1. The Obama-Sotomayor case and the Follow the money! investigation
What did the President ( jur:77 5 ), Chief Justice Roberts, and other justices and judges [ 196 ] know[ 23b ] about Justice Sotomayor's concealment of assets ( jur:65 1 )--suspected by The New York Times, The Washington Post, and Politico[ 107a ]--and consequent tax evasion and when ( jur:75 d ) did they know it? (For an estimate of J. Sotomayor's concealed assets, see [ 107c ].)
2. The Federal Judiciary-NSA case and
the Follow it wirelessly! investigation
To what extent do federal judges abuse their vast computer network and expertise--which handle hundreds of millions of case files ( Lsch:11 9b.ii )--either alone or with the quid pro quo assistance of the NSA--whose requests for secret surveillance orders are rubberstamped [ 7 ] by the federal judges of the secret court established under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA)--to conceal assets--a crime [ 10 ] under U.S. law, unlike surveillance--by electronically transferring them to secret inland and offshore( ol:1 ) accounts to launder money of its illegal origin and bring it back as legitimate assets, and to protect wrongdoing judges by interfering with the communications--also a crime ( ol:20 1112 )--of complainants( ol:19 D )?
3. The findings of these investigations can show that justices and judges have failed to "avoid even the appearance of impropriety" [ 123a ] and give rise to calls for them to be impeached or to resign, as J. Abe Fortas had to on May 14, 1969 [ 186 ]. They acted either as principals by doing wrong or as accessories by tolerating ( 88 a-d ) it. In any event, they were remiss in their individual and collective duty to safeguard judicial integrity; and disregarded in their own personal or judicial 'wrongdoing family' interest the key principle of our democracy: Nobody Is Above The Law.
4. The President too will have to fight off calls for his resignation or impeachment. In addition, he will face the demand of the media and an outraged ( 83 2-3 ) NATIONAL public that he release the secret FBI vetting report on J. Sotomayor, his first nominee to the Supreme Court. It can show whether he was informed also officially by it that she was engaging in the crime [ 10 ] of concealing assets. Whether he learned through the FBI report or the articles in The New York Times, The Washington Post, Politico that she was suspected of concealing assets [ 107a ], he covered it up and lied to the American public by vouching for her honesty. He had a personal interest in doing so: To cater to those petitioning for another woman and the first Latina for the Supreme Court and from whom he expected in exchange support for the passage of Obamacare.
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).
