Blog/Rule of Law
Posted Dec 14, 2020 by Martin Armstrong
COMMENT: So now something that has been on the books for 95 years is suddenly a problem and UNCONSTITUTIONAL? So now it`s unfair to 1 man who in 4 years his only major accomplishment was to pass a tax break that the bulk of the tax break only benefited the top 1% ? In which that allowed him to go back to Mar a Lago and brag to the members who had there membership fee`s to the club raised after he was elected and say… I Just Made You People A Lot Of Money. So I think you can see how people who do not think Trump is our Lord & Savior and just look at facts might not see this as an end of the world scenario you want to put forth on your blog.
REPLY: This is not about one man and what is coming will not benefit the 1% – only the 0.005% – the Super-Rich. This is not about taxes. Like Hillary or Gates, they set up foundations that are tax-free and get to use their money to play monopoly with the world. The refusal to decide a question of law is the end of civilization. If they rule against Trump or for him is not the issue. The FAILURE to rule will leave both sides hating each other and both claiming they are right.
Congress reduced the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court to discretion. So many people have suffered from arbitrary law and that denies the equal protection of the law because one circuit will practice something different than the rest of the nation. New York allows judges to change the very words spoken in court by altering the transcripts which is a federal crime. The Second Circuit claims they have no power to tell judges to obey the law. UNITED STATES v. ZICHETTELLO, 208 F3d 72, 97 (2d Cir 2000).
Try standing before a judge who has dementia and forgets even who you are. (OWEN-Life Tenure for Federal Judges Raises Issues of Senility, Dementia – ProPublica). Judges protect judges. There is NOBODY you can turn to when faced with a judge who has lost his mind. Judge Owen is even mentioned to have “incurable ‘senile dementia'” in books. He was a public disgrace but never would the court of appeals EVER criticize him or recuse him from any case. They called him 100-Year Owen for that was his favorite sentence.
Or when you have one judge who is trying to do the right thing and the government has to always win so they go to the chief judge to have the case removed and sent to a pro-government judge who rules only for the government and then they seal your docket so nobody can review what they have done. This is your rule of law and discretion at the Supreme Court allows them to violate their oath and avoid cases they do not want to have to admit the government has acted corruptly or in my case protected the bankers as always!
I feel sorry for you because you cannot see beyond your bias. This is not about Trump and if he has the evidence it should be reviewed for everyone to see. These judges have all used procedures to avoid ruling on anything of substance. In Wisconsin, they dismissed his case on the procedure and simply said he should have argued that before the election – avoid the issues once again. This is not what the rule of law is all about.
When judges refuse to enforce the law, the ONLY solution remaining to the people is a revolution.
Just ask yourself, why are the Super-Rich always pouring money into the pocket of Democrats? So they will go after them? A small business owner is the hated 1% yet the press cheers the super-rich and calls them our friends! Open your eyes. The corruption is all around you. You will lose your freedom and that of the future for your children because you will not look at the reality that surrounds you.