undefined

We now have another Senate Judiciary Committee hearing going on for the questioning of a U.S. Supreme Court nominee, Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson, who from most accounts is a very fair minded and even-tempered jurist, and extremely qualified for the position from most accounts.  Generally, when I write about judicial issues I keep political party affiliations out of the equation, but this time around I will have to make a bit of an exception since the Republicans, particularly Josh Hawley, a Republican Senator from Missouri, who is hell bent on attacking Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson’s record on crime, particularly on the judge’s record of sentencing child porn offenders to which Hawley has stated “a pattern of letting child porn offenders off the hook for their appalling crimes”.  But despite Howley’s rhetoric, a CNN review of the materials in question shows that Jackson has mostly followed the common judicial sentencing practices in these kinds of cases.  https://www.cnn.com/2022/03/18/politics/republican-attacks-scotus-nominee-sentencing-record/index.html.

And then we have Republican Tennessee Senator Marsha Blackburn’s office stating that she (Blackburn) plans to bring up Judge Brown’s record on sentencing guidelines of child porn offenders at the confirmation hearings.  So the Republicans are going all in with the “soft-on-crime” concept and will be happy to sit there grandstanding in their high chairs with the nation watching on national television and thumping their chests as though they are some kind of special warriors of righteousness.  The Republicans will act as the heroes of the so called “rule of law” phrase that they love to throw around while they thump their chests and try to make it look as though they are the country's "bastions of justice".  But people shouldn’t be so fooled, these same Republicans are nothing more than two-bit hypocrites when it comes to enforcing crime issues.  They hardly qualify for bastion of justice status, they more so qualify for political coward status.

I call them two-bit hypocrites because they love to pick a certain crime topic that they love to exploit in order to score political points —in this case the topic of child pornography.  And score political points with it they undoubtedly will, as they will surely pacify their political bases, but as far as actually being really concerned about softness of crime issues, they are fakes, each and every one of them.

I say they are fakes, each and every one of them, because not a single member of the Senate Judiciary Committee cares anything at all about the problem we are having in our country with judicial corruption issues such as the case fixing activities that have been going on in the U.S. Court of Appeals in Chicago that have been revealed by a very prominent retired federal judge from that court, Judge Richard A. Posner.  http://www.brianvukadinovich.com/blog/post/protectionism-of-case-fixing-is-alive-and-well-in-u-s-court-of-appeals-in-chicago/.  Nor does a single sitting member of the Senate Judiciary Committee care at all that the case fixing activities at the U.S Court of Appeals in Chicago is being swept under the rug by the Chief Judge of that Court, Diane S. Sykes, and her black robed partners in crime. http://www.brianvukadinovich.com/blog/post/the-stench-of-the-seventh-circuit-under-chief-judge-diane-s-sykes/.

Case fixing by federal judges and the protectionism of it by any other judges or government officials and employees is a federal crime under 18 U.S. Code Sec. 2, 18 U.S. Code Sec. 3 and 18 U.S. Code Sec. 4.  Judge Posner has disclosed that Judge Michael S. Kanne had a civil rights decision fixed, and Kanne did not deny on the record that he had the decision fixed when I filed a judicial-misconduct complaint against him with the U.S. Court of Appeals in Chicago.  The chief judge, Diane S. Sykes, then played games and even made a false statement on an official court document during her chicanery in dismissing the judicial-misconduct complaint to which her judicial minions subsequently denied the petition for review and affirmed Sykes’ original order dismissing the complaint, notwithstanding that her judicial minions knew that she made a materially false statement in her order of dismissal of the complaint.  This was all done in the face of Judge Richard A. Posner disclosing Kanne’s case fixing to which Kanne did not deny on the record during the complaint process.  So as far as the United States Court of Appeals in Chicago is concerned, it is perfectly acceptable in that court to fix civil rights decisions, and even in instances where a judge discloses the case fixing conduct, all the chief judge has to do is make a materially false statement on an official court document, to which her judicial minions will acquiesce to, and it is business as usual in that court when it comes to judicial chicanery.

According to the Supreme Court, any judge who does not comply with his/her oath to the Constitution of the United States wars against that Constitution and engages in acts in violation of the Supreme Law of the Land.  The judge is engaged in an act of treason. S. v. Will, 449 U.S. 200, 216, 101 S.Ct. 471, 66 L.Ed.2d 392, 406 (1980); Cohens v. Virginia, 19 U.S. (6 Wheat) 264, 404, 5 L.Ed. 257 (1821).  This would make Kanne and Sykes and her judicial minions treasonous judges according to the Supreme Court’s precedent.

Furthermore, the Seventh Circuit’s protectionism under the leadership of Chief Judge Diane S. Sykes and her judicial minions in essentially looking the other way as to Michael S. Kanne’s criminal conduct of having a decision fixed in violation of the United States laws renders the U. S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in Chicago as a criminal enterprise pursuant to the standards that the Seventh Circuit itself set in U.S. v. Murphy, 768 F.2d 1518, 1531 (7th Cir. 1985) when the Seventh Circuit held that the Circuit Court of Cook County was a criminal enterprise by virtue of the judges’ failure to report the criminal activities of other judges, just as Chief Judge Diane S. Sykes and her undisclosed judicial minions have likewise failed to report the criminal activities of Michael S. Kanne, as disclosed by Judge Posner.  The Senate Judiciary Committee knows that if it would investigate and hold public hearings against Kanne and Sykes and her judicial minions, for the case fixing and cover-up, the Committee would easily find felonious criminal violations under 18 U.S. Code Sec. 2, 18 U.S. Code Sec. 3 and 18 U.S. Code Sec. 4 which it would be duty bound to refer for criminal prosecution.

I have submitted a Petition to the Judicial Conference of the United States in Washington, D. C. to review the chicanery from the U.S. Court of Appeals in Chicago.  In all likelihood they will probably stay with the status quo and protect the judicial corruption as it has simply become a culture, a way of life in this country —that the judiciary isn’t very interested in changing.  But we will see.

And to be fair, while I have been somewhat critical of the Republican members of the Senate Judiciary Committee in this writing, I did so only because of the stance that Hawley and Blackburn have taken where they are trying to portray themselves as champions of justice in attacking “soft on crime” concepts as part of this current Senate Confirmation Hearing of a Supreme Court nominee, while at the same time they apparently have no problem with federal judges getting away with breaking federal laws such as what is going on in the U.S. Court of Appeals in Chicago.  When it comes to this issue, I include the Democrat members as well, and I have in fact been very critical of Democrat Senator, Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Dick Durbin.  http://www.brianvukadinovich.com/blog/post/hey-dick-durbin-and-members-of-the-senate-judiciary-committee-where-are-you-hiding/.

So the moral of this story is if Senate Judiciary Committee members Josh Hawley and Marsha Blackburn, and the rest of the Republicans on the Committee, want to utilize the “soft on crime” issue against Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson at these public hearings, then they should likewise hold public hearings on the case fixing and cover-up activities that are going on in the U.S. Court of Appeals in Chicago and do something about the Senate Judiciary Committee’s history of its own “soft on crime” issues when it comes to holding the federal judges accountable who are breaking laws with case fixing and cover-up activities which are felonies under United States laws. 

Yes, Senator Hawley and Senator Blackburn, we should not be “soft on crime” when it comes to sentencing child porn offenders, but nor should we be “soft on crime” when it comes to federal judges who fix cases and judges who cover it up.  Those judges are no better than the child porn offenders and should be subjected to wearing the same style of handcuffs that the child porn offenders have to wear on their way to the prisons that they belong in.  And the corrupt judges should be disrobed and fitted for the same time of prison wear that the child porn offenders are required to wear.  What say you, Senator Hawley and Senator Blackburn?