And the FBI, DHS, BATFE, AZ AG, and AZ US Attorney were fine with pretending that it wasn’t a Fast & Furious gun found at the murder scene of Brian Terry.
What don’t you get about the whole concept that political critters will lie, before, during, and even AFTER they’ve been caught in wrongdoing?
That judge thought he didn’t need to give a jury trial or other protections before slapping somebody with a $10,000 fine for a “frivolous lawsuit” that didn’t even meet the definitions for the charges he made, if what Orly cited was accurate. His whole claim was that Orly filed her suit to serve a political agenda. I could just as easily say he made his ruling just to serve a political agenda. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander, no? Not when the gander gets to make up the rules as he goes, which is what this judge is very clearly willing to do.
As I’ve said before, this judge’s decision is an indirect admission that the SS application form Orly requested is not Obama’s. IOW, this judge knows that Obama is guilty of SS fraud. If he’s not reported it to law enforcement then he is also guilty of misprision. That makes him non-credible. I don’t care what a non-credible person SAYS to serve their own interests, nor should justice care what they SAY. What matters is what can be documented.
At this point we have the word of a judge who is probably guilty of misprision and is defending himself, against the word of the person filing the affidavit on Orly’s behalf. This judge is calling Orly’s witness a liar/perjurer while at the same time withholding due process for both Orly and her witness to have the facts aired according to rules of evidence before an impartial jury. In short, this judge is allowing himself to decide his own guilt or innocence, which - again - speaks very, very badly of his own ethics and/or grasp of the whole concept of due process and equal protection.
And that is much more serious than whether a person redacts this jot or tiddle from her filings.
I think I’m getting the two judges mixed up. Both Land and Lamberth were allegedly seen with Eric Holder. Land was the one who slapped Orly with the $10,000 fine. Lamberth is the one who indirectly admitted that Obama is guilty of social security fraud.
So Land is not necessarily guilt of misprision but is being accused of unethical ex parte communications. Either way, it is him saying what serves his interests while withholding Orly’s right to have both the conflicting claims examined by an impartial jury. It is Judge Land claiming the right to decide his own innocence or guilt. Unethical to the very core.
If neither Judge Lamberth nor Astrue have reported Obama’s social security fraud to the FBI (which is governed by.....drumroll..... the DOJ, headed by Eric Holder), then they are guilty of misprision, as is Eric Holder himself. But then, Holder has already committed so many felonies what’s another one?