The Fourth branch of government is an ad-hoc formation of a “the facto” group of a prominent political party handlers and bureaucrats that decide directly or indirectly how the other branches of government should rule. In this context “Rule”, icludes legislation, judgment, budget appropriation and execution. This group may use their position in government and other federal, unions or state entities like the USPS, Federal Reserve and Intelligence Community to advance their power by selecting the people and mechanisms that would control the the means of production, means of taxation, healthcare, trade, finances, contracting, appointments and voting mechanisms.
High level bureaucrats can ask a lower level counterparts to create whatever excuse for delaying or circumventing one task and accelerating another task in a “Pick and Chose” way even ignoring executive orders or the regulations they impose on every layman (They just have to define their act as “essential”). If some allegation is exposing their actions they make sure the system would dox, vilify or entrap whislteblowers as well as political opponents through their networking with the prosecution/investigation system and the media. These actions may be “done by the book” by making official papers that make excuse for the acts by lawyers that tax payers are funding.
The Fourth Branch of government has an in-place mechanism of interface and position interchangeability with the Silicon Valley. In the 21th Century the fourth branch of government is controlled by a set of bureaucrats and oligopoly share-holders (oligarchs) that decide on policies, timing, priorities, public opinion and contracting. One of the examples is the fact that the government relies and contracts only a small set of Cloud system providers which is 50% controlled by Amazon while the searcd 90% of search results are controlled by Google. A similar situation occurs in broadcasting and media streaming services. The development and control of storage, transmission, encryption, backdoors and the spread of the information on the cloud is done by people that parachute people or move back and forth from the bureaucracy to those companies or their subcontractors and share a similar Rolodex.
Those actors have in their networking-rolodex a raster of contacts that enable them to parachute themselves or their appointees in boards of directors or positions when they cross over from bureaucracy to the oligopoly and vice versa. They use a preferential system of revolving doors mechanism to make sure the right people are hired which would give preferential contracts and favors later on when the time comes. Mechanisms are already in place in the system that tries to cover up any paper trail by use of appointed inspector generals and in the judicial and jury selection system. Since the 20th century, a similar metamorphosis and symbiosis relation occurred with the Academy and the Industrial military complex as referred by Eisenhower in the 50s. In the 19th century a similar symbiosis occurred between government, bureaucrats, law-firms and prominent journalists. The de-facto branch of government made up of unelected bureaucrats and their accomplices grew up to unimaginable proportions over the decades. The increasing budget of bureaucracy, red tape and government regulations even in days when tasks can be automated, is evidence that the beast is insatiable.
The decision making time horizon of the 4th branch is longer then a presidential office term and has longer interaction and symbiosis with the Intelligence community and Oligopoly echo system. They brainstorming, networking and decision making may take advantage of conduits like think tank or NGOs. For the sake of the argument an oligopoly here is referenced to organizations or a set of corporation that have large market share, control of limited resources or a preferential contracts with the government were competing require overcoming a high barrier that is artificially imposed by preferential regulation, antitrust measures or bid tailoring. In that way Big Tech Oligopols may collude with congress to de-platform, destroy or overtake smaller platforms by using an allegation that extremist conspiracy theorists which pose a national risk are using their competitions platform. This is why Zuckerberg and Dorsey where in favor of amending section 230 under the FCC act. They know that small companies don’t have an army of lawyers or shadow-banners in place or a lobby in congress or former managers appointed to work for a current or incoming government that would enable them keeping afloat.
When were the seeds of the 4th branch of government sown and why it wasn’t emphasized enough in the Constitution?
The Federalist papers (Federalist 6-10 among others) did warn us about tyrannical occurrences that appeared later on under the fourth branch of government. There is no 100% hermetic way to seal corruption and reelection of corrupt people. In comparison with monarchies and other tyrannical forms of government the a true Constitutional Republic is in a better place. The founders presumed that the rotation of congress and the executive would mitigate the effort of the bureaucracy to increase tyrannical taxation and their control of the means of livelihood, the means of healthcare and the means of access to information.
One of the partial mitigation to this situation was removed by nullifying the requirement of making the Vice President a member of a different party of the president. Even with the constitution flaws, America was brought into prosperity for at least 240 years. Yet as opposed to Orwell, the founding fathers didn’t imagine that technology could control the public opinion, the vote, information transfer and free speech venues in the 21th century.
In the notorious Marbury Vs. Madison ruling the supreme court gave a dangerous tool to bureaucrats and the establishment. The delay or refusal of affixing a seal to an appointment by a bureaucrat enabled the strengthening and continuation of a 4th branch of government. Madison was a high ranking bureaucrat that gave a lower bureaucrat, Marshall and others, the order to delay or circumvent the task of affixing the seal for Marbury’s appointment.
Marshall became the judge that ruled in favor of Madison in 1803 creating the tyrannical precedent of injecting steroids to the fourth branch of government by not sending himself to prison for conflict of interest and abuse of power when delaying the seal. Marshal move had created a dangerous modus operandi antecedent that was legitimized by the court. Bureaucrats can change allocation of budges, appointments, they can confection prosecutions, they can tailor reports that suit their agenda and they can even influence outcome of war or conflicts and some say they can even affect election results by their actions and non-actions. Balances and checks of inspector generals or lawmakers are toothless because they come too late or come from within the system and use the same delay or excuse tactics that the inspected entities use.
Madison used an improper technicality to deny a legal appointment of Marbury and thus abused his right and happiness as a retaliation for supporting the Federalists. The supreme court ratified this move by allowing it. The excuse of the supreme court was that they can’t infringe the separation of powers doctrine as required by the constitution. While doing so, Justice John Marshall infringed the equal right to pursue happiness doctrine among others.
The authority given to the Supreme Court by the act establishing the judicial system of the United States to issue writs of mandamus to public officers appears not to be warranted by the Constitution.
https://www.owleyes.org/
There is no happiness when the justice system blocks the rights and justice for person that was harmed by another person(s) or bureaucratic red tape. The courts also circumvent this right today by turning a blind eye on bureaucrats, journalists and persons of one party that are doxing, smearing, denying contract or harming livelihoods of members of the other party. The judicial system should have been using RICO statue and other laws to charge those doxers.
Marshall ruled that Marbury was right in his demand for remedy, but tailored an excuse for preferring one doctrine over the other. Justice Marshall preferred the separation of powers doctrine over the equal rights doctrine. The excuse is unethical and against common sense since by allowing a technicality he intervened in 2nd an 1st branch of government decision while abusing equality and the right to happiness of Marbury, for political reasons.
In that ruling they have showed to the American people that the last resort and against tyrant bureaucrats or judges is compromised as was the case with Dred Scott which ruled in favor of a slave holder that lived in New York using a technicality, and thus maybe expediting the Civil War. Thus the American judicial system imported from England a system that enabled government and people who have the means to use the lack of just justice to make themselves richer and grab more power. In this move they violated the underline motive of the constitution and the declaration of independence that being “all men equal” they have the equal right to pursue happiness. This right has no meaning if it is not equally obtained by rich or poor, lonely persons or persons with connections to the government, persons of one political party and persons of other political party. If the supreme court would be concerned about civil rights like in Row Vs. Wade and Plessy Vs. Ferguson they wouldn’t allow the blacklisting of one party members on other party members.
On February 24, 1803, the Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice John Marshall, decides the landmark case of William Marbury versus James Madison, Secretary of State of the United States and confirms the legal principle of judicial review—the ability of the Supreme Court to limit Congressional power by declaring legislation unconstitutional—in the new nation.
https://www.history.com/
The court ruled that the new president, Thomas Jefferson, via his secretary of state, James Madison, was wrong to prevent William Marbury from taking office as justice of the peace for Washington County in the District of Columbia. However, it also ruled that the court had no jurisdiction in the case and could not force Jefferson and Madison to seat Marbury. The Judiciary Act of 1789 gave the Supreme Court jurisdiction, but the Marshall court ruled the Act of 1789 to be an unconstitutional extension of judiciary power into the realm of the executive.
To add insult to injury, John Marshall increased the power of the Supreme Court by enabling the “Judicial Review” power to decide what part of the constitution and its amendments is constitutional. John Marshall grabbed for the supreme court more powers then the founding fathers.
Having named the process “Constitutional Review” instead of “Judicial Review” might have resulted in different history outcome. But Marshal and his colleagues purpose was to empower judicial law interpretation and activism while strengthening the fourth arm of government that Marshal was part of even before he became a supreme court judge. This is an action that brought the tyranny of Britain judicial and bureaucrat system into the United States circumventing the constitution and the bill of rights guidelines by making an aberrant and out of context interpretation and exploitation of the constitution text itself, which was not the intent of the founding fathers. If a peace judge couldn’t protect his happiness against the machinations of bureaucracy, the layman or people that don’t have time and money for lawyers have no chance of defending their rights against the system which is protected by the supreme court.
The Judicial Review process is unconstitutional from the ground up because it gave the supreme court the right of interpreting the constitution applying out of context clauses in a discretionary or partisan way without authorization of the states, a referendum and authorization of the the other branches of government. This overreach brought inequality, slow due process, liberty infringements, happiness suppression and tricky law practice as antecedents for generations to come.
A bureaucrat may act for her/his party or friends and family in local, state or federal level. It is almost impossible or it takes years to litigate and prove the bureaucrat was acting in a biased or criminal way or that she/he was promoting his boss ideas, his party ideas or having a quid pro quo. USPS workers may “forget” having “mail-in ballots” in the trunk of their car, poll workers may by “mistake” change 5 digit numbers to 6 and so on. People from the FBI may use the same databases by “coincidence” and hire the same law-firms, people and software companies that the DNC hires. Those people get away with their wrongdoings and are compensated when they move out from their bureaucratic position in a magic way. In some cases they or their friends become contractors or managers of government contractors like Crowdstrike or ballot printing houses or Big Tech or companies that develop voting software like infamous the Iowa caucus app.
Since the USPS is a federal entity and the certification delivered to the Congress belongs to the other branches, the previous antecedent and others may be a pretext for the Supreme Court to excuse themselves from any ruling even if there is evidence in plain sight.
Judging from the past election frauds that have existed for many years, the courts have an interest in dismissing their involvement in securing the happiness of 70 million voters that believe that about 10 Million ballots were fiction and many of their votes where disenfranchised even if there is evidence.
The supreme court in the beginning for the 19th century enabled the creation of the Establishment which is the de-facto 4th branch of government which is the establishment both in state and federal levels. That entity makes “errors” and “delays” when convenient and gives preferential information and favoritism to their party, family and friends. To add insult to injury, John Marshall when enabling this power hub, increased the power of the Supreme Court by enabling the “Judicial Review” power to interpret what part of the constitution and its amendments is valid or constitutional. John Marshall grabbed for the supreme court and for the establishment more powers then the founding fathers intended when they tried to avoid tyranny and partisanship.