, and defend, the U.S. Constitution.
That the President has been regularly described in the media as a traitor and ass-clown, as a bombastic narcissistic psychopathic tool of Putin, and as a bedwetter. Regardless of this concerted public disrespect, on January 6th, 2021 the President was faithfully executing his duty to the best of his ability despite public scorn and rejection by the nation, the vicious slander and disapprobation of the press, abandonment by the courts, the repellent attacks of the Bidenists, and the cowardice of elected members of the Republican party.
The orange ass-clown was, on January 6th, 2021, the sole office holder of the US government acting to protect, and defend, the Constitution of the United States of America.
Counsel will then seek to introduce Title 18 U.S. Code § 2385 – Advocating overthrow of Government which states that:
Whoever knowingly or willfully advocates, abets, advises, or teaches the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying the government of the United States or the government of any State, Territory, District or Possession thereof, or the government of any political subdivision therein, by force or violence, or by the assassination of any officer of any such government; or
Whoever, with intent to cause the overthrow or destruction of any such government, prints, publishes, edits, issues, circulates, sells, distributes, or publicly displays any written or printed matter advocating, advising, or teaching the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying any government in the United States by force or violence, or attempts to do so; or
Whoever organizes or helps or attempts to organize any society, group, or assembly of persons who teach, advocate, or encourage the overthrow or destruction of any such government by force or violence; or becomes or is a member of, or affiliates with, any such society, group, or assembly of persons, knowing the purposes thereof—
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both, and shall be ineligible for employment by the United States or any department or agency thereof, for the five years next following his conviction.
Counsel will then seek to address the definition of “force” and raise the question “Does the unlawful sanction and persecution of citizens of the United States of America for the lawful attempt to seek redress for grievance constitute the use of “force?” Does the denial of First Amendment rights by corporate entities domiciled in the United States of America constitute “force?” Does the termination of employment, or the threat of termination of employment for political speech, or the exercise of First Amendment rights, constitute “force?” Does placing persons on a no-fly list and denying them common carrier services for the fact of their political views constitute “force?” Does the conduct of the Speaker of the House acting to impeach a sitting President of the United States of America for the lawful exercise of his duties to the best of his ability constitute “force?” Does incitement on the part of the President elect to sanction citizens for their political speech, or views, constitute “force?” Does the summary execution of a U.S. citizen veteran by an anonymous agent of the state, without notice or warning, for the exercise of her First Amendment rights constitute “force?” The jury will be asked to render a decision on these questions.
What defines the USA is its strong “rule of law” and its “constitution”. Almost 50% of Americans believe that the US judicial system is corrupt. Many US judges are bought and paid for.
Once the judicial system and the rule of law is corrupt, the US has nothing to fall back on. It will slowly descend into a third world country. It already is a third-world country in several aspects, but once the law is flushed down the toilet then it will be a third-world country in all aspects.
What defines the USA is its strong “rule of law” and its “constitution”.
Correct.
By refusing to take up the case of Texas, the Supreme Court has essentially refused to uphold the Constitution. They have destroyed their own institution in order to obtain a temporary reprieve from oblivion.
How the Supreme Court Doomed the USA & the West
What “strong rule of law”? USA got legal realism! Like this: https://www.unqualified-reservations.org/2009/06/judge-sotomayor-reactionary-exegesis/
The problem is not that the judges are bought and paid for, but the whole thing is co-opted, devoured and digested. Thus became a part of the current power structure, rather than long-dead power structure in which “rule of law” was something desirable, allowed and even mostly real.
Bought judges could be removed, but deeply corrupt institutions require more thorough treatments to change. But that’s not a problem. The current regime will not change business-as-usual either way, because it has exactly what it wants. The next regime will need to replace the whole thing, also either way, if only because all parts of the old oligarchy that contain power will have to be separated from it. Or in the words of Moldbug:
“Replacing organizations is simple. Purging individuals or subunits from existing ones is impossibly time-consuming, tendentious and pointless. If you wanted to convert Tony Soprano’s mob into an actual, legitimate waste management company, what would you do, start by replacing Paulie Walnuts with some guy from McKinsey?”
“The jury will be asked to render a decision on these questions.”
And the jury had better render the “correct” verdict or they and their families will be persecuted and ridiculed wherever they go for the rest of their lives, because “America will never tolerate mob rule”.
Great article, Sushi!
So, you’re of the opinion that this scamdemic lockdown will end?
Hard to chase anyone down when you’re locked in.
It looks like murcans will tolerate anything.
Don’t overthink this. Impeachment trials (and it could well be said, trials in general) come down to the personal opinions and biases of the jurists. In this case of course, political considerations override it all. All the legal mumbo jumbo is mostly irrelevant. My guess – and that’s all it is – is that the R’s have ben backed into a corner on this one by recent events and will join the Dems to convict (if that’s the right legal term). Trump is toast.
Perhaps those on the hill but not the almost 80 millions for in fact if they try that those numbers will rise to 100 million, perhaps it would be best if the R’s simply dumped that name like they dumped the Whig Party name and simply called themselves the Constitutionalist Party which would swell their ranks with more who would join it. This ain’t over by a long shot and don’t it expect to simply fade away the people are pis*ed and no one in their right mind can blame them.~~
Agreed about “the people,” but if recent events have proven anything, it’s that the DC consensus doesn’t give a damn what “the people” think. The next four years will be most interesting, to say the least. The people who supported Trump (or any reasonable alternative to Creepy Joe Biden) will be under tremendous pressure to conform – or else.
-ism implies an ideology, a program, ways and means of proceeding in policy and politics.
There is no Trumpism. MAGA is about values, not ideology.
MAGA was very streamlined, easy to ‘get’ intellectually.
Jobs, Family, God, the Nation-State borders, the Constitution, Bill of Rights, Declaration of Independence and Rule of Law.
Trump said the jobs went to Mexico and China. He’d end NAFTA and stop TTPP and end regulations on small business and farmers-ranchers. And he’d make the USA energy independent. He did all these and the economy came to life, people of all classes, all races, all ethnicities prospered for three years. Only the pandemic stopped the success.
Trump backed religion against the Liberal restrictions. All religions felt the freedom. He even forced the use of Christmas as the holiday greeting, Merry Christmas was back.
Trump backed down the Open Borders policy and tightened the Southern Border, eventually getting the Wall built. 420+ miles of Wall that stops drug trafficking, child trafficking, sex trafficking, and millions of illegal aliens.
Trump backed the Thin Blue Line, cops, sheriffs, Border Patrol, ICE, and all the security services that keep the streets and homes safe for the citizens of the nation.
These are the basic tenants and none are ideological. Nothing about MAGA is dogmatic. Most are a return to norms in American life.
Proof of the common sense and popularity of MAGA was the influx of Black, Latinos, Asians into the MAGA movement and their voting for Republicans and Trump. Huge Republican gains, +12 million more voters than 2016.
If the election was not a fraud and theft of Trump’s votes vs Biden, the absolute proof of the MAGA goals would be self-evident.
Trump re-established the Social Contract. Government was doing the things the People wanted. Trump had forced a corrupt Congress and corrupt Bureaucracy to do what he had promised on these issues.
There is no -ism, no cult, nothing at all that binds the MAGA people to Trump except deep affection for his courage to fight. They forgive his foibles and faults and sins. They admire his guts and willingness to suffer all kinds of public cruelties and calumnies on their behalf. That will never end. They love him.
Excellent post. I would add that millions of Democrats crossed over in 2016 & 2020 to vote for the Orange Man. This is one of the reasons why the Obiden cartel & their buddies in the GOPe had to resort to massive fraud, etc., in order to complete the color revolution.
Larchmonter445 – Well said!
Trump was adopted as the leader of the ‘Deplorables’, not because he is a brilliant leader, or because he is an outstanding person, but because he was the only one who was wealthy enough, famous enough, narcissistic enough and foolish enough to stand up to the Deep State/Globalist juggernaut that has ruled the U.S. for 40 years and that turned the ‘Middle Class’ into the ‘Deporables’.
Here here, the world is too full of cheap and indiscreet isms ; follow qualitative experience in large numbers !
What a shame he had such little support,…..here as much as anywhere.
A demonstration of the hopelessness of a unified response.
Divided and ruled, we wait and see what new realities to pontificate over.
Third world! … let’s get one thing straight, what is wrong with a little bit of corruption. The folk of the USA like and respect a family that takes a few bribes for some favours here and there. The whole US society is built on this type of operation by lawyers, politicians and judges. What is wrong with that? It has led the US to become one of the world’s greatest societies – and it is just human nature anyway.
Show me a Christian in politics in the US who does not want to take a little cash from the church plate as it passes by. The Bidens, Clintons and Trumps are just typical families like many others who enjoy showing others that a little corruption does no harm at all. So much so that American citizens admire those like Joe, HIllary and Donald who help themselves to a few favours for money ( I call it helpful assistance) that they will elect them to the highest office in the land.
This is the way business is done in the US. Even Nancy knows that. So what if there are a few poor casualties with no food, no home and no doctor. They are obviously too stupid to avail themselves of the many opportunities. Why go to school in the US if not to learn how to look after number one?
dear John,
What is wrong with a ;little bit of corruption? Heaps! Please tell me what is a little corruption? Do you stop at just a dollar, or does it become, ten or twenty or even a million? When does a little become just a little bit more, and then for some reason, it was so easy, but it’s not. Just ask any junkie, or any ex-cop that got caught!
Why link Donald Trump to the Bidens and the Clintons? How could you equate the Bidens and the Clintons with ‘just a little corruption’? How could you equate these families with ‘typical families’?
There are some people who have some intelligence, some respect, some honesty and some integrity, but there are also some who Paul mentioned to Timothy in regard to the love of gold. And there are lessons in life, that perhaps you have not yet discovered. What our ‘western society has forgotten is the ‘Chistianity’ itself, or the lessons that Rabbie Burns has also mentioned in his poem; “A man’s a man”,
The major cause behind this destruction that we are witnessing in not the fruit of Christianity, but rather the fruits of ‘Mammon’, the love of gold, and not the love of a neighbour. Mammon has no respect for anyone or anything except gold and the power it brings, but that power is destructive, and enormously evil, and it’s always never enough, it is extremely addictive and it has a curse, sometimes called the ‘Midas touch’, but it is known, it is told, and even Christ warned us of it.
And that John Hagan is what is wrong with a little bit of corruption!
Hi Andrew you may enjoy this ….
Cleopatra’s Banquet: This is a satire that contains nudity. It examines an old historical event without identifying the actors. The Banquet of Cleopatra is the title of several workpieces showing the culmination of a wager between Cleopatra and Mark Antony as to which one could provide the most expensive feast. As recounted in Pliny the Elder’s Natural History Cleopatra wins the wager: after Mark Antony’s feast, Cleopatra drops a rare and precious pearl from her earring into a cup of vinegar and drinks it once the pearl has dissolved. The third person at the table is Lucius Munatius Plancus, at the time Antony’s ally, who was to decide the winner of the wager. In this video it is Netanyahu.
https://youtu.be/OCsX5RNRkgE
Cheers,
John
And thus we have ‘casting pearls before swine’.
What I notices was that police stations run by competent S/Sgts followed the competence of their Sergeants. However there were some police stations that were terminally corrupt such as the St. Kilda Police Station where both drugs and prostitution was rampant. One police sergeant who tried to clean up the station found that an unknown policeman had placed excreta in his hat, to give him the message. Finally when the police anti-corruption ‘raided the station and did a search, what they found hidden above the ceiling were firearms, drugs and a heap of other unlawful instruments.
But the other thing I have noted was that corrupt politicians just loved the corrupt police as they were so easily bought, and what the Cardinal Pell saga pointed out to me was that the corruption was not just in the police, starting from the Chief Commissioners, Simon Overland and Graeme Ashton, but also within the DPP (Department of Public Prosecutions), the Magistrate’s Court, the County Court as well as the Supreme Court of Victoria. The evidence of Sir Ken Jones at a recent ‘Royal Commission’ corroborated much of this, (Sir Ken Jones was a former British Commissioner employed for a short term until he ran into the corruption.
And believe me, once we examine properly the behaviour of the courts in America. they too display the very same corruption that permeates both the Federal and state governments of America.
There’s confusion between bribery (personal corruption) and institutional corruption — they are different beasts.
Bribery is eternal, if varying in quantities and forms. Hard to suppress, short of executing any bureaucrats caught taking bribes, along with their entire families, like in China. It’s an individual problem, and for the system it’s but a local malfunction.
Graft as business-as-usual is in the middle: not far from personal bribery, but part of the system, so may be a symptom of its inadequacy or may lead to fully corrupting it.
Institutional corruption is what creates the Clown World and degrades “agreement capability”. It’s not that some or all Elected Representatives take money from this or that group (being “Deputanas”, in Russian terms), it’s that de facto these groups are real minor power groups, and they convert forms of power (money to lobby) and have someone represent their interests.
The problem is not that they have representatives, but that a pre-existing structure repurposed to serve this demand ceases to serve its old purpose, i.e. the electorate can wind up de facto disenfranchised.
Also, this is done via made-up “concerns”, which obviously hinders communication. Since the real interests are covered with pretext, addressing the fig leaf is useless, the prospective negotiating side will resists addressing the matter without a fig leaf, and if a different fig leaf is used, may misunderstand. Bullshit is not an industrial lubricant. So these “representatives” aren’t even empowered to haggle on behalf of their sponsors, just make noise and demand. Is bribe the worst part of this wretched mess?
Consider how if the same minor power groups simply had “above the table” official representatives and paid for their services, their interests could be discussed openly and interactively, quality of the service would directly affect price like on any other market, etc. Feels like sanity?
Of course, it’s a result of deeper problems inherent in the system. But this distortion is not unique to parliaments.
Hence Moldbug’s “general theory of corruption” starts with: Corruption is any human action that is not what it appears to be.
Here is the video that goes with my original post …
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yzUIIL5w7wc&feature=youtu.be&ab_channel=JohnHagan
Suchi, superb post!
Unfortunately I am reminded of a Monty Python skit in a courtroom. So long ago that I forget most of the details but a question was raised: “Is a charge strictly necessary?” -and the answer was an exasperatingly spoken:
“The press are here”.
Well there’s absolutely no problem with that one today with the scurrilous MSM presstitute alphabet agency stenographers who will do and write exactly as they are told.
So with no charge really needed and any defence memory-holed, this eloquent rebuttal does not stand a chance against today’s “up is down” pre-ordained guilty packaging.
Where’s Lady Emma Arbuthnot, the Westminster chief magistrate, and her sidekick Vanessa Baraitser of Julian Assange fame? They work for the USA don’t they?
Let’s face it, You get to be a senator, or congressman, ride in a limo, go to a few meetings, learn the game from the old timers,make an average of $180,000.00/yr, and in a few years your a millionaire. At the same time you get to tell the poor bastards back home your working for them! Sucker born every minute!
The sad part is –We Believe That These People Have OUR interests at hart! Both party’s –every day,every week,year in year out, they lie,cheat and steel from us all, When we object the have the al out gall to call us traitors.
What’s perfect? But to assess a political (or any other) vehicle, one needs to know its mission profile, no?
It’s not a problem at all. “Trumpism” is what the American Centrist press says it is. Which is anything it does not like, because #OrangeManBad.
Not being an American, I have learned a lot from this article. It is a great article.
Thank you so much.
“Rule of Law”
Martin Armstrong argues it is now about the courts own “discretion” on matters!
Good reading and shocking:
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/rule-of-law/trump-filed-in-supreme-court-today-triumph-of-hope-over-experience/
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/politics/why-is-there-no-effort-to-heal-the-country/
Are you sure that ‘the New Normal’ affirms the right for a jury to hear a case in law?
Historically, juries have a most unhealthy tendency and propensity to examine evidence on its merits, which is a dangerous form of domestic terrorism in the current environment.
I mean, in lil ol’ England in the mid 1980s, a judge DIRECTED a jury to convict a civil servant for passing evidence of Government lying to an MP. DIRECTED them to. OK, he was a totally bent judge, but still. He was a judge.
And you know what happened? 12 good men/women and true stuck 12 middle fingers up at the Judge, the Government, the Establishment and unanimously declared the man NOT GUILTY.
What is the law coming to if Government Ministers can’t hire a bent judge to get a bent verdict reliably eh?
Justice is, after all, what the Executive define it to be.
Forget the truth….
The Government has just been overruled by the opportunistic parasite, better known as the mainstream media. I have found some interesting videos on this issue. Here’s a link to one of them, the others can be found on the channel page. Enjoy
https://youtu.be/GP_gGvIM0-Y