If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my free Email alerts. Thanks for visiting!

ARE THEY AFRAID, LAZY, OBLIVIOUS OR COMPLICIT?

by Sharon Rondeau

The U.S. Supreme Court was established in 1789 by the Founders and writers of the U.S. Constitution

(Nov. 7, 2011) — The Post & Email has been covering corruption in the judiciary since its inception in August 2009 following the fraud involved in the 2008 presidential election.  Each court case filed to discover whether or not Obama is a “natural born Citizen” as required by Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution and therefore eligible to serve as president was arguably a demonstration of judicial activism in which previously-reasonable judges ignored overwhelming evidence of fraud and corruption, stating that the plaintiffs “did not have ‘standing‘” to question the eligibility of the man in the White House.

The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly abrogated its responsibility to take up this serious constitutional matter, and Congress will do nothing, even though Congress is responsible for protecting Americans’ constitutional rights.

It is the job of Congress to oversee the Judicial Branch, and there are both a Senate Judiciary Committee and House Judiciary Committee.  But what do these committees accomplish?

The cases of judicial corruption throughout the United States are myriad and diverse.  When citizens contact their state or federal legislator about judicial abuses, they are ignored, provided with excuses as to why nothing can be done about an unconstitutional judge, or are passed off to another staffer who provides no response.  Clerks of the court and their co-workers routinely lie to cover judicial malfeasance.  While members of Congress demand investigations of such matters as “college athletics,” regulating the internet, the nation’s judiciary spins further out of control.

The Post & Email has covered the cases of Walter Francis Fitzpatrick, III, who filed a criminal complaint against Barack Hussein Obama II and is currently in the Monroe County, TN jail following a false arrest and kangaroo trial in a court which convicts its victims.  Complaints have been filed with the Tennessee Attorney General, Robert E. Cooper, Jr., whose office will not even return a phone call; Governor Bill Haslam, who says he “can do nothing” about judicial corruption; and with the Tennessee Administrative Office of the Courts, which has referred complainants back to the non-acting attorney general.  It has been reported to us that there is no agency in the state of Tennessee claiming responsibility for overseeing judges, the courts, and court personnel who might be breaking the laws of the state.  On Friday, November 4, 2011, The Post & Email was informed that the Tennessee Supreme Court has failed to act on a lawful habeas corpus petition for Fitzpatrick and that federal charges of racketeering are now pending against the judiciary of that state.

Local state legislators are aware of the corruption of the Tennessee judiciary but refuse to act, instead becoming part of the problem.  Several weeks ago, The Post & Email contacted the offices of several Tennessee legislators and did not receive one response, even from Stacey Campfield, who has openly challenged Obama’s eligibility by becoming a plaintiff in one of Atty. Orly Taitz’s lawsuits.

Both at the state and federal levels, it is the House of Representatives which is responsible for overseeing the judiciary.  If members refuse to do so, why should they be re-elected?  Why shouldn’t another more qualified candidate willing to uphold his oath to the state and U.S. Constitution take office instead?

Judicial corruption is not new, and a few courageous Americans have been attempting to expose it.

If the FBI can launch a program in Georgia to investigate judges and legislators, why can’t it be done across the country?  Why can’t the FBI in Hawaii investigate Judge Rhonda Nishimura, who apparently broke a state law along with the state’s Deputy Attorney General, Jill T. Nagamine?  If the Hawaii legislature will not oversee Hawaii’s courts, who will?

In Tennessee, it is the responsibility of state Rep. Jimmy Matlock to draw up a bill of impeachment for Judge Carroll L. Ross, Judge Amy Armstrong Reedy, and Judge Donald Paul Harris arising from their corrupt practices while on the bench in Monroe County.  Why has he not done so?  Is there another candidate who would be willing to protect the rights of his constituents by taking action against the criminal judges?

Endemic corruption is reported within the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and other appeals courts throughout the U.S.

Federal judges are not exempt.  Widespread corruption has been exposed, including the case of Jeffrey Baron, a Texas man not accused of any crime, but placed by federal Judge Royal Furgeson under house arrest in concert with a cabal of corrupt, criminal Dallas-area attorneys.  Recently The Post & Email contacted Mr. Baron’s state representative, senator, U.S. Congressman, and a contender running against the congressman about Baron’s case, and the response was negligible.  The state representative made no response; the state senator referred our complaint to a “case worker” from whom we have not heard; and U.S. Congressman Kenny Marchant‘s office passed us off to a “media contact” who never returned our call. A contender for Marchant’s seat, Grant Stinchfield, returned our call and to date has been responsive about Baron’s unconstitutional house arrest.

Federal judges have been accused of obstruction of justice and of corruption which “affects the very moral fabric and value system of our Nation.”  In light of its refusal to evaluate whether or not Barack Hussein Obama II is eligible to hold the office of President of the United States, instead making the excuse that they’re “avoiding” the issue, corruption and political ideology appears to have permeated the U.S. Supreme Court as well.  The court does not appear to be upholding the U.S. Constitution as members are sworn to do.

One writer states that “judges “dispense” our rights at their whim and pleasure with total impunity.”  While complaints can be filed against federal judges, reports indicate that very few of those complaints are acted upon.  Similar research reveals that complaints against federal-level judges undergo “systematic dismissal.”  Some U.S. Supreme Court justices support “originalism,” or a literal interpretation of the U.S. Constitution, while others believe in a “living constitution.”

James Madison was elected the fourth U.S. president after having served as Thomas Jefferson's Secretary of State

Founding Father James Madison had warned against the judiciary becoming too powerful.  He maintained that because of the “constitutional compact” which had been put in place by the states, state governments should intercede in the event of the federal government overstepping its constitutional boundaries.  Madison called the judiciary a “last resort” in deciding a dispute “in relation to the authorities of the other departments of the government.”

The case of Marbury v. Madison established the process of “judicial review” by the nation’s courts, but who reviews the courts?  Where are the checks and balances when it comes to the judiciary?  Why are our judges out of control?  Is federalism being practiced, or can judges do whatever they please with people’s lives?

Thomas Jefferson had warned of judicial tyranny developing from the centralization of power in Washington, DC, away from the states.

Why are innocent people under house arrest or in jails across the country?

Tuesday, November 8, is Election Day.  How many judges who are in violation of their oath to uphold the U.S. Constitution could be unelected?

Could citizens gather petitions in their neighborhoods and call for the impeachment of such judges?  Could they call for the impeachment of U.S. and state representatives who refuse to provide oversight of the judiciary?

Are our courts controlled by the people they are intended to serve or by government authorities working against the people?  Why are members of the pubic “barred” from attending or speaking at a public meeting?

Is it not also the job of a sovereign electorate to police the judges?  Can judicial activism be halted?

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.