5. Obamacare constitutes the President's personal interest, his signature piece of legislation, the one that should establish his legacy. To ensure its passage, he nominated to the Supreme Court a dishonest person, Then-Judge Sotomayor, to shape the law of the land for the next 30 or so years during which she can still remain on the bench. But just as felons cannot serve as jurors, a judge who breaks the law shows hypocrisy and contempt for the law and cannot be expected to respect it enough to apply it fairly and impartially. Hence, he nominated her to the detriment of the people and judicial integrity. Such conduct warrants calls for his resignation or impeachment.
6. The issue here is not whether Obamacare should or should not have been adopted. Rather, it is that the President breached the trust of the American people and placed the advancement of his interest ahead of his duty to defend theirs, just as it was J. Sotomayor's duty to uphold the law by abiding by it. Nor is it partisan politics that determines whether the people can exercise their right, as the source of all political power, to demand that its public servants behave with integrity.
7. The Federal Judiciary-NSA case can provoke a scandal more outrageous to more people than the scandal arisen through Edward Snowden's revelations of NSA's abuse of secret surveillance requests rubberstamped by the federal judges of the secret FISA court. The scandal would be deeper and more extensive because the judges of the federal judiciary, a national jurisdiction, wield power that affects not only the right of privacy, as the NSA scandal mainly does, but also every other right as well as the property, liberty, and life of everybody in this country. The scandal would only be aggravated if it were exposed that the President has covered for wrongdoing judges to avoid their retaliation 17, i.e., their holding Obamacare and other actions of his unconstitutional, thus compounding the wrongdoing and allowing them to harm the people with impunity.
8. A plan of action can show how to proceed from exposing the unaccountability and riskless wrongdoing of the judges of the federal judiciary, the model for its state counterparts; to curbing them through legislated reform ( 158 6-8 ) that mandates non-discretionary, specific method & result changes. The plan will subsequently find application to state judges and their judiciaries.
9. The plan begins with presentations ( Lsch:9 ) of the available evidence ( jur:21 A-B ) of judges' unaccountability and consequent riskless wrongdoing. They will afford the opportunity to form out of the audiences a team of professionals ( 128 4 ) to investigate it further. So, the effort will be made to hold them at law, journalism, business, and IT schools as guest speaker events of classes, student societies, or the schools ( Lsch:1 ). Holding them at student job fairs will offer in addition the presence of recruiters and even top officers of companies that can have an interest in joining the investigation. Likewise, they can be held at partisan conferences and meetings ( ol:75 ). Winning the mid-term elections will give many politicians and their supporters a partisan interest in launching the investigation. Here applies the aphorism: "The enemy of my enemy is my friend."
Next Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
