9TH CIRCUIT FAIL

[SgtFuryUSCZ]

 

Oh, it's on like Donkey Kong, DM !

And if all that falls apart - the Marquis of Queensbury Rules will apply.   BAM !  POW ! Biff ! Socko !

YOU GOIN" DOWN BOY !   LOL ! hahahahaha....!

 

Here, RV ME... hold our shoes and cell phones... we're goin' in !

 

.

 

 

.

Edited February 10, 2017 by SgtFuryUSCZ

[Whatshername]

21 minutes ago, divemaster5734 said:

... then additional 5 shots to begin, and one more shot each at the end of each round....

I'll pour!  

[SgtFuryUSCZ]

Anyone else got a problem with WHN bein' the Bartender....?

Okay, kid... start pourin'...!

[Whatshername]

[SgtFuryUSCZ]

And there it is !  Good job, WHN !  Let's get this started !

[coorslite21]

The 9th has a record of left leaning decisions.  Upon appeal to the Supreme Court there is about an 80% rate of the 9th's decisions being over turned.  Another option is a panel of 11 Judges from the 14 appeal districts could be called upon to look at the decision.  They could over turn this decision.  All of this will take time.

Additionally Trump has seemed to be one step ahead of everyone all along this adventure.  Did he all of the sudden become stupid?  His EO was poorly constructed and the DOJ presentation was terrible.  In the event of a terrorist event who looks bad.......not Trump.......

I find it interesting that there is always some distraction.....all while Trump is getting a lot completed.  Business deals, getting along with the Unions, His cabinet slowly being approved while the left looks foolish in their obstructionism......Building relationships with Britain, China and Japan and Israel.......a hope of better relations with Russia......and even Assad of Syria backing his assessment of terrorists entering the US as refugees.  

Perhaps he is really crazy like a Fox.......and of course the MSM is chasing those rabbits.........JMO

[MyLadiesDaddy]

5 minutes ago, coorslite21 said:

I find it interesting that there is always some distraction.....all while Trump is getting a lot completed.

Exactly my friend. This is something that is completely lost on just about everyone. I have come to have an extremely great amount of respect for President Trump. This man is scary playing games with everyone. He is living by the simplest of rules, let everyone think you're a fool, while you plan their demise. That is why he is constantly telling everyone that he is the greatest deal maker ever. By the time that everyone figures out what this man is it will be far too late. 

[divemaster5734]

1 hour ago, RV ME said:

Hey DM, I want in on that.  I recently read that use of profanity is a sign of higher intelligence and I am betting this contest will reveal several other MENSA DVer’s besides me

 

rofl... it's becoming an outright symposium..

No safe space, hot cocoa, or coloring books, just tequila, whisky, limes, and beer...   dang, am already looking forward to it..

[Indraman]

14 hours ago, Indraman said:

If Gorsuch is confirmed, and the SCOTUS stays the 9th Circus ruling (which would be next to impossible based upon the historical rulings of SCOTUS), then the only recourse left would be for the Trump ADMIN to go through Congress and pass more descriptive language and enumerate the specific boundaries given to the President. I guess the following SCOTUS ruling from the 50's doesn't mean anything to the current Lefties sitting on the 9th Circus:

[From RV ME] Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.

So Shabs, you asked me if a decision by the SCOTUS to stay the current decision by the 9th Circus would be corrupt, which I would interpret to be "political"? Corrupt would be more in align with a judge taking bribes to rule a certain way. Political decisions are the very reason Trump was elected...people are tired of the LEFT legislating through the Judicial branch of our Government, where no where in the Constitution is it granted these powers. Row vs Wade is a prime example of legislation from the bench, and in my mind should overturned. The argument that a woman has the right to choice of killing another human being based upon convenience holds no water in today's society, especially based upon the science and technology that has revealed a Fetus (the young while living in the womb) is a living human being. I am not willing to grant rights under the constitution for one human being outside the womb and not for one inside the womb. Isn't it funny that this whole argument by the LEFT on the immigration issue is that non US citizens should be granted rights under the Constitution, eventhough they are not US citizens and do not currently live within the boundaries of our country. And yet the LEFT can so easily dismiss the rights of an unborn baby in the womb of a mother as non existent. The minds of our LEFT have surely gone into la-la-land and if they continue to stay there, will only strengthen Trumps power. Game on!

Indy

 

A little more fodder for the discussion...Here is a Northwest University Law professor's take on this...It is a total smack down of 9th Circus...Enjoy:

https://youtu.be/M0zDwKupFEc

Indy

Edited February 11, 2017 by Indraman

[Markinsa]

 

Bill to Break Up the 9th Circuit Gains Steam in Congress

 

Nicknamed the “nutty ninth,” the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals is known as easily the most liberal court in the federal system. Now, one day after it ruled against Donald Trump’s temporary immigration freeze, it looks like it may be about to get a lot smaller.

According to Fox News, a bill to break up the 9th Circuit’s geographical purview was gaining some traction in Congress, with Arizona’s two Republican senators pushing legislation that would carve six states out of the San-Francisco-based court’s jurisdiction to create a new 12th Circuit.

The bill, which was introduced last month by Sens. Jeff Flake and John McCain, would put the states of Nevada, Washington, Idaho, Montana, Arizona and Alaska in the new court. In an interview with Fox on Wednesday, Flake said the legislation’s aim isn’t political, but instead aimed at addressing long backlogs in the court.

“It represents 20 percent of the population — and 40 percent of the land mass is in that jurisdiction. It’s just too big,” Flake said. “We have a bedrock principle of swift justice and if you live in Arizona or anywhere in the 9th Circuit, you just don’t have it.”

He said the average case in the 9th Circuit takes 15 months to be handed down. “It’s far too long,” he said.

Of course, it doesn’t hurt that the 9th Circuit stands so far outside of the judicial mainstream. In 2012, Fox News reported, the Supreme Court overturned 86 percent of the Ninth Circuit decisions that it reviewed.

Infamous decisions handed down by the “nutty ninth” include stating that the words “under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance was an unconstitutional breach of the Establishment Clause (Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow) and that the Second Amendment was not intended to allow private ownership of firearms (Silveira v. Lockyer). Both cases, as you may have surmised, were later overturned.

In its entirely predictable ruling against Trump’s executive order on Thursday, the court displayed the same kind of brilliant logic it has in the past. According to The Daily Wire’s Ben Shapiro, it ruled that states suffer “concrete and particularized injury” if illegal aliens aren’t able to attend college classes (that one definitely took some juridical gymnastics) and that they could look to motive as opposed to the text of the law in making their decision. Yes, the 9th Circuit is now involved in mind reading. Who knew?

“The problem is the judges in the 9th Circuit, particularly the liberal judges, don’t want to give up any of their jurisdiction,” Flake said.

And that’s why we have Congress.

[Markinsa]

Republicans push bill to split up ‘nutty 9th Circuit’

 

By Barnini Chakraborty

 Published February 09, 2017 

 FoxNews.com

As judges on the 9^th Circuit Court of Appeals weigh the legality of President Trump’s immigration executive order, a Republican push to split up the controversial court -- and shrink its clout -- is gaining steam on Capitol Hill. 

Republican Sens. Jeff Flake and John McCain of Arizona introduced legislation last month to carve six states out of the San Francisco-based court circuit and create a brand new 12th Circuit.

They argue that the 9^th is too big, too liberal and too slow resolving cases. If they succeed, only California, Oregon, Hawaii and two island districts would remain in the 9th's judicial fiefdom. 

Right now, Flake said, the circuit is far too sprawling. 

“It represents 20 percent of the population -- and 40 percent of the land mass is in that jurisdiction. It’s just too big,” Flake told Fox News on Wednesday. “We have a bedrock principle of swift justice and if you live in Arizona or anywhere in the 9^th Circuit, you just don’t have it.”

Flake says it typically takes the court 15 months to hand down a decision.

“It’s far too long,” he added. 

Conservatives have mocked the 9^th Circuit for years, often calling it the “Nutty 9^th” or the “9^th Circus,” in part because so many of its rulings have been overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court. 

The court has a reputation as one of the most liberal in the country, in large part because of its makeup. Eighteen of the court’s 25 active judges have been appointed by Democrats. Former President George W. Bush appointed six justices, while former President Barack Obama appointed seven.

Under Flake’s bill, the new circuit would cover Nevada, Washington, Idaho, Montana, Arizona and Alaska, leaving the 9^th with three Pacific states as well as the Northern Mariana Islands and Guam.

A separate House version introduced by Rep. Andy Biggs and four other Arizona Republicans would leave Washington state in the 9^th Circuit.

Congressional efforts to split the circuit go back to 1941.

“The problem is the judges in the 9^th Circuit, particularly the liberal judges, don’t want to give up any of their jurisdiction,” Flake said.   

Congress created the court in 1891. At the time, the area was sparsely inhabited – only four percent of the U.S. population lived in the area compared to today’s 20 percent.

In 1998, Congress appointed a commission to reexamine the federal appeals courts’ structure. The commission ultimately recommended against splitting the 9^th Circuit.

But carving up the large circuit isn’t out of the realm of possibility. In 1929, Congress split the 8th Circuit to accommodate a population boom and increased caseloads.

Democratic strategist Joe Lestingi pushed back on accusations the court leans left.

“We don’t complain about courts being too conservative,” he told Fox News. “The truth is… the liberal side of that court provides the conflict we need to settle our most basic disagreements.”

He added that the 9^th Circuit’s track record of rulings being overturned -- sometimes unanimously by the U.S. Supreme Court -- is all part of the judicial process.

“If the Supreme Court wasn’t going to overturn lower courts' decisions, then we don’t need a Supreme Court anymore,” Lestingi argued.   
 

[RV ME]

Shabs, here is the opinion of a Constitutional lawyer.  Would love to hear your opinion on his breakdown of the Constitutional crisis the 9^th has caused.

I believe we are living in a time that America has reached a tipping or boiling point because we have strayed too far from what the Founders envisioned and codified in the Constitution.  History has repeatedly proven that when liberals are thwarted in the legislation process their minions have no problem legislating unconstitutionally from the bench.

As for the article, I agree with the conclusion.  I would love to see Trump do a Reganesque address to the nation and explain that the Courts have acted unconstitutionally and as this case winds through the court system he will exorcise the executive powers granted by law and the Constitution to keep Americans safe, and I am instructing the State Dept to turn away any travelers from these 7 countries unless and until they can be truly and extremely vetted.  RV ME

 

February 10, 2017

A legal analysis of the Ninth Circuit's dangerous usurpation of presidential power

By Ed Straker

Federal district judge James Robart violated the Constitution in issuing a TRO (temporary restraining order) against President Trump's temporary entry ban for citizens of seven countries.  Now a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has affirmed that stay.

What we have here is a creeping constitutional coup.  As long as President Obama was in charge and had a massive open-door policy at our borders and at our airports, in violation of statutory law, the judiciary was content to be silent.  But when Donald Trump became president and tried to use the powers of the presidency to put some national security safeguards into place, the judiciary sprang into action.

The judiciary has usurped the executive branch's powers and has created a parallel constitution – one that bears no relation to the founding document of our nation.  The courts have now cited this parallel constitution to justify taking away the ultimate decision-making authority concerning national security from the presidency to rest in their hands.  The constitutional crisis and injury to our national security caused by this illegitimate decision cannot be overstated.

What follows is an analysis of this travesty and the damage done to our system of jurisprudence and national security.

1) The legal concept of standing has been eviscerated.  In order to sue, one must have "standing," essentially to show that one is an injured party.  The state of Washington, among others, sued claiming that its state-owned universities were harmed because a few students from the affected seven countries could not come to their campuses.  The Ninth Circuit (hereinafter "the Court") found that these grounds gave Washington standing to sue.

As of now, the concept of standing is now meaningless.  The idea behind standing was to limit frivolous lawsuits so only people directly injured could sue.  The Court's expansion of standing means that a state can now sue on behalf of anyone, for any reason.  This is important because if anyone can sue on behalf of anyone, the courts become immensely more powerful.  Remember that courts cannot get involved until someone sues.  With standing gone, anyone can sue, and the court can immediately then exercise its power, as was this court's intent in doing away with standing.

2) "Irreparable harm" has been turned upside-down.  One of the standards the Court used to adjudicate this case was to see if either party would suffer irreparable harm.  The Court found that the University of Washington would suffer irreparable harm if students from Somalia and Yemen were temporarily delayed from coming to the U.S.  The U.W. system has tens of thousands of students.  The number of students affected here would be a small handful.  The Court considers an action that would affect a tiny handful of students in a huge student body irreparable harm.

On the other hand, the Court does not think that the dangers of admitting unvetted foreign nationals who might be terrorists constitute irreparable harm.  The Court demanded that the Trump administration prove that there is a terrorist danger from these countries.  But the Trump administration is not obligated to prove the terror threat, because the Court has no jurisdiction in this area.  It would be as if the Court suddenly demanded that Trump get approval for his DHS cabinet pick from an appeals court and struck down Trump's choice because he didn't submit evidence showing that his DHS pick is suitable.  This is a mad, naked power-grab.

The Court opined:

When the Executive Order was in effect, the States contend that the travel prohibitions harmed the States' university employees and students, separated families, and stranded the States' residents abroad. These are substantial injuries and even irreparable harms.

Can you believe this?  To consider the inconveniencing of a handful of students as an irreparable harm and the national security of a nation as unimportant shows that this court is fully in wanton disregard of the law, not to mention common sense.

3) National security policy has been wrested from the presidency and placed in the hands of the judiciary.  National security is traditionally left to the presidency; indeed, the Court cited cases in support of this.

See, e.g. Cardenas v. United States , 826 F.3d 1164, 1169 (9th Cir. 2016) (recognizing that "the power to expel or exclude aliens [is] a fundamental sovereign attribute exercised by the Government's political departments largely immune from judicial control" see also Holder v.  Humanitarian Law Project , 561 U.S. 1, 33-34 (2010) (explaining that Courts should defer to the political branches with respect to national security and foreign relations).

 

But the Court says this deference is not absolute, and when judges feel they want to overrule the executive branch, they can.  They even cited cases for that proposition as well

see Zadvydas v. Davis , 533 U.S. 678, 695 (2001) (emphasizing that the power of the political branches over immigration "is subject to important constitutional limitations");

Chadha, 462 U.S. at 940-41 (rejecting the argument that Congress has "unreviewable authority over the regulation of aliens," and affirming that Courts can review "whether Congress has chosen a constitutionally  permissible means of implementing that power")

See, e.g. Boumediene, 553 U.S. 723 (striking down a federal statute purporting to deprive federal Courts of jurisdiction over habeas petitions filed by non-citizens being held as "enemy combatants" after being captured in Afghanistan or elsewhere and accused of authorizing, planning, committing, or aiding the terrorist attacks perpetrated on September 11, 2001)

These cases are not constitutionally correct.  The Constitution does not apply to foreign nationals.  The Constitution is an agreement among the American citizenry.  No one else.  It doesn't apply to the people of Iraq, or Somali nationals who come here, or Yemenis with an American visa.  By citing cases that were unconstitutionally decided, you can see how far back the judicial rot extends – the Courts have built precedent for a shadow constitution, which allows them to grab power from the executive.

4) The Due Process Clause has been expanded to add seven billion people.  The Court cites the Due Process clause, which states in part, "No person shall ... be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law."  The problem is that foreign nationals are not legal "persons" under our Constitution.  How could they be?  How could we ever legally go to war or take action against a foreign country or a foreign group without letting them have their day in court?  The implications are truly ridiculous.

The Court writes:

The procedural protections provided by the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause are not limited to citizens. Rather, they "appl[y] to all 'persons' within the United States, including aliens," regardless of "whether their  presence here is lawful, unlawful, temporary, or permanent.

How could that be true?  The Constitution applies to aliens?  And the Court doesn't even have the courage to state its ultimate conclusion: that Due Process extends not just to aliens in America, but even to aliens in other countries who want to come to America.  Because that's what they've extended it to.

5) The Court maliciously avoided a narrowly tailored legal remedy.  Even if the Court honestly believes its own argument, its relief should be narrowly tailored to the handful of students affected at the University of Washington.  Instead, it used this case as a wedge to assert its primacy over national security and to open the entire nation to unrestricted entry.

6) The Court disingenuously employed false religious protection claims.

The Court said:

The First Amendment prohibits any "law respecting an establishment of religion." The States' claims raise serious allegations and present significant constitutional questions.

 

Again, the Court has no jurisdiction here.  The people affected are not Americans.  The Trump administration can exclude Hindus, Muslims, Christians, women, red-haired people, anyone it wants to.  Of course, this is not a Muslim ban, but even to play into that argument presumes that the Court has the power to rule over this.  It doesn't.

7) False consideration of "public interest."  The Court says it has to consider "the public interest" in deciding.  No, it doesn't.  It has to consider only the Constitution.

Aspects of the public interest favor both sides, as evidenced by the massive attention this case has garnered at even the most preliminary stages. On the one hand, the public has a powerful interest in national security and in the ability of an elected president to enact policies. And on the other, the public also has an interest in free flow of travel, in avoiding separation of families, and in freedom from discrimination. We need not characterize the public interest more definitely than this; when considered alongside the hardships discussed above, these competing public interests do not justify a stay [of the TRO.]

So the Court weighed free entry to America for foreigners against national security for Americans.  How to decide?  The Court said, for now, that free travel for foreigners into America is definitely more in the public interest!

8) Conclusion: The false choices: Where do we go from here?  Some commentators will say to appeal this to the full Ninth Circuit (this was a three-judge panel).  Others will say to appeal this case to the Supreme Court.  Still others will say to redraft the legislation to better meet the Court's dictates and current mood swings.

These are all false choices.  It is like people coming into your home and telling you that you cannot redecorate it without their permission.  Submit a proper plan, and perhaps they will approve it.  The only way to win this game is not to play.

Yes, President Trump should appeal to the Supreme Court, but with a 4-4 split there (which will continue for months), his victory is far from assured.

More primarily, he should immediately disavow the Court's authority in this matter and order his officials to reinstate the ban.  Trump will be said to be provoking a constitutional crisis, but let us be clear: it is the courts that have provoked this constitutional crisis, and Trump's entry ban is a relatively mild one.  Remember, to secure the country, he is going go to have to do much more than this moderate executive order:

Let's say that Trump actually wants to have a permanent ban on refugees from Syria or Iraq, for security reasons. A Court could overturn it on the same grounds. Suppose Trump wants to stop all refugees coming to America for a year. A Court could actually force Trump to let 100,000 or more refugees in, if Trump lets them. A Court could stop Trump from doing enhanced vetting, claiming it discriminated against Muslims from ISIS infested countries. A Court also stop Trump's border wall, claiming it would have a negative effect on a snail or a worm.

That's why Trump can't give in on his relatively limited executive order. If he does, he will give the Courts a green light to keep America an open borders country.

If Trump does nothing, merely playing out the process, he may well lose his constitutional power to protect our borders.  And while we wait and watch matters go through the courts, every day, more and more terrorists could be coming into our country.  There is no time to wait.

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2017/02/a_legal_analysis_of_the_ninth_circuits_dangerous_usurpation_of_presidential_power.html

[RV ME]

34 minutes ago, Markinsa said:

 

Bill to Break Up the 9th Circuit Gains Steam in Congress

 

Judicial reform should not end with splitting up the district courts.  Judges that do not uphold the oath they swore to uphold the Constitution should face impeachment and be removed.  That is “check” to keep the “balance” the Founders wrote in the Constitution.  Unfortunately impeachment must start in Congress, and those polytics are more worried about getting re-elected than upholding the Constitution.

[MyLadiesDaddy]

1 hour ago, Markinsa said:

“It represents 20 percent of the population — and 40 percent of the land mass is in that jurisdiction. It’s just too big,” Flake said. “We have a bedrock principle of swift justice and if you live in Arizona or anywhere in the 9th Circuit, you just don’t have it.”

Ever since Woodrow Wilson's unholy reign of terror the U.S. has been suffering under the machiavellian machinations of the Communist Democrat party. It was not by chance that the 9th circus court was that powerful. What we're about to see is 100yrs of Democratic rule being dismantled before our eyes.  And that will explain why the Liberals and the LSM is going to be bat excrement crazy for at least the next 4yrs. People turn them off or you will find yourself going insane.   

42 minutes ago, RV ME said:

Judicial reform should not end with splitting up the district courts.  Judges that do not uphold the oath they swore to uphold the Constitution should face impeachment and be removed.  That is “check” to keep the “balance” the Founders wrote in the Constitution.  Unfortunately impeachment must start in Congress, and those polytics are more worried about getting re-elected than upholding the Constitution.

 

You are so right. But I fear that it's going to take a whole lot more from John McCain than just breaking up the 9th for him to receive any true reconciliation for his sins. I never really believed in,"The Movement", that Trump claimed and that was because I have never before seen someone use those tactics to get elected. Hindsight is 20/20, and I know now that it is not only a movement but something more akin to a genuine revolution.  And the one thing we can all discern  from our experiences with President Trump is that he most certainly knows what he has following him. And he knows it's power. That is why he repeatedly keeps stating that this is not about him. The RINOS in Washington have no clue what is coming their way. By 2018 the Democrats and their cohorts in the Republican party will be a thing of the past.  

[SgtFuryUSCZ]

Trump is making a good start by re-empowering Law Enforcement.

We HAVE to round up the regressive radicals putting on all these shows all over the country.

 

He needs to go after the kommie unions supporting them, as well as those money-men financing them... like bill gates,

gorged soros, mark suckerberg, et al.... 

 

Establishing a zero-tolerance policy for radicals is imperative and RIGHT NOW.

The longer the kommie globalists' little armies of violence get away this kind of behavior, the more empowered they become....

We've seen it go down in several other countries around the world and now it's happening here... it's a classic take-over move

by evil, no doubt about it.

 

Break up their kangaroo courts,

arrest their stooges,

cut their money flow,

break up their unions,

remove 'tenure' for the poisonous indoctrinators,

deport their fake voter base,

slam the Golden Gate shut behind 'em.

 

 

 

[divemaster5734]

The 9th District has been overdue for a reality check, and with luck, our spineless reps will find some courage hiding behind Trumps coattails.

I declared Trump would win almost a full year before he did.

In that same vein, as long as all conservatives hold fast, and refuse to heed the fake news blaring out from the MSM, the needed changes will be made that will pull the fangs from the fanatic left.

What we are seeing is only the tip of the iceberg.

It will be impossible to effect other judicial policy amendments until these illegal and unconstitutional jackals are removed.

Consider, what if, this was all along a very well calculated event, designed to weed out the traitors of America, and establish true Rule of Law, before the real house cleaning can begin?

What if Trump knew, before even releasing the EO, that he would be this persecuted for just doing his job?

DO you think he is ignorant of all the judicial overreach?

He talked long ago about being forced to bribe local, state, and government officials.

That overreach is exactly what has been preying on all Americans, with ever increasing intensity, until today, where you have "judges" openly convicting innocent people for no other reason than to receive a kickback from the institution they are sent to, aided by an overly ambitious prosecutor who only looks for a strong conviction record, regardless of actual guilt, abetted by incompetent public defenders who only seek to help out a coworker. For as long as all three are employed by the same boss, there can be no separation.

Until the Trump administration is confident the remaining court will uphold constitutional guidelines, it can't possibly begin to go after the heart of the matter, the corruption and self-interest so prevalent throughout the system.

 

Just like all those fake polls declaring clinton to win by a landslide, I implore you to ignore the dying words of the collectivists.

How could I know? Because with a few exceptions, every honest productive human with the ability to think for themselves has realized the deception from the left.

While there are still a few that are desperately clinging to their distorted world view for no other reason than their own fear of change, the left's own words and actions are proof of their insanity and delusion.

Trump is not stupid.

Once the incentive to lock up people unable to pay the illegal ransom demanded by our "justice" system is removed, then people of ALL color, and ALL economic standing will finally have a chance to receive equal treatment.

Once that discrimination is removed, gone also will be the hopelessness of being a victim  in the governments game of thrones.

Once The People have a reason to hope, you will see a dynamic change that hasn't occurred in America for over 200 years..  DM

[SgtFuryUSCZ]

4 minutes ago, divemaster5734 said:

The 9th District has been overdue for a reality check, and with luck, our spineless reps will find some courage hiding behind Trumps coattails.

I declared Trump would win almost a full year before he did.

In that same vein, as long as all conservatives hold fast, and refuse to heed the fake news blaring out from the MSM, the needed changes will be made that will pull the fangs from the fanatic left.

What we are seeing is only the tip of the iceberg.

It will be impossible to effect other judicial policy amendments until these illegal and unconstitutional jackals are removed.

Consider, what if, this was all along a very well calculated event, designed to weed out the traitors of America, and establish true Rule of Law, before the real house cleaning can begin?

What if Trump knew, before even releasing the EO, that he would be this persecuted for just doing his job?

DO you think he is ignorant of all the judicial overreach?

He talked long ago about being forced to bribe local, state, and government officials.

That overreach is exactly what has been preying on all Americans, with ever increasing intensity, until today, where you have "judges" openly convicting innocent people for no other reason than to receive a kickback from the institution they are sent to, aided by an overly ambitious prosecutor who only looks for a strong conviction record, regardless of actual guilt, abetted by incompetent public defenders who only seek to help out a coworker. For as long as all three are employed by the same boss, there can be no separation.

Until the Trump administration is confident the remaining court will uphold constitutional guidelines, it can't possibly begin to go after the heart of the matter, the corruption and self-interest so prevalent throughout the system.

 

Just like all those fake polls declaring clinton to win by a landslide, I implore you to ignore the dying words of the collectivists.

How could I know? Because with a few exceptions, every honest productive human with the ability to think for themselves has realized the deception from the left.

While there are still a few that are desperately clinging to their distorted world view for no other reason than their own fear of change, the left's own words and actions are proof of their insanity and delusion.

Trump is not stupid.

Once the incentive to lock up people unable to pay the illegal ransom demanded by our "justice" system is removed, then people of ALL color, and ALL economic standing will finally have a chance to receive equal treatment.

Once that discrimination is removed, gone also will be the hopelessness of being a victim  in the governments game of thrones.

Once The People have a reason to hope, you will see a dynamic change that hasn't occurred in America for over 200 years..  DM

RECIPIENT OF

THE 'OL SARGE'S GALS

POST OF THE DAY

AWARD

CONGRATULATIONS ON A BRILLIANT POST !