Red Herring Alert

There's something fishy going on!

What Other Laws Would Citizens Like To See Violated?

I am not opposed to immigration and refugees; after all, my grandparents came from Germany and Norway.

All Johnson wanted was for our community to be in compliance with the Refugee Act of 1980, 8 USC 1522. It is the law — and the city probably is not in compliance.

What other laws would the citizens like to see violated?

I know, we’ll let the police enter anyone’s home any time and search just for the fun of it! Let’s have county human services publish in the Times the name and financial data of everyone who applies for services! We’ll also have the county publish in the Times the name, address and photo of every juvenile accused of anything! The council should instruct the police to stop doing age checks on liquor stores and tobacco sales. The council should instruct the police to issue Permits to Carry to all felons.

I like that — if you don’t like the law, just ignore it. After all, the City Council is leading by example!

SEEKING JUSTICE

Supporters of judicial integrity attended the April 17th Judiciary and Public Safety Finance and Policy Committee to request legislative intervention in our wrongful prosecution cases.

These cases involve prosecution for ideological beliefs about the court system, obstruction of justice due to illegal withholding/suppression of evidence, numerous due process violations, witness tampering, serial prosecutorial and judicial misconduct, media interference of investigations and trials, violation of rules of the criminal court, significant upward departures in sentencing and false imprisonment of defendants as well as one of the attorneys representing a defendant.

Image result for justice quotesIndividuals have been denied access to justice and the basic right to a fair and impartial trial and the public officials have been and are continuing to act with impunity. Recently, I was jailed for information on this blog regarding these cases.

We have attempted to seek remedy and redress from the MN Court of Appeals, the MN Supreme Court, the FBI, the Attorney General, the Board of Judicial Standards, the Lawyers Professional Responsibility Board, Law Enforcement, Dakota County Commissioners, and the First Judicial District Administrator and Chief Judge, to no avail.

I am not at liberty to discuss the background on the case as I have been gagged by the judges involved and risk further incarceration for revealing details of this high profile case. What this amounts to is a weaponization of the legal system to bully and suppress my first amendment rights.

Here’s what I can say,  the Assistant Dakota County Attorney engaged in malicious and retaliatory prosecution by unrealistically overcharging defendants and allowing wrongful convictions when she knew the affirmative defense negated any criminal liability. The judge erroneously allowed evidence to be illegally withheld from defendants and excluded evidence critical to the affirmative defense, thereby making the affirmative defense ineffective. Evidentiary rules cannot prevent a defendant from presenting his defense. Chambers v. Mississippi, 410 U.S.284 (1972).

The courts are endowed with an abundance of power and yet have limited checks and balances. Dakota County has demonstrated a willingness to abuse the power entrusted to them and have managed to shield themselves from any accountability.

Cover of the first printing of the Minnesota Constitution, 1857

What we requested from the legislators:         

The MN Constitution provides numerous actions that the Legislature can take regarding the Judiciary:

ARTICLE VI, Sec. 9. The legislature may provide by law for retirement of all judges and for the extension of the term of any judge who becomes eligible for retirement within three years after expiration of the term for which he is selected. The legislature may also provide for the retirement, removal or other discipline of any judge who is disabled, incompetent or guilty of conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice.

ARTICLE VIII, Section 1. The house of representatives has the sole power of impeachment through a concurrence of a majority of all its members. All impeachments shall be tried by the senate. When sitting for that purpose, senators shall be upon oath or affirmation to do justice according to law and evidence. No person shall be convicted without the concurrence of two-thirds of the senators present.

Sec. 2. Officers subject to impeachment; grounds; judgment. The governor, secretary of state, auditor, attorney general and the judges of the supreme court, court of appeals and district courts may be impeached for corrupt conduct in office or for crimes and misdemeanors; but judgment shall not extend further than to removal from office and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust, or profit in this state. The party convicted shall also be subject to indictment, trial, judgment, and punishment according to law.

Sec. 5. Removal of inferior officers.

The legislature of this state may provide for the removal of inferior officers for malfeasance or nonfeasance in the performance of their duties.

The Legislature appropriates significant tax payer funding to the courts with no oversight of how these tax payer dollars are being spent. Clearly, Dakota County has not demonstrated good stewardship of public funds in these cases as millions of dollars have been spent on carrying out personal vendettas. At my sentencing hearing, (and speaking on behalf of the state) Assistant County Attorney Keena states,

“As to the sentence that the State believes the defendant should receive in this case, it’s the State’s position that Ms. Evavold should be treated the same and receive the same sentence that xxxxxx  received in her case. And why she remained silent and her rationale for doing so I think is more reprehensible than actions taken by xxxxxx. This defendant did it purposely for her ideological beliefs about the family court system and her complete disregard for the family court system.”

Image result for justice quotesWe are asking for a special counsel investigation into these cases as the Legislature has the power, authority, and duty to investigate any government entity when there is clear evidence of misconduct. This case is of great public interest and must be reviewed to alleviate the adverse administration of justice.

Below are the members that received the information with phone numbers and emails listed. Give them a call or email them to hold them accountable for investigating these cases and take appropriate action against those that are guilty of corrupt conduct in office.

The Rule of Law is Dead

Ultra Liberal Colorado Demonstrates How the Rule of Law Is Dead In America

A shoplifter runs from Walmart after shoplifting a couple of belts. He is chased by police into a strangers home in Greenwood Village, (where else but liberal) Colorado. Police destroy the home and offer only 5,000 dollars. Two years later the City of Greenwood Village keeps delaying the homeowners lawsuit in he alleges unfair compensation. Americans now live in a state of martial law where Constitutional protections such as 5th Amendment property rights are no longer respected. This case in liberal Colorado demonstrates how the rule of law in America is dead…..

Please donate to offset the costs of The Common Sense Show

PLEASE SUBSCRIBE TO OUR YOUTUBE CHANNEL AND DON’T FORGET TO “LIKE” US

SILICON VALLEY PUBLISHER LAUNCHES NEW PUBLICATION COVERING FAMILY COURT, CIVIL COURT, AND CPS CONTROVERSY

SILICON VALLEY PUBLISHER LAUNCHES NEW PUBLICATION COVERING FAMILY COURT, CIVIL COURT, AND CPS CONTROVERSY

In San Francisco on Sunday October 1 – in the shadow of the California Supreme Court, Judicial Council and Commission on Judicial Performance – the launch party for Ex Parte was held. Pictures are included with this post.

Ex Parte is a new print and online source for legal news and opinion from Silicon Valley publisher Susan J. Bassi. Court watchdog and CJP reform advocate Joe Sweeney will lead the editorial staff.

The publication and website will specialize in investigative reporting on California family, civil and probate courts, and Child Protective Services (CPS).

At the San Francisco kick-off event, court and CPS victims, reporters, editors, attorneys, academics, and funders from throughout the state all met for the first time together, face-to-face. The Ex Parte concept germinated and was developed through social media.

The publisher, editors, and reporters at the start-up news organization assert that they will report on the Judicial Branch controversies and human interest stories often overlooked or ignored by existing legal publications, and the mainstream media.

Among other subjects, Ex Parte reporters will be assigned to investigate civil rights and federal law violations – including racketeering, honest services fraud, and misuse of federal funds – by state court judges, court administrators and employees, lawyers, and state and local CPS workers, according to the publisher.

For more information, visit the Ex Parte website at https://www.expartepress.com.

“WE MUST ALL HANG TOGETHER OR SURELY WE SHALL HANG SEPARATELY”

Former Sheriff Joe Arpaio & President Trump Image YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pSw1Rl3_D0k

Arpaio states, “It’s not about me, it’s about our country. If they can get me, the guy with 55 years in law enforcement, where Holder and Obama started this 60 days after they took office, and here I am. I had 2 parking tickets in my life, served as the director of Mexico you name it. I’ve been everywhere and I’m sitting at a defense table. a defense table.  They already drove me out of office, Soros, and they’re still continuing going after me on this. I served my country 55 years and this is what I get for it?”

Don’t I know it!!! If you think you could never end up at a defense table for a noncriminal act…Think again!

https://redherringalert.wordpress.com/2017/08/07/when-we-lose-free-speech-we-lose-everything/

EXCLUSIVE: SHERIFF ARPAIO TELLS INFOWARS HOW IT FEELS FOR TRUMP TO STAND BESIDE HIM

Arpaio gives his first interview since Trump foreshadowed his pardoning

Former Sheriff Joe Arpaio joins Alex Jones live via Skype to give exclusive details on his current court case, and show what it means to him to have the President of the United States at his back.

A Good Day For The First Amendment

Jailed Blogger Darren Chaker Wins First Amendment Case

SAN FRANCISCO, CA – 12/27/2016 (PRESS RELEASE JET) — A California Blogger , Darren Chaker , recently reversed his conviction in federal court on First Amendment grounds where he said “Ms. Leesa Fazal, an investigator with the Nevada Attorney General’s Office, was “forced out” of her previous post with the Las Vegas Police Department.”  See Cato Institute article. Supporters included Cato InstituteACLU of San DiegoElectronic Frontier FoundationFirst Amendment Coalition, and Brechner First Amendment Project at University of Florida. ?

After spending months in jail, Mr. Chaker imprisonment was found unjust. The Ninth Circuit, Case. No. 15-50138/ No. 15-50193, found, see opinion “Chaker’s blog post, which claimed that former police investigator Leesa Fazal “was forced out of the Las Vegas Metro Police Department,” does not qualify as harassment.” The court continued to state in relevant part, “The government also failed to prove that Chaker’s blog post satisfied the elements of defamation, including falsity and actual malice. See N.Y. Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 279–80 (1964).”

In this instance Nevada Attorney General Investigator Leesa Fazal of Las Vegas made multiple reports about the blog to her own agency, Las Vegas Metro Police Department, and FBI. None of them took any action to file charges.  Until she contacted Mr. Chaker’s probation officer alleging defamation, which people are typically sued for in civil court. Mr. Chaker was on probation for a white collar crime.

The Human Rights Defense Center published an article saying in part, “The First Amendment protects the right of everyone to use the Internet to criticize government officials – including people on supervised release from prison,” noted Electronic Frontier Foundation senior staff attorney Adam Schwartz.

As reported by the Cato Institute in a post appeal article, “Chaker notes on his personal blog that he is “only one of 4,708,100 people are on probation or parole.” Millions of individuals’ political speech could have been swept up under the precedent set by the lower court’s outrageous decision…. The decision in Chaker v. United States is thus a victory for First Amendment advocates and political activists everywhere. It protects the rights of even the most downtrodden and implicitly applies the correct defamation standard to political speech aimed at public officials.”

During oral argument on June 10, 2016, it was conceded the speech was non-criminal. The Ninth Circuits YouTube Channel, shows oral argument where the former chief judge did not appear happy about restricting non-criminal speech:

23:16 Judge Kozinski to AUSA – “You managed to bamboozle…I mean the United States, managed to fool the district judge imposing the condition…”;

26:31 Judge Kozinski, “It’s okay for the district court to say obey all laws…but this is not at all limited to criminal conduct…this is conduct that is not illegal…agree this is conduct that is not illegal?”, reluctantly Government attorney said “agreed that the condition reached conduct that is not illegal.”

Jailing a blogger for non-criminal speech for criticizing government is precisely what sets America apart from oppressive regimes who seek to control the media and thoughts of those who govern its population. In this instance, the government lost, but sets a dangerous precedent of how resources can be used to silence critics.

Additional information may be found at, http://darrenchaker.com/darren-chaker-wins-appeal/

Media Contacts:

Company Name: Darren Chaker
Full Name: Darren Chaker
Phone: 213-915-6804
Email Address: darrenchaker@gmail.com
Website: http://darrenchaker.com/

‘It’s time to tell the judiciary to go to hell’

WND EXCLUSIVE

Author reveals recipe for fixing federal courts without constitutional amendment

SupremeCourt2

Are you a conservative worried about losing the federal courts if Hillary Clinton is elected president?

Don’t waste your tears at this point, says Conservative Review senior editor Daniel Horowitz, the courts are already gone.

“This is like a wind-up toy: every four years, Republicans dangle in front of us, ‘Hey, you gotta vote for us, otherwise we’ll lose the courts,’” Horowitz said during a recent appearance on The Tom Roten Morning Show.

“I’m here to tell you we’ve lost the courts. They’re gone, gone, gone. We do need a Republican Congress and administration, but for the purposes of stripping the courts of that power, giving it back to Congress and the state legislatures.”

Horowitz pointed out things have gotten so bad conservatives couldn’t even get a simple voter ID law past the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, regarded as one of the least liberal circuits. Ten of the 15 judges on the Fifth Circuit were appointed by Republican presidents.

However, only four of the 13 circuit courts in the country currently have a majority of Republican appointees sitting on the bench.

Many conservatives believe all they need to do is elect a Republican president who will appoint conservative judges to the federal courts, but Horowitz noted it would take many consecutive years of Republican presidents hitting the mark on their judicial appointments to finally turn the courts in a more conservative direction.

By that point, it may be too late. Horowitz noted the courts have been moving quickly in recent years: they have mandated states fund Planned Parenthood, mangled state religious liberty laws, made transgender people a protected class, forced states to give birth certificates to illegal aliens and tossed out basic voter integrity law

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2016/08/its-time-to-tell-the-judiciary-to-go-to hell/#zGv1HGBRPDpaPMiH.99

%d bloggers like this: