Every *judge* who issues unconstitutional rulings should be removed from the bench and prosecuted. They aren't anyone SPECIAL - the wearing of a black dress does not make you above others. Nor does sitting on a bench at a higher elevation from the others in the room make you ABOVE THE LAW!!!! The LAW is the LAW and there are NO EXCEPTIONS due to some political position one holds. Jackie
The only way one could possibly bring a Fed judge up on charges would be for the highest elected office of the county, in this case Spokane Sheriff Ozzie D. Knezovich to arrest her. What are the chances? If it was done one time, and publicized, we'd start to see some real change in the rulings from the bench.
Eliminate prosecutorial discretion (restoring equal rights on the due process front) and stripping qualified immunity (this eliminating title of nobility) SOLVES the roadblock that exists between this criminal code and it's enforcement upon "officials".
Both criminal code AND civil code exists on this point - but it is rendered moot when those it SPECIFICALLY TARGETS -LEO at all levels- are made immune by these contrived tools.
Just like the Second Amendment itself, words on parchment are just words on parchment unless people stand up and enforce them.
Why weren't those folks arrested the second go round? Why is Anthony charged only as he is (which will end up being dropped entirely I'm bettin)? BECAUSE then he and others clear the STANDING HURDLE and can bring both this AND the civil counterpart as DEFENSES. And that right there is HOW those contrived tools are dismantled.
The JBTs only other choice is to stand down the intimidation attempts - or iow, leave people alone to exercise their rights in peace.
The law is actually on our side folks - whether FUDDS want too see that is another story.
I still take issue with one point though. We should agree to comply with JUST law-like what is pointed out here. On the fine hairsplitting point, we will comply but we will not concede. We hold the constitutional line - and will not back up even one more inch.
The State of Washington requires many of their elected officials, including County Sheriffs, to swear an oath of office. In that oath they swear to protect the Constitutions of the United States of America and of the State of Washington. In addition, quoting from the Spokane County Sheriff's Department's policy manual:
SHERIFF'S PREFACE The Spokane County Sheriff's Office is an organization whose very existence is justified solely on the basis of service to the community. Although Sheriff's Office policies provide employees a working pattern, their official activity must not be confined to the limited orbit described by them. Actually, dealing with criminals is a minor part of our overall responsibility. A greater percentage of time and energy is expended on non-criminal functions and in dealing with the law abiding citizens of the community. We should consider it our duty and privilege, not only to protect citizens from criminals, but also to protect and defend the rights guaranteed under our structure of government. It may be said that matters of civil law are not a basic police responsibility and within reasonable limits, we should avoid becoming entangled in them. However, many situations can best be served only when we assist in such matters. Our broad philosophy must embrace a whole-hearted determination to protect and support individual rights while at all times providing for the security of persons and property in the community. In meeting this objective, it is our duty to operate as a public service organization.
Well, Sheriff? The civil rights of one of your citizens has been violated by a federal judge. It's time to fish or cut bait!
9 comments:
Every *judge* who issues unconstitutional rulings should be removed from the bench and prosecuted. They aren't anyone SPECIAL - the wearing of a black dress does not make you above others. Nor does sitting on a bench at a higher elevation from the others in the room make you ABOVE THE LAW!!!! The LAW is the LAW and there are NO EXCEPTIONS due to some political position one holds.
Jackie
Could she be charged, yes. Will she be charged, no. She's one of the ruling classes and as such is above us peasants.
The judge should be charged. I know where some rope is just in case.
Start a write in campaign to your elected officials in Washington to start impeachment. She can be and should be removed and charged.
My letters go out today.
This judge will be arrested shortly after Eric Holder is impeached.
I'd advise you not to hold your breath while waiting.
Pickets outside of where she lives can do wonders too!
The only way one could possibly bring a Fed judge up on charges would be for the highest elected office of the county, in this case Spokane Sheriff Ozzie D. Knezovich to arrest her. What are the chances? If it was done one time, and publicized, we'd start to see some real change in the rulings from the bench.
HinMO
Eliminate prosecutorial discretion (restoring equal rights on the due process front) and stripping qualified immunity (this eliminating title of nobility) SOLVES the roadblock that exists between this criminal code and it's enforcement upon "officials".
Both criminal code AND civil code exists on this point - but it is rendered moot when those it SPECIFICALLY TARGETS -LEO at all levels- are made immune by these contrived tools.
Just like the Second Amendment itself, words on parchment are just words on parchment unless people stand up and enforce them.
Why weren't those folks arrested the second go round? Why is Anthony charged only as he is (which will end up being dropped entirely I'm bettin)? BECAUSE then he and others clear the STANDING HURDLE and can bring both this AND the civil counterpart as DEFENSES. And that right there is HOW those contrived tools are dismantled.
The JBTs only other choice is to stand down the intimidation attempts - or iow, leave people alone to exercise their rights in peace.
The law is actually on our side folks - whether FUDDS want too see that is another story.
I still take issue with one point though. We should agree to comply with JUST law-like what is pointed out here. On the fine hairsplitting point, we will comply but we will not concede. We hold the constitutional line - and will not back up even one more inch.
The State of Washington requires many of their elected officials, including County Sheriffs, to swear an oath of office. In that oath they swear to protect the Constitutions of the United States of America and of the State of Washington. In addition, quoting from the Spokane County Sheriff's Department's policy manual:
SHERIFF'S PREFACE
The Spokane County Sheriff's Office is an organization whose very existence is justified solely
on the basis of service to the community. Although Sheriff's Office policies provide employees a
working pattern, their official activity must not be confined to the limited orbit described by them.
Actually, dealing with criminals is a minor part of our overall responsibility. A greater percentage of
time and energy is expended on non-criminal functions and in dealing with the law abiding citizens
of the community. We should consider it our duty and privilege, not only to protect citizens from
criminals, but also to protect and defend the rights guaranteed under our structure of government.
It may be said that matters of civil law are not a basic police responsibility and within reasonable
limits, we should avoid becoming entangled in them. However, many situations can best be
served only when we assist in such matters. Our broad philosophy must embrace a whole-hearted
determination to protect and support individual rights while at all times providing for the security
of persons and property in the community. In meeting this objective, it is our duty to operate as
a public service organization.
Well, Sheriff? The civil rights of one of your citizens has been violated by a federal judge. It's time to fish or cut bait!
Post a Comment