Posted on 07/12/2021 5:59:08 PM PDT by grundle
We are seeing this over and over again. Obama judges end up with all the court cases that are related to President Trump. The selection process is statistically impossible.
We just reported on a case in Michigan where the state is suing whistleblowers in the state who reported on the massive election abuse in Michigan. This case is overseen by Judge Linda Parker, an Obama judge.
Judge Parker also oversaw and ruled on Sidney Powell’s case in Michigan right after the election which Judge Parker labeled “speculation” and threw in the garbage. Her comments and bias showed right through her ruling and it’s doubtful she even read Powell’s arguments of clear election fraud. Eventually, the Supreme Court decided not to hear the case. (A state election for President was stolen and the Supreme Court didn’t care!)
Last week we reported that two of three Big Tech cases from President Trump are assigned to Obama judges.
In May an Obama judge claimed Steve Bannon was guilty by accepting President Trump’s pardon and then dismissed his case – months after he was pardoned.
Roger Stone and Paul Manafort both received Obama Judge Amy Berman Jackson – they never had a chance.
Will someone, anyone in authority look into this? This cannot be due to random assignments. No way.
There is little Justice available in our Legal System for a Deplorable.
It’s called “judge shopping. “ Dems have mastered it.
eight years in office lets a prez appoint a lot of judges.
Black Elk (R.I.P.) told me how they did it in Connecticut. The judges were assigned in rotation, and the fellow filing the suit would hold back and watch who was assigned last. When the “right” one was next, he filed.
See post #5
bttt
“It’s called “judge shopping. “ Dems have mastered it.”
You can shop the what circuit you file in, but the assignment to judges is supposed to be random.
Anyone who threatens the deep state finds themselves before a Clinton/Obama judge and their process slows to a painful and hideous political crawl. See Michal Flynn.
DC and NY courts are becoming something other than legal proceedings...
What got me was Terri Schiavo’s case - judge said “low probability of success - case not heard.”
So if the judge agrees to hear it, it would seem the defendant is at a disadvantage and isn’t really getting a fair trial.
I suppose that’s for civil cases - maybe they have no choice but to hear the case if it’s a criminal case.
As if a Clinton or Bush appointed judge would be much difference.
It’s called “judge shopping. “ Dems have mastered it.
You just answered the question I was about to ask - can a judge just say I want this case?
I’m shocked, shocked to find gambling in this casino.
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.