jim-at-usareset.bsky.social
Former believer in honest, high integrity judges. Now that I've had to take the State of Michigan to court I know better. Judges are into POWER, right and rule of law are irrelevant to many of them.
1,779 posts
917 followers
210 following
Getting Started
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
Thank you. That is the book title that the OP replied to me but I don't buy that that is what the book said. I have a copy and have read it. When I asked the OP for specific page info she blocked me. I wonder if she generally actually knows what she is talking about. Jeopardy likely doesn't either!
comment in response to
post
Huh? I've read that book and it doesn't come close, as far as I can see, to the claim of the posted title. Can you cite a page where it does? Thanks.
comment in response to
post
@profmmurray.bsky.social The ISBN for the supposed book title. Thanks
comment in response to
post
Anyone, PLEASE, cite the ISBN for the supposed book. Thanks
comment in response to
post
And any judge that is NOT sanctioning attorneys that pull such stunts IS CREATING FAR WORSE PROBLEMS DOWN THE LINE AS WE SEE CURRENTLY!!
comment in response to
post
Not true as I assume you mean. Art. I, Sec. 8, Cl. 15 & 18 along with impeachment, conviction, and removal provide mechanisms to restore the Constitutional Democratic Republic order. Congress is the most powerful branch of the U.S. Government. Vote OUT ALL Congresspeople that are NOT doing their job
comment in response to
post
Get some good rest!
comment in response to
post
OK, I'm in. Address info to follow as specified.
I'm unlikely to subscribe because rather than essays I'm more inclined to history, biography, novels (sf, mystery, hf), political discussion.
comment in response to
post
GET IT! READ IT! ACT ON IT! YOUR government is NO LONGER behaving Constitutionally. Correct Arithmetic, Valid Logic, and Understanding Law and Constitutions in Plain English are now REJECTED by the COURTS. They ABUSE their POWER and get away with it.
comment in response to
post
Absolutely. Court enforcement powers should NOT be eliminated and not in a budget bill. But it must also be observed that the courts have, for many years, FAILED to discipline lawyers (including judges) who take unconstitutional positions such as that 2 + 2 = 3 and T & T = F and YES means NO.
comment in response to
post
A) I highly recommend the book. B) Keep on contacting all your Congresspeople as close to daily as you can and let them know what you want (such as tax the rich fairly, establish a sound budget that starts reducing the debt, and C) review my case (usareset.net/forum/viewto...) and provide feedback.
comment in response to
post
RULE NO. 1 re campaign ads. NEVER PAY ATTENTION TO THEM! Tell all your friends not to either. For the most part they are so heavily biased if not outright lies that they tell you nothing. Instead, as voting time approaches seek out the real websites of the candidates and read their policy statements
comment in response to
post
I've got news for you. It's been a "catch me if you can" game against the judiciary for years. For two examples see usareset.net/forum/viewto... and usareset.net/forum/viewto... where Understanding Law (and Constitutions) in Plain English, Correct Arithmetic, and Valid Logic have been abandoned!
comment in response to
post
Hey, I know, let's DEMAND that Trump EXCECUTIVE ORDER SSA to bring all the FRAUDSTERS they've found to court.
comment in response to
post
In 1948 a gross mistake was made that is now encouraging Israeli politicians to pretend they have more rights than Palestinians and their progeny. It's exactly the same kind of pretense that SOME white southern men (among others) exhibit in the USA since Reconstruction was prematurely stopped.
comment in response to
post
It's rather simple. Michigan Courts and the Michigan Executive branch have chosen to ignore both the US Constitution and Michigan law. I'm sure it's not just against me that they've done this. I'd like to find other clear examples. Your assistance would be appreciated. Thanks.
comment in response to
post
But @judgeluttig.bsky.social, what YOU fail to say is it is "Justice" Roberts who got 8 "Justices" to agree that THEY THEMSELVES could IGNORE "But Congress may..." from Amendment XIV and it is that ABSOLUTE ABUSE OF POWER (in part) that has INSTRUCTED Trump that he can get away ignoring rule of law!
comment in response to
post
That should say Article I, Section 8m Clauses 15 & 18! Sorry.
comment in response to
post
When 5 "Justices" and the President by prior signaled agreement choose to IGNORE Congress and Law and Constitution we're all in SERIOUS trouble. But the Founders, in the Constitution, gave CONGRESS the MOST power via Article I, Section 8, Clauses 15 & 18. Congress must use it!
comment in response to
post
But @judgeluttig.bsky.social, what YOU fail to say is it is "Justice" Roberts who got 8 "Justices" to agree that THEY THEMSELVES could IGNORE "But Congress may..." from Amendment XIV and it is that ABSOLUTE ABUSE OF POWER (in part) that has INSTRUCTED Trump that he can get away ignoring rule of law!
comment in response to
post
Congress INTENTIONALLY, according to the Framers of the Constitution, has MORE powers than the other two branches. It can IMPEACH and REMOVE and it can do Article I, Section 15 & 18 things too! If YOUR Congresspeople are NOT active in regaining control UNELECT THEM next time!!!
comment in response to
post
A "Justice" who gets 8 other "Justices" to IGNORE "But Congress may..." in the XIV Amendment CANNOT SPEAK HONESTLY about "rule of law." See usareset.net/forum/viewto....
comment in response to
post
Yeah!! Now if we could just get @dananessel.bsky.social and Governor Whitmer to agree to make Executive departments and the courts to guarantee Correct Arithmetic, Valid Logic, and Understanding Law in Plain English!! See usareset.net/forum/viewto... for more. Know of another case? Let me know!
comment in response to
post
Roberts didn't pay any attention to the law that says "But Congress may..." from Amendment XIV when he and 8 other "Justices" grabbed that power for themselves. He also claims Correct Arithmetic, Valid Logic, and Understanding Law in Plain English are NOT protected by Amendment IX. Rule of law, NOT!
comment in response to
post
"Rule of law" says the man that led 9 "Justices" to totally ignore "But Congress may..." in Amendment XIV while they took on a totally adverse power for themselves!!
comment in response to
post
TRUE! And very often it is by lawyers (often working for the government [not "the People"]) who mistakenly "zealously" concoct a false position with the goal of winning rather than JUSTICE. See usareset.net/forum/viewto.... Correct Arithmetic, Valid Logic, Understanding in Plain English all lost!!!
comment in response to
post
Far more threatening is the fact that judges and Justices in the USA quit honoring "rule of law" many years ago and lawyers are complicit. I would say that Correct Arithmetic, Valid Logic, and Understanding Law in Plain English are all "rule of law" rights under Amendment IX. What do you say?
comment in response to
post
Congratulations @marinklevy.bsky.social. But why now? Is it because, as a lawyer, you now see many others interested in clear rule of law rights? Answer a simple question. Do I have a right to Correct Arithmetic, Valid Logic, and Understanding Law in Plain English? If not, why not? Thanks.
comment in response to
post
@tribelaw.bsky.social why are YOU contributing to the PROBLEM? Insisting that any SCOTUS decision is "forever" right once made is STUPID and makes correction near impossible. See usareset.net/forum/viewto... where YOU insist Incorrect Arithmetic, Invalid Logic, and Ignoring Plain English Law are OK.
comment in response to
post
Sotomayer is correct, Michigan lawyers and judges pay no attention to the Constitution or Michigan law. Correct Arithmetic, Valid Logic, and Understanding Law in Plain English are ALL IGNORED when they think they can get away with it. See usareset.net/forum/viewto...
comment in response to
post
First, there is no "God" or "Allah" or "Creator of the Universe" or "?" That "explanation" for existence is more complex than spontaneous or always. Second, there is no 100% correct religion. All religious books were written by humans with human intent behind them, not necessarily YOUR interests.
comment in response to
post
Well done! The current federal government Congress, Executive, and Judiciary are NOT obeying their affirmations to support the Constitution. "In all Cases...in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction." Ignored by SCOTUS with no Congressional action!
comment in response to
post
It's not just Trump. SCOTUS is compliant. "But Congress may..." ignored by SCOTUS, all 9 "Justices." "In all Cases...in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction." Also totally ignored by SCOTUS. Now under appeal to Brett Kavanaugh: usareset.net/forum/viewto...
comment in response to
post
"But Congress may..." was ignored by SCOTUS, all 9 "Justices." "In all Cases ... in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction." Also totally ignored by SCOTUS. Now under appeal to Brett Kavanaugh re Attachment at usareset.net/forum/viewto....
comment in response to
post
Hey @dananessel.bsky.social, Correct Arithmetic and Valid Logic were worked out millennia ago, why doesn't the State of Michigan adhere to them? Understanding of English has been clear since the 1600s. Why is the State of Michigan exempt? See usareset.net/forum/viewto....
comment in response to
post
But, @tribelaw.bsky.social, it appears to me that as a lawyer yourself you cannot answer simple law questions. Which of the following are protected rights by Amendment IX: Correct Arithmetic, Valid Logic, Understanding Law (and Constitutions) in Plain English?
comment in response to
post
Do more in Michigan so you can explain how the Michigan Courts have gotten away with ignoring Correct Arithmetic, Valid Logic, and Understanding Laws in Plain English for years. Trump didn't start it. See usareset.net/forum/viewto... for one example.
comment in response to
post
Hi @leahlitman.bsky.social, then maybe you can tell me how the State of Michigan (and SCOTUS) come to agree that stonewalling is the correct practice when it is pointed out to them that Amendment IX protects Correct Arithmetic, Valid Logic, and Understanding Law (and Constitutions) in Plain English?
comment in response to
post
It doesn't matter, the Bible is just a book like any other book. It's only purpose at the swearing/affirming ceremony is symbolic to their perhaps being a higher power to which the President will be held. In our country that actually is the Constitution, not any particular religion.
comment in response to
post
I also maintain that the 10th Amendment holds correct arithmetic, valid logic, and law (and constitution) understanding to be plain English. SCOTUS says No, States can do whatever they want in any of those regards. What do YOU say? Thanks.
comment in response to
post
Hey @judgeluttig.bsky.social, you've taken both sides. I say the Constitution is what it says, not what a Supreme Court says it says. "But Congress may..." from what the 14th Amendment says was totally erased by SCOTUS's grab for power in Trump v. Anderson. Which do YOU say is correct? Thanks.