View Full Version : War On The Judiciary

Osborne Russell
08-27-2017, 10:01 AM
More than just another Sheriff Joe story.

People are habituated to thinking of the awesome power of the American judiciary, shown in its many epoch-making rulings. But it's awesome like a glacier -- a snail could out-run it, and a few degrees temperature change can stop it dead. Make it back up. Cause it to melt away to nothing.

Extremely vulnerable. Judges can be picked off one by one. What are the rest going to do, march in the street? Arrest legislators? Cut off funding for the executive?

Therefore it's not necessary to attack the judiciary broadly, though that is what Republican "Constitution lovers" continually do. It's enough to attack them one at a time. No one has their back. And once they've been picked off, Republicans refuse to replace them. Game over.

On June 4, 2014, the Phoenix New Times reported that Arpaio had initiated a criminal investigation of Judge Snow as well as the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ).

The article quoted unnamed sources, including a former detective with the MCSO's [Maricopa County Sheriff's Office] Special Investigations Division, who claimed that the investigation was being run directly by Arpaio and was based on his belief that Judge Snow and the DOJ had engaged in a conspiracy against him.

Arpaio neither confirmed nor denied the investigation to the Phoenix New Times. However, in an April 2015 civil contempt hearing before Judge Snow, Arpaio testified that his attorney, Tim Casey, had hired a private investigator to investigate Judge Snow's wife, and that the MCSO had paid Dennis L. Montgomery to investigate whether the DOJ had been penetrating Arpaio's e-mails as well as those of local attorneys and judges, including Judge Snow. (This was called the "Seattle Operation.")

Subsequently, MCSO Chief Deputy Jerry Sheridan testified that there was no investigation into Snow, his wife, or his family. As a result of the potential for ethical conflicts arising from Arpaio's and Sheridan's testimony, Casey withdrew as legal counsel for Arpaio and the MCSO.

During a status conference on May 14, 2015, Judge Snow, reading from a prepared statement, said that documents unearthed from the "Seattle Operation" by the court-appointed monitor revealed "an attempt to construct a conspiracy involving this court" as well as other entities and individuals including the DOJ, former U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, former Phoenix Mayor Phil Gordon, and ex-MCSO Executive Chief Brian Sands, among others.

One week after this status conference, Arpaio's criminal defense attorney filed a motion to disqualify Judge Snow, claiming that he had moved from being an independent arbiter in the case into the role of investigating "issues involving his own family." Judge Snow temporarily halted further hearings in the case, but ultimately denied the motion and resumed holding hearings. On August 7, 2015, Arpaio asked the Ninth Circuit to remove Judge Snow from the case. On September 15, 2015, the Ninth Circuit denied Arpaio's request to remove Judge Snow, as well as Arpaio's related request to halt the lower court's proceedings.

As part of the contempt proceedings, Judge Snow concluded Arpaio and others had made intentionally false statements about the efforts to investigate him.


. . . i.e. in the contempt proceedings covered by the pardon given by President "The judge is a Mexican" Trump.

Lew Barrett
08-27-2017, 11:14 AM
The real issue and something to put up there with the investigations regarding Russia. He's setting the precedent for the unwarranted pardons to come.

Osborne Russell
08-27-2017, 01:04 PM
If the executive attacks the judiciary, the judiciary cannot defend itself. That leaves only the legislature.

Osborne Russell
08-27-2017, 01:17 PM
Lots of action in Act III.


Rich Jones
08-27-2017, 02:08 PM
If the executive attacks the judiciary, the judiciary cannot defend itself. That leaves only the legislature.
"If" the executive attacks the judiciary? He already has with this pardon.

08-27-2017, 04:04 PM
Drip, drip, in such ways democracy is lost.
But then with 40% non-voters maybe it was already lost and just required an executioner?