I gave Chris a fully comprehensive and detailed explanation of my concerns on October the 9th ( https://i.imgur.com/koyj2r9.png ). No action was taken. You hosted this event with the intent to hear questions and concerns, but are then offended when I bring them up???
For the third time, check the court trellos. It’s blatant that the Department of Justice is failing to file adequate criminal cases in comparison to the amount of submissions they receive. Furthermore, of the cases they do file, they are losing them at a statistically larger amount than previously. This can all be found on the Court Case Submissions Center Trello, The District Court of Firestone Trello, and the Completed Cases Archive Trello. Links to all of these can be found in my chambers.
I don’t have a “need to attack.” I brought up concerns because you invited them. Again, if you can’t take the heat, get out of the kitchen.
I am completely aware of the removal of the Appeals Court and I inquire, how does that serve as negative? I’m well aware that it is removed, I simply used a more broader term to describe its removal.
Once again, there’s a obvious line between respectfully giving out your concerns and
looks like I must say that again.
Also, you’re a Supreme Court Justice? Shouldn’t you also represent yourself accordingly rather than act like some stuck up citizen? It’s only in favor of decency that you do so, I find the attack to be unethical and I’m pretty sure everyone can concur on that. You do realize there’s a separate trello, I cannot go into details as it is to be kept classified, but cases remain on there. But, that doesn’t matter, because you legit STILL haven’t provided that establishment act, so I can care less of that bullshit claim you made on filing cases. We most definitely take any cases submitted by citizens, we are doing our job.
Any other concerns are completely baseless, what part is unclear to you? I’m not some punching bag that will take apocryphal claims.
I’ll admit, I was lazy and looked at an older version of the constitution, but it seems to me that you’re just trying to find an excuse that I’m not as legally fluent as you. I don’t stay up 24/7 and study Firestone law, sorry.
I literally made the separate Trello–of course I know of its existence. That is still not an excuse for the DoJ filing one case in 30 days.
I expressed my concerns through a line of questioning which you did not appropriately address.
I am, in fact, an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court. That doesn’t mean I waive all my rights as a citizen of the state. I literally built the modern Department of Justice, and I am certainly not going to sit on the sidelines while you all let it shrivel and die.
I represented myself appropriately at the interview. To my recollection, I asked questions based off your answers. I stated that if what you were saying is correct, 1superchris2 is not executing his duties.
The Establishment Act is publicly available on the forums ( Justice Department Recognition Act of 2017 ). You’ll notice that this law delegates the DoJ as the only agency authorized to prosecute criminals, and if the DoJ is NOT doing this, they are both endangering public safety and failing to meet their obligations.
You keep bringing up the filing cases claim, you finally provided a legislation, but you still yet fail to prove how it is mandated. After a brief look over of this legislative piece, no where does it state that the FDoJ “must file a case”. Are you trying to say that the rate of prosecutions is sluggish? I cannot comprehend what your concern is regarding the State Attorney’s Office. I’m not in charge of that, each Director has their own respective duties, you’d go to who is in charge and express your concerns regarding that. I was never delegated to handle SAO related issues or matter, and I’d like to make that sufficiently clear.
So you’re using your previous standing in this department to justify for your actions? Seems pretty weak to me, you only hurt your beloved department by trying to correct your actions using arrogant excuses. In no where did I say that 1superchris2 should be ‘impeached’ or failing to execute his duties, you took that out of proportions and spewed unnecessary statements during your ‘civil’ concern.
If that’s what the Judiciary calls appropriate, I honestly have no words.
I cant really comment regarding the activity of the DoJ yet. But, regarding the mentions of me within this post. I can say many of the things discussed and problems presented are real. I’ve discussed them many times on my show. Whilst I respect the knowledge Jefrafra has, I do not respect the complete lack of respect for judicial impartiality. I have not personally been presided over by Jefra, and frankly hope I never am as I do not trust he’d have an impartial ruling regarding me. He can say it doesn’t extend to the courtroom, and whilst it hasn’t with me. It has with Ftlicious, and i’m sure others I know for a fact I’m not the only one he personally attacks and usually I don’t make mention of it. But, it has gotten to the point that the Court Announcements have been used to attack me personally, as well as others including patchy.
I know you’re not one for jokes, but Patchy knows I don’t personally dislike him, and it was an obvious joke.
Please cite one time I have made a case based on personal impartiality and not the rule of law. I can 100% tell you that’s wrong. I always have a legal basis.
I could name a few cases in which your respective decisions have directly contradicted themselves in your capacity as a SCJ. For example the case regarding freedom of press, and classification in this case you and the SC express that one simply cannot overrule the other, and then proceed to make one overrule the other. If I was on my home computer I keep most of this stuff saved as evidence but until monday I wont be.
The Constitution is not more powerful than the Bill of Rights, nor is any section of either of these documents more powerful than another.
When two sections directly conflict each other, it should be the duty of congress to fix. However, if it is brought up in a writ, the courts have to clarify, and generally, we try to go with the option that is least damaging to the state.
That’s not contradictory…it’s basic constitutional law.
You ask intentionally inflamed questions and then complain when I provide politicized responses. I’m not feeding into a show based on misconstrued facts.
I’d like you to present a single example in which I’ve presented false information. If you make a statement, I present it as is, no edits and continue to do so for anyone who makes a statement for my show, and I know for a fact you cant point to a single situation to the contrary. I ask a simple, “Do you have any comments regarding what went down at the panel” could potentially present the evidence that only one case has been done to everyone, as I haven’t currently found it. I try to reach out to every single person involved in a situation to give their statements, just some choose to no comment for professional reasons, other choose not to due to personal dislike. Another reason why I wouldn’t ever want you to preside over any case involving me.
I can certainly hear a case with you while having no bias, but I would voluntarily recuse because you are so concerned.
I don’t even remember what I said in the court announcements channel, but apparently it really got under your fingernails. I apologize, as it was most likely a joke. I think you’re indisputably annoying and do a lot of your “exposing cOrRuPtIOn” work as a ploy for attention, but I don’t dislike you personally.
Anyway, I didn’t say you present false information. I said you misconstrue facts. You used a joke Danny made to make it seem like he bribed the Governor for his nomination. You didn’t lie, but you misrepresented.
I literally during that segment acknowledged that it was likely a joke. I referred to MANY other things MANY other concerns to which danny even admitted himself that the segment had almost nothing to do with that joke.
