RSS
 

Archive for the ‘Judiciary’ Category

The facts about who is influencing our presidential election 

14 Oct

Source: A Government Is Seizing Control of Our Election Process, and It Is Not the Russians – Antiwar.com Blog

 
Comments Off on The facts about who is influencing our presidential election 

Posted in Corruption, Democrats, Donald Trump, FBI, Foreign policy, Hillary Clinton, Judiciary, Presidential campaign, State Department, Warfare state

 

Why is Debbie Blabbermouth-Schultz Not Charged with a Crime?

25 Jul

Where is the justice?  A two tier “justice” system in America. No wonder the natives are restless! 

Source: Why is Debbie Blabbermouth-Schultz Not Charged with a Crime?

 
Comments Off on Why is Debbie Blabbermouth-Schultz Not Charged with a Crime?

Posted in Corruption, Crime, Democrats, Hillary Clinton, Judiciary, Politicians, Politics, Presidential campaign

 

Supreme Court Justices are not political. Ha.

12 Jul

If Trump wins, she should resign from the Court. 

“Justices don’t weigh in on presidential elections for a reason.”

Source: In bashing Donald Trump, some say Ruth Bader Ginsburg just crossed a very important line – The Washington Post

 
Comments Off on Supreme Court Justices are not political. Ha.

Posted in Constitution, Donal Trump, Hillary Clinton, Individual rights, Judiciary, The Warfare State

 

Hillary in big trouble?

10 Jul

“Most voters disagree with FBI Director James Comey’s decision not to seek a criminal indictment of Hillary Clinton.”

Source: Most Disagree with Decision Not to Indict Clinton

 
Comments Off on Hillary in big trouble?

Posted in Corruption, FBI, Hillary Clinton, Judiciary, Politicians, Politics, Presidential campaign

 

Hillary did the American people a favor…

07 Jul

…according to retired finance professor Michael Rozeff

Source: Hillary’s e-mail flap: I’m glad

 
Comments Off on Hillary did the American people a favor…

Posted in Constitution, Corruption, FBI, Federal Government, Hillary Clinton, Judiciary, Politicians, Politics, Presidential campaign

 

The Department of Political Justice

07 Jul

Judge Napolitano lays out the case against Hillary.  

Source: The Department of Political Justice by Judge Andrew P. Napolitano | Creators Syndicate

 
Comments Off on The Department of Political Justice

Posted in Corruption, Crime, FBI, Hillary Clinton, Judiciary, Politicians, Politics

 

The FBI’s double standard

05 Jul

Whatever credibility the FBI has had as an objective crime fighting organization went out the window today.

 

“Nishimura caused the materials to be downloaded and stored on his personal, unclassified electronic devices and storage media. He carried such classified materials on his unauthorized media when he traveled off-base in Afghanistan and, ultimately, carried those materials back to the United States at the end of his deployment. The investigation did not reveal evidence that Nishimura intended to distribute classified information to unauthorized personnel.”

Source: Peak FBI Corruption? Meet Bryan Nishimura, Found Guilty For “Removal And Retention Of Classified Materials”

 
Comments Off on The FBI’s double standard

Posted in Corruption, Crime, FBI, Hillary Clinton, Judiciary, Politics

 

WOW! Former federal prosecutor blasts FBI Director Comey on CNBC

05 Jul

 
Comments Off on WOW! Former federal prosecutor blasts FBI Director Comey on CNBC

Posted in Constitution, Corruption, Crime, Federal Government, Hillary Clinton, Judiciary, Presidential campaign

 

Why Hillary got a pass from the FBI

05 Jul

“The FBI announced today that Hillary Clinton will not be indicted for any change — not even a misdemeanor charge — related to her use of unsecured personal servers for storage of classified government materials.”

Source: Why Hillary Clinton Wasn’t Indicted

 
Comments Off on Why Hillary got a pass from the FBI

Posted in Corruption, Crime, Federal Government, Hillary Clinton, Judiciary

 

If Hillary walks…

03 Jul

…any American who is investigated by the federal government or any level of government for alleged criminal behavior can invoke the “Hillary defense”, “I made a mistake and it is time to move on.”  A Hillary administration  would be the most lawless in our history.

“CNN Sources: Hillary Clinton Not Expected to Face Charges in Federal Email Probe”

Source: CNN Sources: Hillary Clinton Not Expected to Face Charges in Federal Email Probe – Breitbart

 
Comments Off on If Hillary walks…

Posted in Crime, Federal Government, Judiciary, Politicians, Politics, Presidential campaign

 

The last hurrah for the Clintons?

02 Jul

Were the Clinton’s set up?  Or are they just that arrogant?

“It’s common knowledge in law-enforcement circles that, while FBI staffers believe Hillary Clinton should face some charges over her handling of classified government information through her private…”

Source: Lynch may be forced to charge Hillary after Bill’s shady powwow

 
Comments Off on The last hurrah for the Clintons?

Posted in Crime, Democrats, Judiciary, Politics, Presidential campaign

 

Can Wikileaks Take Down Hillary Clinton? – NationofChange | Progressive Change Through Positive Action

21 Jun

According to a long time friend who was told by a former FBI agent the agency “has the goods on Hillary.”  We are now in the waiting game.  

Julien Assange believes that Clinton can’t be indicted regardless of the evidence.

Source: Can Wikileaks Take Down Hillary Clinton? – NationofChange | Progressive Change Through Positive Action

 
Comments Off on Can Wikileaks Take Down Hillary Clinton? – NationofChange | Progressive Change Through Positive Action

Posted in Constitution, Crime, Judiciary, Military-industrial complex, Warfare state

 

The right to self defense is going down the tubes

11 Jun

The following piece was posted on the NRA-ILA website.  Judges have a duty to protect the people’s constitutional rights.  Even if the Second Amendment does not exist the right to self defense is a fundamental human right.

Peruta Opinion Finds No Right to Carry Concealed Firearms

A full panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit today used shameful sophistry and sleight of hand to effectively deny millions of Californians their constitutional right to bear firearms in public for self-defense. The ruling came in the long-running case of Peruta v. San Diego, which challenged California’s discretionary issuance of concealed carry permits, the only option Californians have to legally exercise this right. Ignoring that fact, the court held that concealed carry of firearms in public is not protected by the Second Amendment and that discretionary permitting for it therefore does not offend that provision.

We have been reporting on the saga of the Peruta case for a number of years (including here, here, here, and here). The issue in the case is simple: Does the Second Amendment allow California officials to deny the state’s residents the only effective means they have of carrying a firearm in public for self-defense, absent a showing of an extraordinary need to do so? The answer to that question is simple – no – and it was answered correctly in an opinion by a three judge panel of the Ninth Circuit back in 2014.  The panel recognized that the question at the heart of the case was “whether a responsible, law-abiding citizen has a right under the Second Amendment to carry a firearm in public for self-defense.”

Nevertheless, after that decision was issued, a majority of the full Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals took it upon itself to order the case to be reheard. In reversing the panel’s decision, the full court deceptively recast the issue in the case as whether plaintiffs, who “wish to carry concealed firearms in public” but “do not satisfy the good cause requirements in their counties” nevertheless have a Second Amendment right to be issued concealed carry licenses.

The plaintiffs asserted because concealed carry licenses are the only means responsible, law-abiding Californians have to exercise their Second Amendment right to bear arms in California, they cannot be subject to issuance only on a showing of extraordinary need. It was the State of California, not the plaintiffs, that decided concealed carry would be the vehicle state residents had of protecting themselves from violent crime in public.

While a majority of the Ninth Circuit judges signed onto the decision to deny Californians their rights, three strongly-reasoned dissents, accounting for the opinions of four judges, called out the majority’s chicanery. The dissents correctly point out that it was the State, not the plaintiffs, who established the “concealed carry” permitting context of the case. The dissenting judges also would have explicitly held that responsible, law-abiding Americans certainly do have a right to “bear” arms in public for self-defense.  According to the dissent of Judge Conseulo M. Callahan (an appointee of President George W. Bush), the majority’s framing of the case was nothing more than “an elaborate straw man.”

While the majority opinion blithely asserts that people who believe California’s ban on open carry violates the Second Amendment have the option of challenging that ban, they ignore the fact that no provision of California law provides a means for law-abiding citizens to do so for self-defense. Thus, achieving proper standing to mount such a challenge would be difficult for anyone who does not commit a criminal violation of California’s open carry ban.

In the final analysis, the majority opinion does perform one very important public service: It provides the clearest possible example of why liberty-loving Americans need to go to the polls this November and vote for those candidates who will preserve their Second Amendment rights. The consequences of failing to do so could not be clearer.

“Once again the 9th Circuit showed how out of touch it is with mainstream Americans.  This decision will leave good people defenseless, as it completely ignores the fact that law-abiding Californians who reside in counties with hostile sheriffs will now have no means to carry a firearm outside the home for personal protection. This flawed ruling underscores the importance of the 2016 election. It is imperative that we elect a President who will appoint Supreme Court justices who respect the Second Amendment and law-abiding citizens’ right to self-defense,” Chris W. Cox, executive director, National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA).

 

 

 

 
Comments Off on The right to self defense is going down the tubes

Posted in Federal Government, Human rights, Judiciary, Second Amendment

 

One way to create affording housing

07 Jun

Today’s Record (Bergen County, NJ) features an article about the need to create affordable housing in the Garden State.  The long history of litigation is another example of judicial overreach–the courts ordering towns to have “affordable” housing goals.

There is one way to create affordable housing, it is called the free market.  Ryna McMaken spells it all out in this essay.

 
Comments Off on One way to create affording housing

Posted in Judiciary, Local government, New Jersey, State government