America Wakes Up To Find Its Judicial Branch Infiltrated By Organized Crime

An epidemic of government  corruption in America has led to economic decline, and social unrest.  Evidence increasingly points to a major source as the Judicial Branch – the most powerful part of the government,  expected to have the most integrity.   It is no longer just conjecture, as citizen complaints of racketeering and misconduct by members of the Judiciary, are rampant across social media.  A study published by Yale University Law School  supports this reality, that  judicial corruption is a major U.S. problem. Continue reading “America Wakes Up To Find Its Judicial Branch Infiltrated By Organized Crime”

Clintongate versus Porngate: A Tale of Two Email Scandals That Just Doesn’t Add Up

The saga of Democrat and first female Pennsylvania Attorney General, Kathleen Kane, is an interesting contrast to that of Presidential Democrat candidate Hillary Clinton’s quagmire regarding mishandling of official government emails.  In fact, the two women are, or were comrades and Clinton supported Kane’s run for office in 2012. The difference of course is who they were up against and how much money they had to fight allegations, making the speed and timing of today’s announcement that Clinton has been cleared a bit suspicious. Continue reading “Clintongate versus Porngate: A Tale of Two Email Scandals That Just Doesn’t Add Up”

Montgomery Co. Judge Richard Haaz Fails to Disclose Conflict on Panel Against AG Kane

 

 

 

 

 

Judge Richard Haaz

It may be old  news that Judge William Carpenter,  Senior Judge William Nicholas, and Judge Richard Haaz sat on the April 27, 2015 panel to determine if Carpenter’s ambiguous protective order was violated by Attorney General Kane. But while thus far, Judge Richard Haaz has remained under the radar,  it may be time to give him his place of honor in the Pennsylvania Courts Hall of Shame.
Continue reading “Montgomery Co. Judge Richard Haaz Fails to Disclose Conflict on Panel Against AG Kane”

PA Supreme Court Decision Should Be the Basis to Challenge Judicial Immunity and Self-Recusal

Pennsylvania is the state to watch, with its ongoing  major challenges  to  jurisdiction in our courts,  through what apparently started as a political agenda, against  the State Attorney General Kathleen Kane.  The Pennsylvania Supreme Court is the first  and oldest in the country- the birthplace of democracy, with the most precedent set.   It is ironic that it is also the venue of one of the worst cases of judicial corruption in the country- The Kids for Cash Scandal;  and now that same Judicial Branch is  imposing its dubious power to try to  exceed their jurisdiction, and retain control of the government.

The major cause  of the decline of our democracy,   has its roots in the claims of “judicial independence” and the self-regulated judiciary.  There is just no one to go to when the law is being broken by judges- who use “discretionary” rule to deny  due process in violation of  civil rights. The concurring opinions are highly  hypocritical-  in the rulings issued today regarding  Attorney General  Kane.  In the ruling which precipitated this appeal to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, it was held by  lower court  Judge Carpenter, of Montgomery County,  that the Attorney General cannot investigate herself.  However,   judges get to decide every day if they should recuse themselves, and they control their own disciplinary process, and that of lawyers.

Below are the concurring and dissenting opinions from today – on the Attorney General’s challenge to the jurisdiction of the courts – who appointed a special prosecutor to investigate her. Prosecution is the jurisdiction of her office – not the courts. According to the doctrine of separation of powers, the judiciary does not have the power to appoint a prosecutor.  Below are the links to the rulings.

Hopefully, Attorney General Kane will challenge the constitutionality of this in the Federal courts, and begin to address the mass of complaints their office receives regarding lack of judicial integrity.  The only one that got it right, is the only woman on the bench – Madame Justice Todd- who wrote the dissenting opinion:

In Re: 35th Statewide Inv Grand Jury / of: AG (opinion announcing the judgment of the court)
http://law.justia.com/cases/pennsylvania/supreme-court/2015/197-mm-2014-1.html

Date: March 31, 2015
Docket Number: 197 MM 2014

In Re: 35th Statewide Inv Grand Jury / of: AG (concurring)
http://law.justia.com/cases/pennsylvania/supreme-court/2015/197-mm-2014-2.html

Date: March 31, 2015
Docket Number: 197 MM 2014

In Re: 35th Statewide Inv Grand Jury / of: AG (dissenting)
http://law.justia.com/cases/pennsylvania/supreme-court/2015/197-mm-2014-3.html

Date: March 31, 2015
Docket Number: 197 MM 2014