I have a lot of experience with judges. I’ve known them very personally, and I’ve been in front of them…………a lot. I know a lot of lawyers too and I have watched over the last 25 years or so the severe degradation of the legal professions due to the declining intellect of those who would seek such occupations. But never have I heard such sheer stupidity reflecting the destruction of the American intellect to such an extent as I did in listening to Judge Friedland, Judge Clifton and Judge Canby of the Ninth Circuit of Appeals as they considered solicitor general Noah Purcell’s argument that President Trump’s Executive Order calling for extreme vetting from seven countries seething with terrorist plots was justified. After listing to the following oral debates, if I were President Trump I’d simply write another executive order that goes far beyond this current one and keep these guys busy in contemplation for the next year to simply wipe them out-of-the-way. Because these guys weren’t interested in the merit of the Executive Order or the rights of the president—they were simply using case-law as a means to rewrite the intent of the Constitution which grants a president of the United States the privilege of protecting our borders from hostilities interpreted by him.
Being a judge and even an attorney of the legal profession—the way that John Adams practiced it, was a noble profession which required ceaseless reading and a yearning for the blindness of justice from the philosophic position of high ethics and personal nobility—when a person decided to become a judge, or an attorney, they were dedicating themselves toward the intelligent pursuit of scholarship for life. The best of them would stay up all night reading briefs and case-law always yearning to understand a foundation argument to solidify a baseline philosophy of justice as understood by the architecture of a civilization’s common understandings. That is not the quality of any of the minds arguing the immigration executive order from Donald Trump. Not a single person on that call was what I’d consider an intelligent person which perfectly illustrates the deplorable condition of our current legal system.
Those participants were either activist judges seeking to make their mark in history by defying a president they politically disagreed with or they were just incompetent for a job of this magnitude and had become soft over time intellectually because they had spent their careers essentially unchallenged. It is quite obvious that these judges around the country are planning to be activists that reflect the political left and see themselves not as stalwarts of justice, but as soldiers for the Ideas of Woodstock which emerged in 1969 upon a muddy field of degradation and anti-Americanism. These are not the type of people who can sustain a republic such as what we are in the United States.
Those in our legal professions need to be the best and brightest of our young people. They need to love the idea of justice and the role of articulated philosophy tested against other bright minds in pursuit of the purity of deductive thinking—or otherwise the Socratic principle of oratory discrimination so that the stupid are slapped away from the gates of judgment and only the best and brightest among us write the laws for which the philosophy of our nation grows. The members of the Ninth Circuit of Appeals in San Francisco on this highly contested case are not those types of people. They are terrestrial slugs meddling among the animal desires of mankind seething with an artificial compassion rooted in liberal activism without the merit of sustained thought to challenge their premise. They just assume by default that their method of thinking is the blind eyes of justice—only because they have closed their eyes not to the facts, but the illusion of sentiment.
If I were Trump and I heard the condition of the current Department of Justice attorneys available to argue this case since he has not yet had time to reform that corrupted arm of the law—destroyed literally by Eric Holder and Loretta Lynch recently—I’d write several executive orders that essentially do much the same thing and I’d overload these courts with mindless debate for years crushing their minds with their own mundane yearning for starlit success and a gravestone that indicates they fought against Trump. Because that’s all they really want to do—is defy Trump. They don’t care about the intelligence reports available to Trump that they don’t have access to. They don’t care about the covert operations that are going on in Yemen, Libya and Iraq as I write this, that might spark retaliation against our domestic interests. They only want to be on the record in defying the president of the United States so that the judiciary can make their claim at running the country and setting the stage for a future battle in the Supreme Court over Roe v. Wade. If they win this fight—they think—then Trump’s appointees may have second thoughts of overturning that unconstitutional ruling which was allowed by these same type of activist judges to interpret the facts to suit their liberal sentiment painted with a modern brush against the tapestry of stupidity.
What these judges really fear is work, so give them so much to discuss at such a pace that they don’t have the man-hours to possibly ever do it all, and crush them with their own mediocrity. That’s what I would do if I were Trump. I wouldn’t wait for these idiots to rule in your favor or even to challenge them in the Supreme Court. I’d just overload their plate until they choke on their own inefficiencies. Write an executive order that calls for extreme vetting for all countries so that they can’t proclaim that the issue is one of religion. And let people complain to the courts that they’ve been inconvenienced by a radical court system that forced the issue for the security of the nation. We’ve never said that President Trump’s Executive Order denied people entry into the United States—instead it was “extreme vetting.” Well, that could apply to anybody. If the courts want to make a big deal about religion, well take away that excuse and make it about everyone. Why not, the TSA already does that with every hot woman who goes through their scanners, and white guy who looks like they won’t beat the shit out of them for trying to look like they are doing their jobs while they let a turban headed migrant with a full beard carrying a Quran marked up with “Death to America” written across its cover to walk right on by without incident because they don’t want to be blamed for being “insensitive” to a “religion.” Make the next executive order not about the 7 most suspect countries but include all of the current caliphate countries including those of the central African nations—and let’s see where that puts us.
There are more ways to skin a cat folks, and when we are dealing with people who are this stupid, they are easy to beat. So let them argue this case in court for the next two years. Meanwhile, let’s load them up with so much work that they just throw up their arms and beg for retirement. Because we don’t need people with such low intellectual ability to be making such important decisions on our behalf because it weakens the success of our republic—which stands on the foundations of law and order. Such people are not capable of interpreting either and they need to be forced into retirement so we can appoint people of a higher intellect, because they are out there. But they are sitting on the bench waiting for these lifetime appointments to expire who were given the job due to their political activism in the first place like that Judge Friedland joke appointed by Obama. Give them so much work to do that they are forced to retire and give up the seat so that Trump can appoint much more sensible appointees. Attack them at their true weaknesses—their lack of real intellect and their inherit laziness—and that is how to beat a radicalized judiciary. Load up the scales of justice so that they are forced to lift up the blindfold across their eyes so they can see that where they are standing is not in the republic of the United States, but the eroded away ideas of Oxford and the last remnants of the Roman Empire as it slowly crumbled away in modern Europe where judges like these have already destroyed that culture. And force those judges aside so that much more intelligent legal minds can emerge and do the job that is required to sustain our sovereignty against the failures of the current world.
Sign up for Second Call Defense here: http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707 Use my name to get added benefits.