When full-scale revolution finally breaks out, it will likely be the judges who will be the first taken to the legal guillotines.
As the third branch of government, our Founding Fathers gave to them the power to hold the other two branches accountable when they engaged in illegal, if not tyrannical, acts against We the People. However, over the last decade in particular, the nation's judiciary, at both the federal and state levels, have not only largely succumbed to the politicians and others who got them their jobs through appointment or by way of stuffing money into their campaign war chests (judges are elected in many states and localities), but have themselves grown so intellectually and otherwise corrupt as to be an even bigger threat to survival of our republic than the executive and legislative branches of government.
While judges have been known to take bribes and other perks from dishonest litigants and their attorneys to render dishonest decisions – crimes that are rarely unmasked since federal and state law enforcement investigating authorities are also frequently in the hip pocket of these felonious greasers – in recent years many judges have devised a far more opaque, sinister and "clever" way to get the job done for their masters. Simply put, in politically charged cases judges simply sit on complaints filed by public interest and other activist litigants, making use of the old adage that justice delayed is justice denied – a credo which frequently serves the same purpose as issuing biased and illegal decisions. Let me give you just a few examples from personal experience in cases that I have filed and been involved with in recent years.
Advertisement - story continues below
Freedom Watch v. Hillary Clinton and U.S. Department of State, et. al, (Case No 12-cv-00314) – Given the potentially fatal nuclear threat the Islamic Republic of Iran poses to our nation, Israel and their Western allies, I filed a Freedom of Information Act request with the State Department to obtain documents uncovering how and why former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton decided, pursuant to the legal authority granted to her by Congress, which persons, interests or countries were granted "waivers" to do business with this neo-Nazi country. In this way, the economic sanctions that the United States and its allies have imposed on Iran – sanctions which are the centerpiece of the Obama administration's weak attempts to coerce the mullahs in Tehran to drop their nuclear bomb ambitions – do not apply for those persons, interests or persons. The rationale for the waivers is that these persons, interests or countries would be severely harmed if all of their trade with Iran were to be shut down.
Obviously, the issue of waivers is of crucial national importance, since Iran continues feverishly to build atomic weapons that it has said will help it carry out a new Holocaust against Jews and Christians worldwide. By allowing for this loophole in the Obama administration's sanctions regime, the "mullah in chief" and his equally corrupt and traitorous former secretary of state intentionally and deviously undercut their own sanctions, keeping Iran economically viable and eliminating any pressure for it to come to an agreement with the west over ceasing its dangerous nuclear ambitions. Sure enough, just this week the New York Times wrote a front-page story confirming that Obama's sanctions have had little to no effect in stemming Iran's march to acquire nuclear bombs.
When Hillary Clinton and the Obama administration predictably stonewalled our FOIA document requests, almost a year ago I was forced to file suit in federal court in Washington, D.C. It was a "slam dunk" to win, particularly since the defendants had never responded to my FOIA requests – meaning that they had "waived" any defenses. But despite our motion for partial summary judgment, which sought to end the case and have the defendants immediately turn over the documents, the judge assigned to the case, the Honorable Rosemary M. Collyer, who has delayed ruling on our motion for now more than eight months – a crucial period in Iran's nuclear bomb building. When I sought to press her to make a decision and rule in our favor to order the release of these crucial documents, Judge Collyer threatened me with legal sanctions if we filed anymore requests. And, when I filed an ethics complaint against Judge Collyer for threatening me over her own failure to do her job and rule, the ethics committee of the federal court in Washington, D.C., conjured up absurd reasons to send my complaint back to me and refused to take any action – "circling the wagon" for their fellow jurist.
Judge Collyer was appointed by President George W. Bush and is presumably a Republican. However, it is also likely that given the incestuous nature of the political and legal establishment in the nation's capital that she knows and has had contact with Hillary Clinton. Other more sinister reasons why Judge Collyer has sat on my case for more than eight months are also not ruled out. But whatever the cause, Judge Collyer and those who protect her on the ethics committee have sold out the interests of We the People. Through their inaction, they may be furthering the building of an Iranian atom bomb that could wipe us all out in the near future.
Advertisement - story continues below
Then there is the latest example of judicial delay and injustice: the recent decision by the middle level appeals court in Florida, the First District Court of Appeal (Case No. No. ID12-3489), over Obama's eligibility to be president. My client, Michael Voeltz, a Florida voter and a Democrat, filed his initial challenge before the primary elections. The lower court ruled for the "usurper in chief," and we appealed. Despite our having previously asked the appeals court long ago to send the case immediately to the Florida Supreme Court, or itself rule quickly, as is required under the law of the Sunshine State for election cases, it sat on the case until after Obama was safely re-elected president. Conveniently, it issued a decision last Friday that the appeal is now moot and dismissed it. While we will now be able to appeal to the Florida Supreme Court and while Mr. Voeltz also has another case which I filed after the election to have Obama declared ineligible, this intentional delay by the Florida appellate court is also traitorous and worthy of ethics complaints against the three responsible judges.
These are just two examples among many of the judges who have in recent years intentionally failed to do their duty and sat on cases to feather the nests of the political elite.