Op-ed:
A Justice System Run Amok
By: Diane Sori / The Patriot Factor

The article posted here is the authors opinion alone, and does not necessarily represent the views of blogspot.com or Google 

    

...let me say that while we all know...or at least should know if one has been paying even a mere modicum of attention to what's happening in our country today...the overtly partisan “activist judges” who currently sit on US court benches are not the only ones in need of change. Why so...because the game that is politics itself has also played a big part in the infiltrating and thus the corrupting of our overall system of justice.

A truth unnerving, but a truth that cannot be ignored especially in light of the politically based “assassination” of “Turning Point USA's” founder Charlie Kirk by one Tyler Robinson. Be prepared for a “not guilty by reason of insanity” plea coming into play to help drag out what should be an open and shut case, for this is a classic ploy used by defense attorneys and heralded by “activist judges when there's nothing left to build a defense case on. What a sad commentary indeed...Read entire article here.

Op-ed:

A Justice System Run Amok

By: Diane Sori / The Patriot Factor

The article posted here is the authors opinion alone, and does not necessarily represent the views of blogspot.com or Google    

When I was growing up my dad was not only a junior high school math and science teacher, but was directly involved in politics. He was what was then called a “ward leader” which today would be comparable to a powerful precinct captain or a district-level political operative, My dad worked on many major political campaigns from presidential, gubernatorial, down to my town's mayoral campaigns, but one thing he always told me right before an election was to take place...told me even years before I was even old enough to vote...was that when it came to the judicial elections always remember to vote the incumbent judges out. And when I asked him why his answer was simply that too many judges do, in time, tend to either be “bought” by one party or another, or simply become beholden to a given party's ideologies or agenda.

And while I did not really understand his reasoning back then, I surely do understand it and herald it now.

So here let me begin by saying that there are, unfortunately, still some serious problems and issues facing our beloved America today, and it's mostly thanks to the liberal far left and their America-hating agenda. And one of the most serious of problems, in my opinion, is the increase in overt acts of politically generated physical violence now having become both an unwelcome and undeserved hallmark of who we are as both a people and as a nation. And while that alone should give one pause to think, so too should the fact that thanks to “activist judges” and tainted juries, the guilty are often either deemed innocent or given what amounts to a mere slap on the wrist. And this is no matter the seriousness of their crime(s) committed, while their innocent victim(s) are often verbally ripped apart and dragged through the “court of public opinion” courtesy of the Democrats bought and paid for media fodder.

In fact, and it pains me to say this, but the entirety of our legal system as it stands now... thanks to the infiltration of “activist judges” who ignore the fact that their job is to interpret the law as written and apply it accordingly, not twist said law to meet their personal political agenda or ideology...is indeed a contributing factor to the increase in acts of physical violence we are facing today. Why so...because the “catch, book, and release” mentality of the left has overtaken both the law and common sense.

And while the police do try to do their job...which is to protect and serve “We the American People”...their hands continue to be somewhat tied behind their backs what with the police still being seen as “public enemy #1” in many of the still Democrat controlled “blue” cities and states.

But the fact remains that while the legal process itself will always remain tainted to some degree...it's just the nature of the beast as nothing having any relation to government or politics is perfect...the most serious problems in regards to law and order today remains mostly on the federal and state levels while it has, albeit to a lesser degree, now started filtering down to the local level as well. However, there is a common denominator between all said levels in that when a trial is over and a defendant faces sentencing a given judge's partisan loyalties seem to outweigh the actual rule of law.

Simply, what these “activist judges,” especially those on the federal level, have done is literally thrown Constitutional law aside in the name of their personal “body politics.” Why so...because they as “activist judges” really do put their politics, their party, and their personal agendas above what they consider to be “outdated” Constitutional law, while at the same time deliberately overlooking legally set precedent.

And then there's what's called “judge shopping” coming into play more times than not, and know it's rampant on the federal, district, and state levels. How so? When a case is filed on any level it generally does go through what's called a "case-assignment process"...a process designed to randomly draw a judge out of a “general pool” of all eligible judges, thus supposedly allowing for what's called “impartial authority.” However, today we do find party partisanship overriding impartiality as left leaning attorneys relish in exploiting any and all so called “quirks in the system.” And this is done solely to help in their evading a randomly selected judicial assignment, which then allows them to push for a judge who is sympathetic to or actually shares their ideological agenda and goals.

For example, in the case of what now seems to be any judicial ruling in President Trump's or his administration's favor, these now hand-picked “activist judges,” who sit on district appeals court benches, will do any and everything possible to find ways to override what was a lower court's decision, And this usually results in their blocking said decision via the issuing of an “injunction,” thus forcing what was a settled case to go higher up in the court system. And in President Trump 's case that usually means fighting an “injunction” all the way up to the Supreme Court, which his attorneys have rightfully and successfully done on a number of occasions.

And not to be forgotten is that judges sometimes, especially when presiding over what is a dual federal/state case, actually do see said case being melding together, with said state's district attorney (DA) now also coming into play. Remember, it's the DA's job to not only bring charges but to make said charges stick, while it's the judge/justice's job to not only keep decorum in the courtroom while at the same time helping to move a given trial forward, but to only after a verdict has been reached are they to adjudicate a sentence. But this, unfortunately, is not what happened last week when New York, Justice Gregory Carro...a party loyal Democrat...tossed out the “terrorism charges” in Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg’s murder case against Luigi Mangione, the man who planned, orchestrated, and then executed said plan by murdering...by shooting in the back...UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson.

Saying in his ruling that DA Bragg had not proved that Mangione “acted with terroristic intent” after he alone decided that Mangione's writings only “indicated a desire to draw attention to what he perceived as the greed of the insurance industry,” and therefore was not a threat against the country nor the general public, thus ruling that said charge did not reach the level of domestic terrorism. But what Carro actually did was take what should have been a decision made by a jury and render said decision himself. And that is indeed a true example of judicial overreach ...an overreach that in my opinion, should see Justice Carro being both removed from the case and then see him facing disbarment charges for willfully and knowingly doing a jury's job for them.

But even with that said, one has to remember that it's not just the judges/justices themselves who are the sole problem, but that the actual jury selection process is as well. Why so...because many times a seated jury consists of folks with a decidedly political agenda and who use said agenda to try and sway their fellow jury members to their side no matter the presented facts or evidence of a given case. The “George Floyd” verdict is a perfect example of a criminal being turned into a supposed saint courtesy of a jury verdict while the police officers involved became the devil incarnate all because the actual presented into evidence autopsy report seemingly was being ignored.

Simply, today's jury system itself...from selection to verdict rendered...should be called into question because at times...especially in high profile cases like the “George Floyd” case,...jury selection, in my opinion, is seemingly being manipulated by either lawyers for the defense or the prosecution in order to either balance out the racial, sexual, and/or intelligence level (whether to dumb it down or smarten it up) of a given jury in order to help sway, in a timely manner, a verdict in that specific case. And how is this done... simply by the attorneys on said case looking for signs at interview time as to whether a called to jury duty individual actually wants to be a jurist or not. Remember, jury decisions have, at times, been rendered based not on the facts presented, but by the wants of the jury to simply wrap up a case that is either taking too long or that they never wanted to be seated on in the first place.

A truly sad but true commentary on what should be ones civic duty.

And then there's this regarding today's judicial system in general, for the fact is that not only does the system itself seem to have been taken over and corrupted by not just “activist judges,” but by countless left leaning defense attorneys who have been using.... or should I say misusing...what are actual court processes to help “reset”...if you will... the time frame for certain verdicts rendered to actually being carried out. And it's done courtesy of said attorneys filing countless...and most times useless...appeals in order to buy more time for the guilty in the misplaced hope of overturning what was a jury's original verdict. Case in point...how many times have we heard of long convicted murderers finally being put to death years, it not decades, after having committed the crime to which they were found guilty…as their“on-the-clock” attorneys were raking in the big bucks while the victim's family and friends were being denied the much needed act of closure.

And here let me say that I firmly believe in one trial, one appeal...or two appeals if it involves a complicated case...but in both cases with a set time frame for appeals in place...and then sentence should be fully carried out as originally adjudicated.

So now in closing let me say that while we all know...or at least should know if one has been paying even a mere modicum of attention to what's happening in our country today...that the overtly partisan “activist judges” who currently sit on US court benches are not the only ones in need of change. Why so...because the game that is politics itself has also played a big part in the infiltrating and thus the corrupting of our overall system of justice.

A truth unnerving, but a truth that cannot be ignored especially in light of the politically based “assassination” of “Turning Point USA's” founder Charlie Kirk by one Tyler Robinson. Be prepared for a “not guilty by reason of insanity” plea coming into play to help drag out what should be an open and shut case, for this is a classic ploy used by defense attorneys and heralded by “activist judges when there's nothing left to build a defense case on. What a sad commentary indeed. 

And lastly, come the 2026 midterm elections don't forget to vote all the sitting judges out. So with that said, case closed.

Copyright © 2025 Diane Sori / The Patriot Factor / All rights reserved.  

************************************************************************************************** 
For more political commentary please visit my RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS partner Craig Andresen's blog The National Patriot to read his latest article, Sociopathy…The Pervasive Mindset of Liberalism.

************************************************************************************************** 

RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS...LIVE!                                                  Tomorrow, Tuesday, September 23rd from 7 to 8:30pm EST, RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS Craig Andresen and Diane Sori discuss 'A Justice System Run Amok'; 'Sociopathy…The Pervasive Mindset of Liberalism'; and important news of the day. Hope you can tune in to RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS on https://rspradio1.com Click 'LISTEN LIVE' starting at 6:50pm EST, show begins at 7pm EST.

Op-ed:
Two Cases...Two Verdicts Overturned...Two Reasons To Clear Our Judicial House
By: Diane Sori / The Patriot Factor / Right Side Patriots on American Political Radio

"Justice will not be served until those who are unaffected are as outraged as those who are."
- Benjamin Franklin, American Founding Father

Two weeks or so ago while most of us here in Florida, me included, were rightfully focused on a hurricane named Dorian, two Obama appointed activist judges were busy overturning convictions of an illegal alien and a muslim jihadi with barely a word heard in the mainstream media. Well...that word will be now be heard...better late than never I say.

Let's start with Jose Inez Garcia Zarate...the five times deported illegal alien...a man now in our country illegally for time number six...who shot and killed Kate Steinle back in 2015 when she was leisurely strolling with her dad on San Francisco's waterfront Pier 14. Dying in her dad's arms after being shot in the chest, the Steinle family saw Zarate being acquitted of murder on November 30, 2017 after the court ruled the shooting an accident. However, he was found guilty of being a convicted felon illegally in possession of a firearm and ammunition.

An illegal alien convicted of illegally possessing a firearm who now thanks to his liberal miscreant lawyers and an Obama appointed liberal activist judge named Sandra L. Margulies, has seen the knife dug deeper into the Steinle family's back as California's First District Court of Appeals has overturned even that conviction saying that, “the original judge [Judge Samuel Feng] failed to instruct the jury on one of his defenses.”

Oh really...

And so the man who stole a beautiful young woman's life...the man who claimed that, “he unwittingly picked up the gun wrapped in a T-shirt and it fired accidentally”...the man who claimed that after the gun went off...a gun stolen from a federal agent’s car...that he threw said gun away to stop it from firing again...that very man is now basically not only getting away with murder but with culpability as well, all while the Steinle family is left to relive their grief and forever wonder why it sadly ended this way.

But these six simple words can tell you and the Steinle family why...San Francisco is a “sanctuary city”...a city whose police department and government officials blatantly refuse to comply with our federal on-the-book immigration laws...a city that allowed murdering scum like Zarate to freely walk its streets. The rights of illegals over the rights of American citizens is the law San Francisco now lives by, and it's this very attitude...an attitude also embraced by California itself as it's a “sanctuary state” ...that is the direct cause of not only Kate's Steinle's death but the deaths of other folks in their state who've lost their lives at the hands of illegal aliens.

Remember, if California as a whole and San Francisco in specific had just complied with federal immigration laws, Kate Steinle and the others murdered by illegals in California would not be dead, because Jose Inez Garcia Zarate and the other criminal sorts like him would not have been in these United States in the first, second...or in Zarate's case all the way up to the sixth place.

So how did this newest travesty of justice unfold...simply on the infamous “technicality” rouse is how. While Zarate remained in federal prison on the illegal possession of a firearm and ammunition charge, his court appointed public defender, Matt Gonzales, was busy preparing his appeal on the grounds that while deliberating the case Judge Feng, even after being asked by the jury for added clarification about the definition of “possession,” did not inform the jury about what's called the “momentary possession of a firearm,” which legally it seems is not the same as the actual “possession” of a firearm. How so...“momentary possession” is when an individual has “brief possession” of an “item” in question...this being the gun...while being in the process of disposing or destroying that “item,” and that in no way is the individual trying to prevent law enforcement from seizing said “item.”

So with Zarate's having already fired the gun...guns don't pull their own triggers you know...and then after it “accidentally” kills Kate Steinle...Zarate throws the gun he knew had to be stolen into San Francisco Bay.

And with Zarate now having already built up enough credits for time served to cover his sentence on the state gun charge, Judge Margulies wrote in the 3-0 decision that, “During the deliberation, the jury asked for the definition of possession, whether there is a time requirement of possession and whether defendant’s possession of a firearm and knowledge he possessed it were sufficient to demonstrate wrongful intent,” and that “it is reasonably probable at least one juror may have reached a different conclusion if the jury had been instructed on the momentary possession charge,” thus allowing Kate Steinle to basically be de-facto murdered all over again.

And then to make matters even worse, Zarate's slime of an attorney, Matt Gonzales, had the audacity to call the appeal's court overturning the decision a “vindication”...a “vindication” because by Judge Feng not fully instructing the jury, Gonzales felt that Feng was in effect directing a guilty verdict be found. “He had an obligation to give this instruction whether or not we asked for it,” said Gonzalez as he seemed to relish in Kate Steinle's family having to relive once again the nightmare no parent should ever have to face.

I just wonder how people like Matt Gonzalez and Judge Sandra L. Margulies can look at themselves in the mirror let alone live with themselves knowing that they have further hurt the innocent while defending and overturning verdicts of those they know are guilty, and doing so on a “technicality” alone...what should, in my opinion, be a crime in and of itself.

So while Jose Inez Garcia Zarate remains in prison as the California state-court ruling has no legal bearing on federal prosecution, Zarate could still face up to ten years in prison if found guilty of federal "possession" charges. And yet even this, what seems like a last ditch attempt at justice, leaves me to wonder if Kate Steinle will ever be allowed to “Rest in Peace,” and will her family ever reach even a modicum of closure. Honestly, I just don't know especially when our current judicial system, and not just in California, seems to favor the perpetrator instead of the innocent victim.

Next on the list of Obama appointed liberal activist judges run amok involves the case of David Daoud Wright, the former ISIS operative and fame seeker who was found guilty of "conspiracy to commit acts of international terrorism" as well as being one of the ringleaders of the 2015 plot to behead political activist, blogger, and AFDI (American Freedom Defense Initiative) founder Pamela Geller...a woman I'm honored to call my friend. And why the focus on Pamela Geller...because she was the organizer of the “Draw Mohammed” art contest... a contest Wright and his ilk found offensive to mohammed and to mulsims...a contest that saw the two muslim gunmen who attacked said contest rightfully being shot dead by Garland, Texas police.

Thankfully, their plot fell apart after Wright’s uncle, one Usamaah Abdullah Rahim, said he wanted to kill Massachusetts police officers instead of Geller, but as fate would have it he was shot dead by the very officers he wanted to kill after pulling a knife on them in a parking lot when they simply wanted to question him. David Daoud Wright was now left alone to face charges, and in December 2017 he was found guilty on five counts in said terrorist plot against Pamela Geller. However, we recently witnessed one of those convictions being overturned by Federal Appeals Court Justice David J. Barron...with his decision being ludicrous at best, an outward catering to those out to kill us all at worst.

And why do I feel this way...because in his ruling this abomination of an Obama appointed islamic condoning judge had the audacity to mimic David Daoud Wright's lawyers whose sole defense was that their client, “could have simply been ‘role playing’ with respect to following ISIS’s direction,” against Pamela Geller. Ignoring that those on the jury in no way felt that Wright was “role playing” when reaching their verdict...Judge Barron also ignored that the five guilty verdicts were reached in under six hours...remarkable time in a case like this. And those guilty verdicts led Acting U.S. Attorney William Weinreb to state that, “Mr. Wright is a terrorist, an ISIS supporter and recruiter who intended to wage war against the United States by beheading people and killing Americans”...Pamela Geller sadly included.

The main case against Wright involved his contact and financing of American ISIS leader Zulfi Hoxha's trip to Syria to train with ISIS, and of all things video games...video games being used as a way for someone to both train and ultimately join ISIS. In fact, Wright himself trained by using amongst others a video game called “Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare” to “virtually prepare” for jihad.

Judge Barron knew all this and yet apparently he did not take any of it into account. And what's even worse is that both David Daoud Wright's original 2017 conviction and sentence of 28 years in prison will now more than likely be reduced due to Barron's overturning the ISIS related conviction. And this is not only a miscarriage of justice, but yet another showing that Americans do come second to politically activist judges...in the Geller case second not to an illegal alien but to a convicted terrorist.

Makes you wonder who's worse...the illegals, the terrorists, or the activist judges who give these folks but a slap on the wrist and then basically lets them go. Sad isn't it...sad indeed.

So what's the answer to stopping liberal appeals judges from overturning rightful verdicts... to overturn them simply to meet their personal political agenda alone? Remember, it's not as simple as just replacing them with conservative justices for a defendant has the legal right to appeal any guilty verdict or in the above stated two cases any secondary part thereof said verdict without negating the original underlying guilty or not guilty conviction.

In the Zarate case his attorney Matt Gonzales used “error at trial” in his appeal to Judge Margulies, because of Judge Feng's perceived legal error of omission regarding “possession,” an error he believed contributed to a guilty verdict no matter this be right or wrong. In the Pamela Geller case, there is no rhyme nor reason for the ISIS related charge to be overturned, proving once again that liberal activist judges tread lightly in regards to those of the islamic persuasion.

So while a number of judges...whether they be appeals court judges or otherwise...must be replaced before the worst of the worst are coddled even more than they already are, they must not be replaced solely based upon their party affiliation, but based upon their judicial record of being either Constitutional judges or activist judges. Remember, we have seen Republican judges and even Supreme Court justices not following the Constitution at times, albeit to a far lesser degree than Democrat judges and justices. But no matter the judicial appointee and no matter the president who appoints them, said judge or justice must always interpret the law as per the Constitution not take it upon themselves to start legislating from the bench as the two above mentioned judges clearly have done.

It's way past time to clear America's judicial house and put it back in proper working order...and do so before it's too late.

Copyright @ 2019 Diane Sori / The Patriot Factor / All Rights Reserved.

**************************************************************************************************************************************
For more political commentary please visit my RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS partner Craig Andresen's blog The National Patriot to read his latest article, Mullen, Nebraska Schools a Triggered Indoctrinator.
 

************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************ 

RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS...LIVE!

Tomorrow, Friday, September 13th, from 7 to 9pm EST on American Political Radio, RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS Craig Andresen and Diane Sori discuss 'Two Cases...Two Verdicts Overturned...Two Reason To Clear Our Judicial House'; 'Mullen, Nebraska Schools a Triggered Indoctrinator'; and important news of the day.

Hope you can tune in at: http://listen.samcloud.com/w/73891/American-Political-Radio#history...or on Tune-In at: https://tunein.com/radio/American-Political-Radio-s273246/

Op-ed:
Two Cases...Two Verdicts Overturned...Two Reasons To Clear Our Judicial House
By: Diane Sori / The Patriot Factor / Right Side Patriots on American Political Radio

"Justice will not be served until those who are unaffected are as outraged as those who are."
- Benjamin Franklin, American Founding Father

Two weeks or so ago while most of us here in Florida, me included, were rightfully focused on a hurricane named Dorian, two Obama appointed activist judges were busy overturning convictions of an illegal alien and a muslim jihadi with barely a word heard in the mainstream media. Well...that word will be now be heard...better late than never I say.

Let's start with Jose Inez Garcia Zarate...the five times deported illegal alien...a man now in our country illegally for time number six...who shot and killed Kate Steinle back in 2015 when she was leisurely strolling with her dad on San Francisco's waterfront Pier 14. Dying in her dad's arms after being shot in the chest, the Steinle family saw Zarate being acquitted of murder on November 30, 2017 after the court ruled the shooting an accident. However, he was found guilty of being a convicted felon illegally in possession of a firearm and ammunition.

An illegal alien convicted of illegally possessing a firearm who now thanks to his liberal miscreant lawyers and an Obama appointed liberal activist judge named Sandra L. Margulies, has seen the knife dug deeper into the Steinle family's back as California's First District Court of Appeals has overturned even that conviction saying that, “the original judge [Judge Samuel Feng] failed to instruct the jury on one of his defenses.”

Oh really...

And so the man who stole a beautiful young woman's life...the man who claimed that, “he unwittingly picked up the gun wrapped in a T-shirt and it fired accidentally”...the man who claimed that after the gun went off...a gun stolen from a federal agent’s car...that he threw said gun away to stop it from firing again...that very man is now basically not only getting away with murder but with culpability as well, all while the Steinle family is left to relive their grief and forever wonder why it sadly ended this way.

But these six simple words can tell you and the Steinle family why...San Francisco is a “sanctuary city”...a city whose police department and government officials blatantly refuse to comply with our federal on-the-book immigration laws...a city that allowed murdering scum like Zarate to freely walk its streets. The rights of illegals over the rights of American citizens is the law San Francisco now lives by, and it's this very attitude...an attitude also embraced by California itself as it's a “sanctuary state” ...that is the direct cause of not only Kate's Steinle's death but the deaths of other folks in their state who've lost their lives at the hands of illegal aliens.

Remember, if California as a whole and San Francisco in specific had just complied with federal immigration laws, Kate Steinle and the others murdered by illegals in California would not be dead, because Jose Inez Garcia Zarate and the other criminal sorts like him would not have been in these United States in the first, second...or in Zarate's case all the way up to the sixth place.

So how did this newest travesty of justice unfold...simply on the infamous “technicality” rouse is how. While Zarate remained in federal prison on the illegal possession of a firearm and ammunition charge, his court appointed public defender, Matt Gonzales, was busy preparing his appeal on the grounds that while deliberating the case Judge Feng, even after being asked by the jury for added clarification about the definition of “possession,” did not inform the jury about what's called the “momentary possession of a firearm,” which legally it seems is not the same as the actual “possession” of a firearm. How so...“momentary possession” is when an individual has “brief possession” of an “item” in question...this being the gun...while being in the process of disposing or destroying that “item,” and that in no way is the individual trying to prevent law enforcement from seizing said “item.”

So with Zarate's having already fired the gun...guns don't pull their own triggers you know...and then after it “accidentally” kills Kate Steinle...Zarate throws the gun he knew had to be stolen into San Francisco Bay.

And with Zarate now having already built up enough credits for time served to cover his sentence on the state gun charge, Judge Margulies wrote in the 3-0 decision that, “During the deliberation, the jury asked for the definition of possession, whether there is a time requirement of possession and whether defendant’s possession of a firearm and knowledge he possessed it were sufficient to demonstrate wrongful intent,” and that “it is reasonably probable at least one juror may have reached a different conclusion if the jury had been instructed on the momentary possession charge,” thus allowing Kate Steinle to basically be de-facto murdered all over again.

And then to make matters even worse, Zarate's slime of an attorney, Matt Gonzales, had the audacity to call the appeal's court overturning the decision a “vindication”...a “vindication” because by Judge Feng not fully instructing the jury, Gonzales felt that Feng was in effect directing a guilty verdict be found. “He had an obligation to give this instruction whether or not we asked for it,” said Gonzalez as he seemed to relish in Kate Steinle's family having to relive once again the nightmare no parent should ever have to face.

I just wonder how people like Matt Gonzalez and Judge Sandra L. Margulies can look at themselves in the mirror let alone live with themselves knowing that they have further hurt the innocent while defending and overturning verdicts of those they know are guilty, and doing so on a “technicality” alone...what should, in my opinion, be a crime in and of itself.

So while Jose Inez Garcia Zarate remains in prison as the California state-court ruling has no legal bearing on federal prosecution, Zarate could still face up to ten years in prison if found guilty of federal "possession" charges. And yet even this, what seems like a last ditch attempt at justice, leaves me to wonder if Kate Steinle will ever be allowed to “Rest in Peace,” and will her family ever reach even a modicum of closure. Honestly, I just don't know especially when our current judicial system, and not just in California, seems to favor the perpetrator instead of the innocent victim.

Next on the list of Obama appointed liberal activist judges run amok involves the case of David Daoud Wright, the former ISIS operative and fame seeker who was found guilty of "conspiracy to commit acts of international terrorism" as well as being one of the ringleaders of the 2015 plot to behead political activist, blogger, and AFDI (American Freedom Defense Initiative) founder Pamela Geller...a woman I'm honored to call my friend. And why the focus on Pamela Geller...because she was the organizer of the “Draw Mohammed” art contest... a contest Wright and his ilk found offensive to mohammed and to mulsims...a contest that saw the two muslim gunmen who attacked said contest rightfully being shot dead by Garland, Texas police.

Thankfully, their plot fell apart after Wright’s uncle, one Usamaah Abdullah Rahim, said he wanted to kill Massachusetts police officers instead of Geller, but as fate would have it he was shot dead by the very officers he wanted to kill after pulling a knife on them in a parking lot when they simply wanted to question him. David Daoud Wright was now left alone to face charges, and in December 2017 he was found guilty on five counts in said terrorist plot against Pamela Geller. However, we recently witnessed one of those convictions being overturned by Federal Appeals Court Justice David J. Barron...with his decision being ludicrous at best, an outward catering to those out to kill us all at worst.

And why do I feel this way...because in his ruling this abomination of an Obama appointed islamic condoning judge had the audacity to mimic David Daoud Wright's lawyers whose sole defense was that their client, “could have simply been ‘role playing’ with respect to following ISIS’s direction,” against Pamela Geller. Ignoring that those on the jury in no way felt that Wright was “role playing” when reaching their verdict...Judge Barron also ignored that the five guilty verdicts were reached in under six hours...remarkable time in a case like this. And those guilty verdicts led Acting U.S. Attorney William Weinreb to state that, “Mr. Wright is a terrorist, an ISIS supporter and recruiter who intended to wage war against the United States by beheading people and killing Americans”...Pamela Geller sadly included.

The main case against Wright involved his contact and financing of American ISIS leader Zulfi Hoxha's trip to Syria to train with ISIS, and of all things video games...video games being used as a way for someone to both train and ultimately join ISIS. In fact, Wright himself trained by using amongst others a video game called “Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare” to “virtually prepare” for jihad.

Judge Barron knew all this and yet apparently he did not take any of it into account. And what's even worse is that both David Daoud Wright's original 2017 conviction and sentence of 28 years in prison will now more than likely be reduced due to Barron's overturning the ISIS related conviction. And this is not only a miscarriage of justice, but yet another showing that Americans do come second to politically activist judges...in the Geller case second not to an illegal alien but to a convicted terrorist.

Makes you wonder who's worse...the illegals, the terrorists, or the activist judges who give these folks but a slap on the wrist and then basically lets them go. Sad isn't it...sad indeed.

So what's the answer to stopping liberal appeals judges from overturning rightful verdicts... to overturn them simply to meet their personal political agenda alone? Remember, it's not as simple as just replacing them with conservative justices for a defendant has the legal right to appeal any guilty verdict or in the above stated two cases any secondary part thereof said verdict without negating the original underlying guilty or not guilty conviction.

In the Zarate case his attorney Matt Gonzales used “error at trial” in his appeal to Judge Margulies, because of Judge Feng's perceived legal error of omission regarding “possession,” an error he believed contributed to a guilty verdict no matter this be right or wrong. In the Pamela Geller case, there is no rhyme nor reason for the ISIS related charge to be overturned, proving once again that liberal activist judges tread lightly in regards to those of the islamic persuasion.

So while a number of judges...whether they be appeals court judges or otherwise...must be replaced before the worst of the worst are coddled even more than they already are, they must not be replaced solely based upon their party affiliation, but based upon their judicial record of being either Constitutional judges or activist judges. Remember, we have seen Republican judges and even Supreme Court justices not following the Constitution at times, albeit to a far lesser degree than Democrat judges and justices. But no matter the judicial appointee and no matter the president who appoints them, said judge or justice must always interpret the law as per the Constitution not take it upon themselves to start legislating from the bench as the two above mentioned judges clearly have done.

It's way past time to clear America's judicial house and put it back in proper working order...and do so before it's too late.

Copyright @ 2019 Diane Sori / The Patriot Factor / All Rights Reserved.

**************************************************************************************************************************************
For more political commentary please visit my RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS partner Craig Andresen's blog The National Patriot to read his latest article, Mullen, Nebraska Schools a Triggered Indoctrinator.
 

************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************ 

RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS...LIVE!

Tomorrow, Friday, September 13th, from 7 to 9pm EST on American Political Radio, RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS Craig Andresen and Diane Sori discuss 'Two Cases...Two Verdicts Overturned...Two Reason To Clear Our Judicial House'; 'Mullen, Nebraska Schools a Triggered Indoctrinator'; and 9/11 Remembrances and Tributes.

Hope you can tune in at: http://listen.samcloud.com/w/73891/American-Political-Radio#history...or on Tune-In at: https://tunein.com/radio/American-Political-Radio-s273246/

Op-ed:

Shifting the Supreme Court Decidedly to the Right
By: Diane Sori / The Patriot Factor / Right Side Patriots on American Political

“He shall have power, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to make treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall appoint ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, judges of the Supreme Court...”
- Article II Sec.2 of the U.S. Constitution

Last Monday night President Donald Trump nominated “originalist” Brett Michael Kavanaugh to fill the seat on the Supreme Court after Justice Anthony Kennedy announced his retirement after having served 30 years on the bench.

Now having the chance to shift the High Court decidedly to the right for many generations to come no matter which political party holds the presidency in the intervening years, it's important to remember that it is the Senate alone who will approve or disapprove Trump's newest nominee. And while our side was able to get Neil Gorsuch approved thanks to some crossover Democrats, the question is can we do it again what with undeniable partisan politics seeming to have overtaken not only common sense but moral sense and decency as well.

And with moral sense and decency surely not being the calling the card of the left, it really came as no surprise when Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer's top deputy, Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin, said on 'Meet the Press' the weekend before President Trump even announced his nominee that Senate Democrats need to put “party” over their constitutes wishes when the vote for whomever is taken. In other words, Durban said Democrats should prioritize partisan opposition over their own re-election considerations. And this was immediately followed up with House Minority Leader Nancy Polosi sending out a fundraising letter saying she will “avenge” Barack Obama by opposing “Mr. Trump’s” then unannounced nominee “if it’s the last thing I do.”

                                                                                                                                                 Avenge Obama for what...he served two terms as president per the time limits set by the Constitution... he nominated and got his people appointed to the Supreme Court...so what is she really avenging but Hillary Clinton's loss thus proving herself to be but an aged snowflake still in need of a therapy puppy and bubbles...albeit this aged snowflake is an elected official of the most politically dangerous kind because her very words convey as truth what some of us have suspected all along...that Hillary Clinton was indeed to be Barack Hussein Obama's third term in office.

And with that third term surely would have come even more activist judges appointed to both the lower and the higher courts...hard to the left activist judges who would relish in legislating from the bench and who slowly but surely would be working hard to remove the 'as-written' Constitution...the very law of our land...by changing and amending it to such an extreme degree that it would have absolutely no relevancy at all in their eventually legislated socialist utopia.

No longer relevant is truly what the Democrats want the Constitution to be for the simple fact is that with the decades long liberal leaning court now shifting hard to the right the Democrats simply cannot digest let alone accept both the economic and the political shocks they on the left received with the election of Donald J. Trump as America's 45th president.

So with the wise old adage that “elections do have consequences” not being the adage the Democrats wanted to hear but instead being the reality they must now face, the age of liberalism on the Supreme Court has now come to a rightful end for it's liberalism that is America's greatest enemy from within...with said liberalism having been adjudicated from the bench.

And while the Supreme Count's job is solely to interpret the law as laid down in the Constitution, unfortunately time itself has shown that what a justice holds as his or her personal ideology and politics does more times than not sway said justice's vote. And in today's political climate of the left hating any and everything Donald Trump, the overt political ideology and now agenda of some justices has proven to be a very dangerous thing indeed.

Take for instance the Supreme Court's recent 5-to-4 vote to uphold President Trump's temporary travel ban. In their decision the court’s five conservative justices rightfully stated that Trump's power as president to secure our country’s borders “had been delegated by Congress over decades of immigration lawmaking”...which in fact it has always been...and that said delegation was not being undermined by what was then-candidate Trump’s “incendiary statements” concerning the dangers he claimed muslims posed to our country...which was the basis for the liberal justices ruling against the travel ban.

In fact, during oral arguments before the bench, Obama appointee Justice Elena Kagan personally tired to “swing” now retiring Justice Kennedy to vote against Trump's now for the third time amended travel ban by depicting the case as a “watershed moment” in the High Court’s jurisprudence about bias by laying out the possibilities of 'what if' an overtly anti-Semitic person became president and banned all immigration from Israel. Ignoring the fact that 'what ifs' are not now nor have they ever been constitutional law...and really why pick Jews who have contributed much to the fabric of our American society when she could have picked any number of minority groups...saw Kagan in her argument trying to play what in reality was the Obama anti-Israel, anti-Jew card...perhaps even allowing a glimpse into her own possible anti-Semetic and anti-Israel bias to show through.

Talk about an activist judge of the first degree.

Thankfully though this 'what if' scenario backfired on her leaving Chief Justice John Roberts to write for the majority that President Trump had “ample statutory authority to make national security judgments in the realm of immigration.”

So one can see by Justice Kagan's actions that having activist justices sitting on the Supreme Court... activist justices who have actually broken their promise of “fidelity to the law”...affects each and every American to some degree and is more dangerous than most people think for it reeks not of what should be “judicial restraint” but of a justice's partisan desire to both strike down either an existing law or applying his or her own policy preferences to, as per legal expert Hans A. von Spakovsky,* “uphold a statute or other government action that the Constitution clearly forbids.” And this includes their writing their own political leanings into their legal decisions instead of applying the Constitution impartially according to its original meaning based upon its “plain text.”

In fact, the great conservative Justice Antonin Scalia...a true "originalist"...stated time and again that “the text of the law speaks for itself”...something that all Supreme Court justices need to not only take to heart but to apply in all their decisions made.

“I do not ask about a nominee’s personal opinions...what matters is not a judge’s political views but whether they can set aside those views to do what the law and the constitution require.” So said President Trump when queried if he would ask his possible Supreme Court nominees their personal opinion on abortion.

And that brings us back to now Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, and to what the Democrats consider the most critical issue of the day...their fear that the High Court with Kavanaugh sitting on the bench would surely overturn Roe v. Wade...the highly contentious 1973 law making a women's right to choose legal...making abortion legal...in these United States.

And with Democrats ignorant to the fact that abortion is but only one of many critical issues facing our nation today, I personally do not think Roe v. Wade would be overturned.... amended maybe but not overturned...for the simple fact is that it's a settled opinion with precedent already having been set. And while a lot of conservatives would like to see it overturned based upon their religious beliefs alone, only Justice Clarence Thomas has publicly stated that he would like to see Roe v. Wade overturned.

In fact, Judge Kavanaugh, a true "originalist" in the mold of Antonin Scalia, himself has stated that he would not vote to overturn Roe v. Wade based upon precedent already being set.

But now some key Democrats are saying that while Kavanaugh was serving as a D.C. Circuit Court judge he had to honor the precedent of the Supreme Court, but that as a sitting High Court justice he actually would not have to. However, during his 2006 confirmation hearing to said Circuit Court, Kavanough clearly stated that, “if confirmed to the D.C. Circuit, I would follow Roe v. Wade faithfully and fully,” and no words that he has spoken or written concerning Roe v. Wade since then has proved otherwise making the Democrats fear of his flipping nothing but a Justice Kagan previously stated 'what if' scenario with 'what ifs' being mere conjecture not fact.

And besides going against widespread public opinion about abortion is not something that any sitting justice is likely to do...and you can see where Americans stand by the numbers regarding abortion in my recent article On Abortion...because sitting justices truly are leery to overturn settled precedent and disrupting public expectations especially when doing so might imperil the legitimacy of the Supreme Court.

So what do Democrats fear most regarding a Kavanaugh appointment besides his possibly changing his stance on Roe v. Wade...his past record voting record, his possible future voting record, and especially his opinions written coming back to haunt them.

Remember, while on the appeals court Kavanaugh voted to strike down environmental regulations and said he would have overturned internet regulations issued while Barack Obama was president. Kavanaugh also dissented a ruling that let an undocumented immigrant teenager get an abortion while in federal custody. And Democrats now fear that Kavanaugh would vote to rescind the protection of pre-existing conditions under ObamaCare, which the Trump administration is no longer defending in a lawsuit launched by GOP attorneys general. And they especially fear Kavanaugh’s past opinions on whether a sitting president can be indicted in a criminal investigation and how that would impact Mueller’s ongoing Trump/Russia collusion what amounts to a 'witch hunt' investigation. Translation: Kavanaugh might vote to throw Mueller's entire investigation out if it ever reached the Supreme Court.

“If confirmed by the Senate, I will keep an open mind in every case,” were Judge Brett Kavanaugh's words last Monday night adding that he would follow the Constitutional rule of law “and precedent.”

So where do we stand right now as we anxiously await the nomination hearings...Democrats will surely try to put Kavanaugh, a supporter of broad presidential powers, on the spot regarding how he would vote on upcoming future cases like of course Roe v. Wade, the always hovering ObamaCare, and would he side with what the Democrats call corporate interests against the working people. And we also need to see how three Democratic Senators... Joe Donnelly of Indiana, Joe Manchin of West Virginia, and Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota...all of whom voted to confirm Neil Gorsuch and who are all running in difficult reelection campaigns in red states...will vote.

And with Schumer’s goal being to keep his party in partisan lock-step line it surely will be fun to watch the Democrats squirm as the High Court shifts decidedly to the right for decades to come for Brett Kavanaugh will be confirmed when all is said and done leaving the Democrats to cry that their dream of a legislated from the bench socialist utopia is forever relegated to the trash heap where it always belonged.
__________________________________
* Manager, Election Law Reform Initiative and Senior Legal Fellow at the Meese Center for Legal and Judicial Studies

Copyright @ 2018 Diane Sori / The Patriot Factor / All Rights Reserved.

************************************************************************
For more political commentary please visit my RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS partner Craig Andresen's blog The National Patriot to read his latest article Kavanaugh...Because Elections Have Consequences.

*******************************************************************************************************

RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS...LIVE!

Today, Tuesday, July 17th from 7 to 9pm EST on American Political Radio, RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS Craig Andresen and Diane Sori discuss everything SCOTUS... 'Shifting the Supreme Court Decidedly to the Right'; Kavanaugh...Because Elections Have Consequences'; and important news of the day.

Hope you can tune in at: http://listen.samcloud.com/w/73891/American-Political-Radio#history