By Renee Parsons
As part of the Marxist agenda to transform an existential threat into a full blown Constitutional Crisis, the DOJ’s Special Counsel Jack Smith latest aspiration was to indict former President Donald Trump a second time, criminalizing his election objections as if he could verbally overturn the 2020 results. That indictment has proven to be an overreach of statutory authority within the framework of a flawed legal document that would forever cripple the First Amendment. Smith is intent on proving that Trump was fully aware that he had lost the election and yet stubbornly persisted to oppose election results despite evidence to the contrary. Contrary to Smith’s deepest desire, Trump was clearly convinced that he had won the 2020 election; therefore, relegating Smith’s case to pure hogwash.
In Smith’s favor is the ‘random’ appointment of a partisan District Judge Tanya Chutkan who was appointed by President Barack Obama and to whose campaign she made frequent financial contributions. The US Senate approved her nomination in 2014 on a 95-0 vote with five Not Voting including Senators Mike Lee (Utah) and John Boozman (Ark). That level of support would not occur today but came before awareness of a concerted Democratic campaign to fill the Federal Courts with unqualified partisan hacks. If there was a time when a lifetime appointed Federal Judge was above and beyond reproach, today’s newly appointed judicial branch are predominately bobbing heads with little independent or analytical thinking skills.
A native born Jamaican who grew up in Jamaica before moving to the US as a college student, raises the question of whether Chutkan is imbued with a heart-felt devotion to American principles like the Constitution or understands foreign concepts of freedom and liberty. Associated with the politically tainted Boies, Schiller and Flexner law firm for a dozen years which also represented Fusion GPS of Trump dossier fame, Chutkan was employed by BSF when Hunter Biden was on the payroll and who reportedly brought Burisma into the firm. As a District Court Judge, Chutkan is known to have voluntarily recused herself twice from Hilary Clinton-GPS related cases without explanation; one case involved the lawsuit to release of bank records connecting Fusion GPS to the dossier.
On arraignment day, newly designated DC Chief Judge James Boasberg and Judge Amy Berman Jackson made an unprecedented appearance (ie attorney-client privilege) during Trump’s arrival for no legal purpose in what should be an impeachable act. Their presence abolished any semblance of impartiality, fairness or objective judicial philosophy as their world view confirmed a disrespect for the legal process and contempt for the Defendant as well as setting the tone for Chutkan with a not-so-subtle green light to pull out all the stops.
With expected governmental chicanery and judicial hanky pank, the Defense in any of Trump’s cases should be primed to file a series of motions to create a credible appealable record laying the necessary foundation for the Supreme Court to step in. Tightening its grip on lawfare, Judge Chutkan will conduct a hearing in DC this week regarding arguments on the government’s motion for a ‘protective order’ to limit Trump’s speech.
As J6 Defendants have experienced, the process of adjudication through the Federal judiciary confirms that a black robe does not confer judicial excellence but does disguise abuse of power issues or malignant judicial hubris against American citizens conducted by political stooges. Those same lackeys who believe themselves to hold all the cards; untouchable heavy hitters all of which brings the bloated DC Federal Court system to Congressional attention.
With the site selected by George Washington as a compromise to north and south delegates in 1790, the Congress apportioned land from Virginia and Maryland to create a new Federal District mention of which was included in the US Constitution. Article I, Section 8, Clause 17 established “exclusive Legislation” to become the ‘Seat of the Government of the United States.” In Federalist 43, James Madison defined a “Federal District’ subject to Congress’s ‘exclusive jurisdiction…separate from any state’. In 1863, President Abraham Lincoln established the Supreme Court in the District of Columbia replacing four judges with perceived bias in favor of the south with four judges based on political loyalties to the US.
With 68 sq. mi. and a population of 675,000 (2023), the US Direct Court, District of Columbia Court system boasts twenty six Federal judges including twelve District Judges, nine Senior Judges, four Magistrates and one Chief Judge. That sounds like an excess of judges for a civilian population but Court jurisdiction also encompasses a Federal agency caseload with an annual report which articulates how many cases each judge works for a period of time within a one year period.
While the Court operates totally under the Constitutional jurisdiction of the US Congress, the total 2022 cost to the Federal government for District of Columbia courts for operations and maintenance was $358 Million not including another $46 Million for public defender services. Since November 2021, US Attorney for the US District Court, District of Columbia has been Matthew M. Graves who was approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee on a voice vote on September 23, 2021 and a voice vote by the US Senate on October 28, 2021.
* *
According to the government, Trump’s attempt to overturn the 2020 election included a concerted organized agenda in seven states which has led to criminal prosecution of American citizens who have done nothing wrong, dishonest, unethical or even improper except for having a personal or political association with former President Donald Trump. Well-meaning patriotic Americans who signed up in 2020 to serve as Trump Presidential Electors to the Electoral College (Art. II, Section 1) are now threatened with prosecution.
For context, I served as an election judge at the county fairgrounds in Colorado all day on November 3rd and, upon returning home late that evening, it was immediately apparent that no states had yet ‘called’ the election for Trump; despite his state-wide results being far superior to Biden. By that time, it was midnight on the East Coast.
In the early morning hours of Wednesday November 4, as I continued to follow election results, I personally witnessed the Trump-Biden numbers in Wisconsin ‘flip ‘ at around 1 am. Trump had been in the lead by about 250,000 votes and suddenly, as I stared at the numbers on the screen, inexplicably, those numbers flipped with Biden receiving Trump’s votes and Trump assuming Biden’s votes.
For the record, I have an exceedingly healthy lifestyle as the strongest drink or food I ever ingest is black coffee; I know what I saw and it could not have been more unequivocal despite a disbelief that votes had actually flipped before my eyes. Shall I expect to be served with a Complaint and charged with conspiracy to commit election fraud for publicly sharing my experience?
***
On December 14, 2020, Wisconsin Democrats met in the state Capitol to cast the state’s ten electoral votes for Biden. At the same time, ten Republicans gathered in the Capitol to fill out paperwork claiming Trump had won Wisconsin. They submitted their filings to Congress, the National Archives, a federal judge and then-Wisconsin Secretary of State Doug La Follette.
Today, Wisconsin Governor Tony Evers has called for prosecution of those ten designated Trump electors for “committing crimes with intent to overturn the election.” In addition, Wisconsin Sen. Tammy Baldwin, up for re election in 2024 announced “There has to be accountability for perpetrating the big lie,” Baldwin said. “We know who won the election in Wisconsin. The folks who oversee the election said it was the most secure election we ever had.”
In addition, Trump electors in Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, New Mexico and Pennsylvania are now implicated in what has been defined as an “illegal elector scheme“ by signing the necessary paperwork believing Trump to be their true statewide winner. These are voters who knew the final results were not yet final; that election glitches were still unfolding and that it was too early to verify election fraud before all outstanding questions were resolved. In other words, the vote was certified before all questions were adequately addressed with the response “let’s get it certified and call it a valid election.” Today, some of those Trump electors are being accused of election fraud while their expectation was they were participating in a Constitutionally legitimate election.
***
At the center of the chaos on January 6th was President of the Senate (aka Vice President Mike Pence). As a problematic appointment, he was designated in Article II, Section 1 to “open all the certificates” and count the votes. If a challenge occurred, if there were electoral discrepancies or anomalies as there were in 2020, the Electoral Count Act of 1887 (ECA) would provide “procedures and deadlines for the states to follow in resolving disputes, certifying results, and sending the results to Congress.” During the contentious 2000 US Presidential election, the law’s timing provisions did play a role in Bush v. Gore court decisions. The Act, however, was never seriously tested in a disputed election, nor was it consulted on January 6, 2021.
In the heat of the chaos underway at the Capitol that day, there is little doubt that Pence was not up to the job. To delay the final count and assert that legal advice and consultation was necessary would have required more courage and initiative than Pence had to offer.
At the December 20, 2020 Turning Point USA rally, Pence made it clear ‘we will keep fighting until every legal vote is counted, we will keep fighting until every illegal vote is thrown out and we will win Georgia.”
After the 2020 chaos, the Democrat-controlled Uniparty recognized that there was urgent need to ‘amend’ the ECA before the 2024 election. By 2022, the Senate uniparty sponsored the Electoral Count Reform and Presidential Transition Improvement Act of 2022, led by Sens. Susan Collins (Maine) and Joe Manchin (WVa). Predictably, the ‘improvement act” eliminated the Vice President’s role to “solely ministerial,” with no power to “determine, accept, reject, or otherwise adjudicate or resolve disputes over the proper list of electors, the validity of electors, or the votes of electors.” The Act was attached to the year-end Omnibus and approved in the Senate in a 68-29 vote with fourteen Republican Aye votes and House approval the following day in a 225-201 with nine Aye Republican votes.
Renee Parsons served on the ACLU’s Florida State Board of Directors and as president of the ACLU Treasure Coast Chapter. She has been an elected public official in Colorado, staff in the Office of the Colorado State Public Defender, an environmental lobbyist for Friends of the Earth and a staff member of the US House of Representatives in Washington DC.