"What is right is not always the same as what is legal."

Edward Snowden makes a very valid point... He is not condoning that everyone break the law.

DID YOU KNOW... there was a constitutional challenge to Rule 1.6 of the rules of professional conduct filed on August 8, 2013 and served upon every state attorney general.

Every state Attorney General has failed to address the loss of the constitutional rights of people in the state courts because a 'law' makes it illegal to prosecute judicial corruption.

Every District Attorney also does nothing. Every lawyer also fails to act.

How's that for an example to a 'legal' state law which should not be followed BECAUSE OF IT'S UNCONSTITUTIONAL RESULT.

The good news is that Rule 1.6 does not have to be followed by THE PEOPLE unless you are mandated to follow the Rules of Professional Conduct which applies to lawyers and legal professionals.

The bad news is that the LAW which MANDATES the failure to prosecute judicial corruption and injustice is concealed in the rules which only affect lawyers conduct.

The bad news is that the LAW which MANDATES that legal professionals not take any action which adversely affects the integrity of the judiciary EVEN WHEN IT CAUSES THE DENIAL OF RIGHTS AND PRIVILEGES PROTECTED BY THE US CONSTITUTION was enacted by the judiciary.

The bad news is that the LAW results in disciplinary actions against any legal professional who breaches the confidentiality of information.

The bad news is that the LAW is unconstitutional AND a nullity BUT that determination must be made by a court which by LAW may not take any action which adversely affects the integrity of the judiciary.

The bad news is that the lower court actions/decision on appeal presents the issue to an appeals court which by LAW may not take any action which adversely affects the integrity of the judiciary.

The bad news is that escalation for review to a state supreme court which by LAW may not take any action which adversely affects the integrity of the judiciary.

The bad news is that state supreme court enacted THAT LAW. The state supreme court is not obligated to act where their decision would incriminate the state supreme court.

The bad news is upon presentation of the constitutional issue to the us district court, the judiciary improperly dismisses the matter.

The bad news is upon appeal to the Third Circuit, the appeals court improperly affirms the lower court decision without substantiation.

The bad news is upon raising the issue to the US Supreme Court, the court may choose to ignore the matter entirely. Realistically, the US Supreme Court is not likely to expose the sedition of the judiciary in every state. In the national interest of preventing civil unrest, they permit the state to continue to deny the constitutional rights of people.

THE US CONSTITUTION grants authority and jurisdiction to the US Supreme Court through the US Congress.

The bad news is that when you contact your US Senators and Representatives, you discover they are lawyers - mandated to obey THAT law and take no action.

"WHAT IS RIGHT IS NOT ALWAYS THE SAME AS WHAT IS LEGAL." - Edward Snowden

The Judicial Branch made judicial corruption and injustice legal, and in doing so they undermined the US Constitution.

Edward Snowden is speaking DIRECTLY to the US ATTORNEY GENERAL...
Edward Snowden is speaking DIRECTLY to the ATTORNEYS GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES...
Edward Snowden is speaking to the US Congress...
What is right is not always the same as what is legal.

The Constitutional Crisis in the US can only lawfully be addressed by Eric Holder, the US Attorney General, the Attorneys General of the United States, or the US Congress.

According to the law, the petition for action cannot be from a legal professional.

The Constitutional Challenge of Rule 1.6 was filed on August 8. 2013 and served on the Attorneys General of the United States by Terance Healy and Todd M. Krautheim. Pro Se litigants. Non-lawyers. Lawfully acting to address an unconstitutional law.

When a law mandates that lawyers ignore corruption and injustice, WHAT IS RIGHT IS NOT ALWAYS THE SAME AS WHAT IS LEGAL.