December 2, 2015
By Larry Klayman
Twenty-two years ago, I conceived of and founded Judicial Watch, as I had labored in the legal system for 17 years and seen its gradual but steady ethical decline: my alma mater, the U.S. Department of Justice prosecuting those on the wrong side of the political fence and protecting those on the right side; judges failing to enforce the rule of law, or favoring those who could get them a higher appointment or an under the table favor or gratuity; and, lawyers whose ethics more closely resembled used car salesmen or insurance adjusters, rather than officers of the court in a formerly noble profession.
But the situation in 1994 – when I filed Judicial Watch's articles of incorporation and began my quest to take on judges, lawyers and President Bill and first lady Hillary Clinton and their 40-plus scandals over the next eight years and beyond (now with my new group, Freedom Watch) – pales in comparison to the rank dishonesty and corruption that permeates the legal system and its judiciary today.
Sure, if as a lawyer one has the opportunity to represent private interests of equal political, economic or social weight, there is a chance that a court or jury will rule correctly and in a just and righteous way. But if a legal revolutionary, such as myself, files suit against a politically, economically or socially connected person or entity, such as the president or other high official or corporate or labor union executive, the president who nominated the judge will usually dictate the ultimate result. Regrettably, I can predict with near exact certainty, after decades of toiling in the increasing ethical swamp of our judicial system, what the result will be depending on the judge's connections, extra-judicial biases, inclinations and likely professional aspirations. Let me give you four examples, just for starters.
First, there are the cases I (and others) brought challenging the eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama to run for and be elected president of the United States. Despite the strong election laws in Florida, my home state, where any taxpayer or voter can challenge a candidate on the basis of fraud or misconduct, the courts there, in three successive cases going all the way to the Florida Supreme Court, dismissed all challenges without nary writing a coherent word explaining why. A similar result occurred in Alabama, although the chief judge there, Roy Moore, had the integrity to write a dissenting opinion agreeing with me. The hard fact: No judge in this country, other than Moore, would make such a ruling against an African-American president like Obama, who has spent his career, a la Al Sharpton playing and using the race card to destroy anyone of a different color who gets in his way. While judges are supposed to adjudicate cases and controversies regardless of political, economic and social pressures, it is revolting at best that they have bent over to this despot and his black and white leftist racist allies and apologists in the media. The result: The country has been sold out to foreign and Muslim interests, including the terrorists Obama refuses to even call Islamic, lest he offend his own bloodline.
Now in the lead-up to the 2016 presidential elections, ironically, two white Republican candidates also do not technically qualify as natural-born citizens eligible to be president. It will be interesting to watch what mostly politically compromised and conflicted judges now "find in their legal hearts" to write should legitimate challenges be filed with regard to the candidacies of Sens. Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz, who were not born in this country to two citizen parents at the time – the uncontroverted Supreme Court precedent that applies (Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162, 1875). The Founding Fathers clearly inserted this requirement into the Constitution to avoid a president being too close to foreign influences – a tragedy if not a disaster we have seen played out and foisted upon us by one President Barack Hussein Obama, our first and hopefully only "Muslim president," born to a Muslim father, educated in Islamic schools in Indonesia, and likely birthed in Kenya and not Hawaii. (While I personally really like and admire Ted Cruz as a true patriot and would be happy to see him as president, he sadly does not qualify.)
Second, there is the recent experience with my clients' and my cases against the National Security Agency. While one of the few courageous judges in the nation along with federal judge Royce C. Lamberth of the same D.C. federal court, the Honorable Richard J. Leon, enjoined this runaway and corrupted spy agency, now run by Obama and the Democrat and Republican establishments in Congress, from conducting mass surveillance on the entire citizenry without probable cause (which Leon found was an almost-Orwellian violation of the Fourth Amendment), politicized judges on the D.C. federal appeals court quickly stayed the injunction under obvious pressure from this establishment. These cases will continue to a jury trial, but the lesson for now is clear. Judges, such as the primarily Obama and Clinton appointees on the D.C. appeals court, will bend over to the establishment. This establishment, generally speaking, got them their appointments and can butter their bread in the future. We the People come a distant second to these judges' own interests.
Third, there is the myriad of federal judges, mostly Clinton and Obama appointees, now overseeing the various cases challenging Democrat presidential candidate Hillary Clinton's personal email obstruction of justice in Freedom of Information Act lawsuits. Despite a few cosmetic and inconsequential rulings by Judge Emmet Sullivan, a Clinton appointee, these cases are being delayed by these judges to get Mrs. Clinton past the 2016 primary and general elections. Her so-called personal email would undoubtedly show, if produced, that the "wicked witch of the left" sold influence – that is, took bribes – for her, her husband's and daughter's sham money-laundering foundation while she was secretary of state. But the Clinton cases will never see the light of day thanks to these politicized judges. And, in the one case that challenged Hillary's bribery scam directly, the one I filed in Palm Beach, Florida, federal court, the Clinton-appointed judge couldn't wait to dismiss it before even hearing any evidence. The case is now on appeal to the federal appeals court in Atlanta.
Fourth, there is my case against OPEC, the Arab oil producers who fix prices and divide markets to manipulate the price of gasoline in clear violation of our antitrust laws. The case, before a Republican appointee of former President George W. Bush, has languished in the court for now almost four years without the judge even permitting us to effect service of process of the complaint against this Saudi-dominated oil cartel. The likely reason: Both the Democrat and Republican establishments are in bed with OPEC and its major oil producer, Saudi Arabia, which finds clever ways to line the pockets of our politicians with favors and other perks. Just ask President George W. Bush who made it a point of immediately jetting members of the Saudi Royal family out of the United States to avoid them being questioned in the days after the Sept. 11 attacks. Seventeen of the 19 hijackers were Saudis. And, is it no coincidence that W's dad, President George H.W. Bush, was then a member of the Carlyle Group, which had invested and held more than a billion dollars for the bin Laden family?
In sum, these are just a few examples of how our judges have largely been bought and sold by the political, economic and social establishments. At some point, the roof is going to blow off of our legal system and We the People, just as we did in 1776, will find no recourse other than to take matters into our own hands. This Thanksgiving Day weekend, we can at least be thankful that the citizenry will not stay silent for long. The die is cast. It's only a matter of time.
© Larry Klayman