The Weakness of Judge James L. Robart’s Position: How to beat that bow tie wearing loser into oblivion and protect Trump’s E.O.

As we look around to the villains who have caused so much destruction to the American way of life over the last few decades the mechanisms of tyranny have certainly showed themselves publicly after Donald Trump’s inauguration.  Many of us who voted for Trump suspected the depth of the situation, but I think we are all surprised at how radical and openly anti-American they truly have been—and the case of Judge James L. Robart is a perfect example.  As an appointed U.S. District Judge from the socialist utopia of Seattle, Washington he took great pride in thumbing his nose at the civilian appointment of Donald Trump to the Executive Branch stopping the Executive Order temporarily that aggressively investigates refugees from terrorist inspired countries to prevent their border transfer like a Trojan Horse into our domestic concerns.  And to read his reasoning as objectively as possible the only determination that can be made is that he’s simply a radical left-winged loon that has a sole function protecting the open border concerns of the globalist left-leaning insurgents who have targeted the United States as the last bastion of freedom. Two sources that talk about this issue are listed below to provide some backdrop along with some specific text to explain why the Department of Justice was blocked by an appeals court preserving the Judge’s attack on Trump’s Executive Order. Then I of course outline how this case can be won since the Department of Justice wavered in its oral arguments on February 3rd.  Since they can’t figure it out on their own I tell them how to win this case in favor of Donald Trump.  (Get with the program people, these losers are easy to beat)

Judge James L. Robart did not have to actually rule on the legality of President Donald Trump’s executive order barring people from seven countries from entering the United States.

In granting a temporary restraining order, the judge essentially had to decide that the plaintiffs (the states of Washington and Minnesota):

  1. were likely to succeed at a later date
  2. that people in those states could suffer irreparable harm if the ban continued
  3. that blocking the President’s order was in the public interest.

In other words, he decided there was more harm letting the ban continue than there was blocking it until the full case could be heard.

He questioned Department of Justice lawyer Michelle Bennett, who was representing the Trump administration, asking, “How many arrests have there been of foreign nationals from those seven countries since 9/11”?

The Sept. 11 attack was one of the rationales behind the executive order, according to the Trump administration.

“I don’t know the specific details of attacks or planned attacks,” said Bennett, who is from the DOJ’s Civil Division.

“The answer to that is none, as best I can tell,” said the judge.

“The rationale was not only 9/11,” Bennett said. “It was to protect the United States from the potential for terrorism.”

Congress gives the president wide latitude in foreign affairs, which includes granting visas.

“The court doesn’t get to look behind those determinations,” she added.

But the judge answered: “I’m also asked to look and determine if the executive order is rationally based. And rationally based, to some extent, means I have to find it grounded in fact instead of fiction.”

Temporary restraining orders generally last up to 14 days. They can be extended, but the idea is to hold a full hearing on an injunction instead. Of course, a higher court can overturn the restraining order in the meantime.

Robart has a history of saying what he thinks. He was nominated for the federal bench by President George W. Bush in 2003. He was confirmed unanimously in a 99-0 vote by the Senate in June 2004.

Before that, he was a lawyer in private practice in Seattle. He has worked with at-risk youth in that city and, before becoming a judge, Robart represented refugees from Southeast Asia.

Last year, Robart presided over a case alleging excessive force by Seattle police brought be the Obama administration’s Justice Department. During a hearing, he used FBI statistics to note that police use of deadly force in cities in the U.S. involved 41 percent of black people, despite them being only 20 percent of the population living in those cities.

Robart took a breath and said, “black lives matter.”

Essentially what all that means is that the swamp in Washington D.C. extends well beyond into every aspect of our legal system and has been corrupted there by many years of liberal instruction in our university system for which our law schools are grossly left-leaning.  So the first step is in forcing radical judges to reveal themselves as this Robart guy has, then taking action to minimize their assault against American interests.  People like this Judge Robart lunatic are like cat people who take in every stray animal on the street then wonder why they piss all over the house, and nobody wants to date them for the odor and narcosis of their bad decisions.  As well-meaning as Robart thinks he is, the ultimate meaning behind his actions is defiance toward national sovereignty with an emphasis on spreading the world’s problems to every crevice of society.  And if the first function of government is to protect the American people from threats foreign and domestic—which is what Trump has done with his Executive Order.  The actions of this judge are a hostile action taken against our Constitutional government.

As is clear from the provided text in the NPR report Judge Robart is a “black lives matters” supporter which is another extreme radical organization sponsored by communist insurgents designed to overthrow order in our cities where the minority population of only 20 percent do most of the damage involving crime, murder, and consumption of law enforcement resources.  So this Seattle judge has “change” in mind, not “order” while making a determination if Trump’s Executive Order is rooted in “fact” instead of “fiction” based on using 9/11 standards as the foundations for determining terrorist patterns of attack. The fact of the matter is that future terrorists will likely come from other places—such as the 7 scrutinized countries identified by Trump’s E.O. and not those from the past leaving strategic assessment to be based on incoming intelligence which Robart doesn’t have and could never have—so his scope of the facts are tainted negating him from even providing a judgment on the matter.

Not to tell Department of Justice lawyer Michelle Bennett how to do her job, but, seriously, Judge James L. Robart based his entire challenge on the foundations of fiction because only the Trump administration had the facts to make such determinations which created the language of the Executive Order mentioned.  Some radical loon from Seattle doesn’t get to decide national security so the argument had nothing to do with an executive order being “rationally based” as determined by the cast of Saturday Night Live for which the Judge is obviously a fan.  (He’s actually funnier)  He has simply overstepped his authority, the appeals process has shown that it is in lockstep with the radicalism of these circuit judges—making decisions on activism desires and not legal necessity.

If the Department of Justice would like me to argue the case for them I’d be happy to, and additionally would enjoy blasting the reputation of this fool Judge James L. Robart into oblivion in the process.  I’m sure Michelle can turn this situation around now that the shock of the arrogance of this ruling has been revealed and the chess moves by the political left have been witnessed-from the press conference to the way outlets like CNN ran with the story.  It is easy at this point to destroy the Robart case for his preservation of terrorist expansion from the war-torn regions of the world and onto our door steps because he’s working from a corrupted mind polluted with liberal values and talking points—like “black lives matters” rhetoric.  Such a person shouldn’t even be on any government payroll because he fails to do the first function of government—protecting the American citizens.  In order to do that you have to define America’s borders and begin from that basic foundation which leftists seek to erase allowing judges like Robart to act in such a way without detection of their true intentions.  But now that this issue has been exposed, President Trump can act accordingly in his future judicial appointments.  After all, we now know that James L. Robart was appointed by George W. Bush so over Trump’s years in office a lot of this radicalism can be undone with his future appointments.  Bush was a globalist and part of the mistakes of the past and Trump has been the answer.  Fixing these issues are part of draining the swamp—but as we can see—that process extends well beyond Washington D.C. into the target audience of the average Starbucks consumer—in Seattle, Washington where they are out of control under a socialist city council and a progressive civil war with the more rural residents of their state.  And we are just getting started.

It is important to understand that Trump’s Executive Order was not unjustified; it was just weakly protected by Michelle Bennett from the Department of Justice.  She obviously got jostled in her arguments by a bunch of radical lunatics.  If she’d like help, just call me.  I’d love to argue the beard off that fat face of a bow tie wearing bitch and disgrace him verbally to such an extent that he’d be haunted into the netherworld of the hereafter. The judge and the state did not base their opinion of the Executive Order based on the facts of the intelligence available to Donald J. Trump and that invalidates their criteria.  So get in there on Monday and give these idiots hell, because they deserve it—and then some.  Additionally, understand that you can never trust a person who wears a bow tie.  Like mustaches, bow ties indicate that something is wrong with the person wearing it—so you cannot trust their sanity. Remember that during the next oral argument.

Rich Hoffman


Sign up for Second Call Defense here:  Use my name to get added benefits.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.