I've come to the not-so-un-obvious conclusion that we, as a nation, are all concerned with the wrong terrorists. It's not ISIS, or ISIL or radical Islam in general that is the preeminent threat to our freedom and security - it's judges, and attorneys who aspire to be liked by judges.
How many people really understand that you can't do anything to a judge (legally) no matter what they do to you or your family? Until you've seen it, lived it, fought it and lost your kids in it, most Americans cannot wrap their heads around the very simple fact that any judge anywhere can take everything from you - your job, your home, your life - even your kids, and do it maliciously and without any regard for the law, and you have absolutely no recourse. It's called judicial immunity. Look it up. Stump v. Sparkman, 435 U.S. 349 (1978).
It's our fault, you know. Well, not mine really. I've seen the little beasties behind the curtain; the sociopaths wearing the robes, the terrorists in plain sight. I've seen it and read about it, and still get desperate calls about it every day. I discarded my veil sometime ago.
But there are plenty enough of you out there who still fall for it. Good people; hard -working people; law-abiding people, who look up to judges and hang on every word they say; who feel honored if you can call a judge "friend;" get tongue tied and giddy if one deems to notice you, and believe every word they say because they said it. You'll kick some 1st Amendment exercising flag burner's ass and feel all proud of yourself, but not feel one iota of shame for standing before a judge, hat in hand, asking nicely for your rights.
And I'm going to be really harsh here but, it is in no way even remotely American to be deferential to power. Respectful, yes - but obedient? Since when is obedience, particularly blind, deaf and dumb obedience, a sign of respect? Because it's not. It's a sign of submission, and last time I checked, our national anthem doesn't end on the refrain, "home of the meek and land of the obedient."
And I'm going to be really harsh here but, it is in no way even remotely American to be deferential to power. Respectful, yes - but obedient? Since when is obedience, particularly blind, deaf and dumb obedience, a sign of respect? Because it's not. It's a sign of submission, and last time I checked, our national anthem doesn't end on the refrain, "home of the meek and land of the obedient."
But maybe it should. Because every day, good people; hard-working people; law-abiding people step into court and, like lambs to the slaughter, meek and obedient, lay their heads on the chopping block, always believing that the fine person wearing that impressive black robe will not drop that hatchet on their neck because they're a good person; a good parent; they're hard-working, law abiding and, don't forget, a fierce defender of a piece of fabric with stars and stripes. Just don't ask any of them to defend anyone's rights, much less their own, without getting permission first.
I can't figure out who I'm more disgusted with: the mechanical, uninspired drones who sacrificed their integrity and dignity so they can keep a piece of paper that says they're an attorney, and maybe one day a judge ... or at least a judge's pet ... or the rest of you, who can't wrap your head around the fact that judges are just average people, with a lot of power, who can do whatever they want with it, and there is absolutely no one left to rein them in because you, the people can't be bothered to stand up and be the Americans who are actually worthy of the great country the Founders entrusted you with.
This opinion by the Louisiana Supreme Court is based on pure fiction and is so bloated with hypocrisy and self-serving reasoning that it should smell like old road-kill and make about as much sense as sweaters in July. In order to justify disbarring me, they had to ignore, distort and just make up the "facts." It's not hard to check the facts - they're all in the record - but it does require a desire to know the facts, which are inconvenient in my case if the whole objective is to merely disbar me.
What makes it so easy for them is that these judges know that they can say whatever they want - they could say I was responsible for Jimmy Hoffa's death and disappearance; I was Charles Manson in disguise; Hitler back from the dead; born a poor black child in rural Mississippi. It doesn't matter how ridiculous or absurd, they know that once they declare it, all you robe worshipers are just going to say, "There she goes, that white lady that was born a poor black child ... " And in those rare instances when someone does question them - or accuse them of admitting bias - Oh my! - so what? Even if they're caught in their own lies, they'd have to punish themselves because no one else can do it. And that will be when you'll need that sweater in July - at least by the current Court in Louisiana.
They took my license - big deal. I'm still standing, taller and prouder than ever. They took my license, but they didn't get my integrity and I'd close that deal every day, twice a day.
I can't figure out who I'm more disgusted with: the mechanical, uninspired drones who sacrificed their integrity and dignity so they can keep a piece of paper that says they're an attorney, and maybe one day a judge ... or at least a judge's pet ... or the rest of you, who can't wrap your head around the fact that judges are just average people, with a lot of power, who can do whatever they want with it, and there is absolutely no one left to rein them in because you, the people can't be bothered to stand up and be the Americans who are actually worthy of the great country the Founders entrusted you with.
This opinion by the Louisiana Supreme Court is based on pure fiction and is so bloated with hypocrisy and self-serving reasoning that it should smell like old road-kill and make about as much sense as sweaters in July. In order to justify disbarring me, they had to ignore, distort and just make up the "facts." It's not hard to check the facts - they're all in the record - but it does require a desire to know the facts, which are inconvenient in my case if the whole objective is to merely disbar me.
What makes it so easy for them is that these judges know that they can say whatever they want - they could say I was responsible for Jimmy Hoffa's death and disappearance; I was Charles Manson in disguise; Hitler back from the dead; born a poor black child in rural Mississippi. It doesn't matter how ridiculous or absurd, they know that once they declare it, all you robe worshipers are just going to say, "There she goes, that white lady that was born a poor black child ... " And in those rare instances when someone does question them - or accuse them of admitting bias - Oh my! - so what? Even if they're caught in their own lies, they'd have to punish themselves because no one else can do it. And that will be when you'll need that sweater in July - at least by the current Court in Louisiana.
They took my license - big deal. I'm still standing, taller and prouder than ever. They took my license, but they didn't get my integrity and I'd close that deal every day, twice a day.
Refusal to acknowledge facts is a prolific problem throughout the United States. Thank you for helping raise awareness of the troubles that plague our legal system.
ReplyDeleteThank you, Gina. Refusal to acknowledge facts, I''m afraid, is the least of it.
DeleteI have seen the beast beyond the curtain in nj family court... I can appreciate the hell you went through via retaliation. Parents in nj are organizing and purchased a billboard to confront the issues of court reform... but we realized long ago we have no parental rights under the current regime of federal abstention doctrines and local court cover-ups.
ReplyDeleteWe support your whistle blowing.
You can read more about our efforts at:
Http://www.njcourtcorruption.com
&
Http://www.fclu.org