Posted on 03/21/2017 4:18:34 PM PDT by davikkm
Recent court verdicts by judges have shown us that they apparently have the power to overrule both presidents and Prime Ministers. And of course, a stable nation state needs checks and balances on Executive power, but why is it such a “horror” to suggest that judges may be politically motivated; they are not the beacons of light to guide us in our moral darkness, they are politically appointed by politicians with a political agenda who feel their agenda will be better served by having said judge in place.
Two recent cases and rulings show the politicization of the judicial class:
Judge: Derrick Watson
Appointed By: Barrack Obama in 2013
Ruling: Granted a temporary restraining order (TRO) against key parts of President Trump’s executive order on immigration.
Questions: Obama is attempting to frustrate Trump’s policies; he goes to Hawaii (possibly meets with the judge?) and the most likely judge to follow suit is called upon to hear the case. Why are specific judges selected to hear cases? If they are all impartial and swayed only by evidence, then surely any judge could hear the case and come to the same decision. If this is not the case, then there is a clear case of bias. Couldn’t a judge who was not Obama’s old school friend have heard the case?
Judge: Gonzalo Curiel
(Excerpt) Read more at investmentwatchblog.com ...
Here’s another theory (actually, more than a theory, if you beleive Sibel Edmonds.) Sibel Edmonds worked for the FBI in the 90s and this was her experience:
In this video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7XMoejT3lKs
released on November 11, Sibel says from 3:45:
One of my FBI whistleblowers, and this was a decorated agent who never became a public whistleblower, but he went to court cases with the FBI internally because he DOJ IG, that is the Inspector General’s office, etc.
One of the things this guy exposed, and I went to the media and I had this guy on the record with them but they never published, was: he was working between 1993 and 1997 in this division in the FBI, where one of his tasks was running background check on federal judge candidates, and this is during the Clinton administration, because those federal judges have to be cleared by the FBI. They look at their background: are they pedophiles, are they rapist, you know, do they have some financial nefarious activities etc.
And he said, during these four years, when this decorated FBI agent, and this was 10 years, or 7, 8 years before he blew the whistle, he was running background checks on these federal judges, the way they were selecting the ones to appoint were the ones who had the highest number of skeletons. Meaning, the government, the Clinton administration (this is the head of the FBI, this is the OJ), they did not want to appoint any federal judges to the bench, and go through the confirmation process, if the judges, or the candidates, didn’t have enough skeletons, meaning they have to be rapists, pedophiles, despicable characters, and that information is collected during the background check, and then they are used against these judges, so the judges rule per government’s instruction.
Very simple, same thing, one of my main whistleblowing facts that I exposed, and this was between 2002 and 2006, and if people were to go and visit by state secrets gallery, there were going to see all these individuals, whether they were from the executive branch or congressional people, they were involved in the case I was exposing. And I talked about the fact that they were all blackmailed. Blackmailed by whom? They were blackmailed by the deep state.
So you sort of saying they formed a cold, I have to say what they do, *the deep state, they want to make sure that only blackmailable, maybe I made up a word here, only blackmailable candidates get to hold offices, whether executive offices, or they are in Congress, you know whether they are in courts, federal judges, if you’re clean, if you’re squeaky clean, and if you start running for a major seat position, the chances are you are not going to get there because you will be disqualified. They don’t want you there. They can not put pressure on you by a blackmail. So that’s the answer to the questions: no we’re not gonna join this crowd and talk about there is a cold, it is not about cold, this is how this corrupt system has been operating.”
The two judges who TRO’d the second EO have precipitated a Constitutional crisis.
There’s no precedent for it in American history.
It is without a doubt the most astonishing thing I have seen in my life to come from Federal courts.
Those opinions should have been written with the utmost deference to the office of the President, if they even were issued at all. The idea that they proceeded because “the suit would likely succeed on its merits” is a complete fraud and as used becomes nothing but an excuse to abuse power.
The two individuals are unfit for service and have blown a gaping hole in the entire Federal judiciary, leaving it naked. They have managed to call into question the entire system.
Both should be up in front of Congress with the threat of impeachment for their abuse, along with the dismemberment of the Ninth Circuit which is actually in motion now.
Apparently they do have power. Judges in NY, Seattle and Hawaii seem to have power. Even though their legal reasoning doesn’t meet the standard of a kid shoplifting a pack of gum and isn’t based on the law, just their desire to oppose Trump.
“Questions About Judges: Are They Just Political Pawns, Or Do They Have Real Power?”
Unelected black-robe fascists have power because the gutless Congress refuses to checkmate the power of judges.
Congress has the constitutional power to:
1) Impeach judges.
2) Create or abolish judicial courts.
3) Restrict the review power of judges.
4) Increase or decrease the pay of judges.
Our Founders clearly made the Congressional House as the supreme arbiter of what judges can and cannot do.
I know several judges, both retired and active, who are genuine straight arrows. And I also know or know of far more who cannot be fully trusted or relied on to do the right thing in a pinch. Although the judicial system is mostly honest, it and the wider political system it is grounded in are nevertheless susceptible to abuse and manipulation.
Should sports referees call the game by the way they would desire the outcome to be, or should they impartially make calls based solely on the rules of the game?
By the same token, should judges rule based on their desired social outcome, or should they rule impartially based solely on the law, the constitution, and on the evidence presented to them?
Congress has chosen poorly.
Based on the conferal of “precedence” in case rulings, I would state for the record that the “law-makers” have a-l-l-o-w-e-d Judges to make laws that are never voted on by either a congress or senate either at the state or federal level.
Questions About Judges: Are They Just Political Pawns, Or Do They Have Real Power?
With the exception of the supreme Court, All Federal Judges are a Creation of Congress. Congress does NOT have the Constitutional Authority to Create another “Separate but Equal” Government Agency.
Furthermore the Inferior Court according to Article 3, Section 2, Has NO AUTHORITY under the Constitution to Hear ANY Case where “a State shall be party” All of these Judges are Usurping the Constitutional Authority of the Executive Branch and they should All be removed immediately.
See Article 3 US Constitution
https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articleiii
In Other words, they are just Pawns.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.