Proceduralism Turns Lawyers into Morons

Let me tell you something most people don’t realize until it’s too late: lawyers are absolutely clueless when it comes to facts. I’m not saying they have a hard time analyzing facts. I’m saying they don’t even think in terms of facts. They don’t know how to discover them, how to establish them, or how to prove them — even when you hand them a gold-plated, color-coded data set on a velvet pillow.

Why? Because the legal system — and the legal education that feeds it — is entirely proceduralist. It doesn’t train people to think, it trains them to follow. And what it trains them to follow is procedure, not truth.

Ask a lawyer to figure out what actually happened in a case, and you’ll get silence. Ask them to prove a factual point, and they’ll start reciting filing deadlines or quoting case law. Ask them to build a narrative based on real-world evidence — not motions, not technicalities — and they will look at you like you’re speaking Greek.

Because in their world, the idea that truth exists outside of procedure is alien. It’s not even that they’re cynical — they’re not. They’re institutionally brainwashed. Their job isn’t to prove what’s real. It’s to move through the system, like a bureaucratic tapeworm.

I dealt with five lawyers on a low-level charge. All five were useless. None of them even thought in terms of innocence or guilt. That distinction didn’t register. Their only concern was “managing the case” — filing motions, logging hours, and eventually pushing a plea. They would’ve acted the same if I had murdered 50 people in broad daylight. Why? Because the system doesn’t want to know the truth. It wants to check the boxes.

We call them “officers of the court,” but they’re really just functionaries — trained not to ask what’s real, but only what’s admissible, what’s timely, and what’s procedurally clean.

And that’s why, when you need someone to actually prove something, you’re on your own.