by Joseph DeMaio, ©2023
(Aug. 29, 2023) — Several weeks ago, your humble servant made this offering. It was posited in support of the fact that U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan – appointed by the Second Usurper in Chief (the “SUC”), Barack Hussein Obama, Jr. – was hopelessly, not to mention indisputably, compromised and conflicted from presiding over the upcoming kangaroo cou…, sorry…, Star Chamb…, sorry…, Volksgerichtshof proceeding involving Donald Trump.
Specifically, your servant included various provisions from the official “Code of Judicial Conduct” applicable – purportedly – in the District of Columbia to all judges serving on the bench in that district. Recall that this is the same code of judicial conduct that supposedly applied to a guy going by the alias of “Merrick Garland” before he was anointed by Brandon as the nation’s attorney general (title in lower case intentional). Your servant’s prior offering detailed the numerous ethical rules which Chutkan was violating.., and seemingly proudly.
President Trump has indicated that his lawyers would be filing a recusal motion (as well as a motion for a change of venue to a place other than the District of Columbia), but the court docket does not yet disclose that such a motion has been filed. In addition to such a motion, someone in D.C. with “standing” might consider filing a bar complaint against Chutkan objecting to her refusal to recuse. Moreover, D.C. judges are supposed to “police themselves” instead of “skating” on their ethical transgressions until someone objects. Fat chance.
Yesterday, Judge Chutkan, denying 45’s request that the trial be delayed to beyond the November 2024 general election, ordered that the trial would begin on March 4, 2024…, one day before “Super Tuesday,” when voters will get their first major chance to voice their preferences for president. Tell me again that Chutkan’s trial-setting date is not direct election interference masquerading – thinly – as “equal justice under law.”
The independent and super-unbiased website, Politico.com, has reported that “Chutkan has shown no indication that she intends to recuse, nor is there any known conflict that would typically require it…,” (Emphasis added) adding that “she has not opined about his innocence or guilt of any crimes associated with the charges he now faces. It’s unclear what other bases Trump may cite to call for her recusal.” (Emphasis added)
Really? Seriously? This statement gives stunning new meaning to the term “objective journalism.”
When Chutkan was sentencing a “January 6” defendant back in 2021, she is quoted in the December 17, 2021 sentencing transcript regarding one Robert Palmer: “He [i.e., President Trump] did not go to the United States Capitol out of any love for our country. … He went for one man.” (Emphasis added) The “one man” Chutkan was referencing was not Mike Pence.
Unless you are someone “recovering” from a serious drug addiction – such as Brandon’s crackhead “chip-off-the-old-block” son – her slanderous statement cannot be read as anything other than a biased, judicially-unhinged and gratuitous personal attack on Trump…, a matter that could have been seen clearly by even Stevie Wonder or Ray Charles…, but not, of course, Politico.com or the esteemed jurist now presiding over the trial.
Recall as well that her slander – committed as a sitting judge bound by the ethical rules governing the conduct of all D.C. District Court Judges – targeted the person who was, on Jan. 6, 2021, still the President of the United States and the person now appearing as a criminal defendant before her. Who says the Volksgerichtshof died with the Third Reich?
Judge Tanya Chutkan continues refusing to recuse herself from presiding over her upcoming kangaroo court exercise. The D.C. Code of Judicial Conduct mandates that judges not only avoid conflicts of interest such as she has precipitated, it also requires judges to avoid even the appearance of improprieties. Chutkan seems more interested in inviting both the appearances as well as the realities of ethical improprieties…, as long as the goal of “getting Trump” is pursued.
By analogy, Chutkan has shown no interest in observing the rules any more than Merrick Garland has shown interest in adhering to the Department of Justice rule that the special counsel to “investigate” Brandon’s “recovering” crackhead relative should be selected from someone outside the government. Garland’s selection of David Weiss is beyond outrageous: if one expects an objective and fair investigation, it borders on lunacy.
These people make a mockery of the phrase “Equal Justice Under Law” chiseled into the marble above the entrance to the U.S. Supreme Court. However, this is not altogether surprising though, because they are Democrats…, and the only principle to which they pay homage is: expediency. Machiavelli would be extremely proud. The Democrats – top to bottom, rich to poor, judge to jury foreman – continue to confirm that they have forfeited any claim of ability, right or character to govern a free people in a constitutional republic. Boot them out of office. Now.
And if they don’t like your servant’s words and wish to marginalize, trivialize or censor them or even make him surrender his computer and P&E-connected keyboard, your servant – a big 2nd Amendment proponent as well – responds: molon labe.
Great article! Unfortunately, the Bar Associations are run by the same people that appoint the judges, FBI directors, Atty Generals, CIA war instigatiors. We need a president that will release all of these materials. It might never happen. Even the documents on JFK’s assassination have not been fully released.