Powerful Constitutional Rights
Let Justice be done, though the Heavens May Fall
Equalvoteamerica’s suit over McConnells abuse of power and obstruction of Congress regarding the Garland debacle. No where does any document give him the power to veto Appointments. He’s now openly sabotaging the impeachment proceedings.
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2019/10/12/1892067/-An-Open-Letter-to-Urge-the-Attorney-General-of-New-York-State-to-Join-the-Lawsuit-against-McConnell?_=2019-10-12T18:40:27.210-07:00
POWERFUL CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS POLITICAL COMMITTEE
REPUBLICAN COUP D’ETAT OF U.S. SUPREME COURT AND PRESIDENCY
In 2000 a 5 justice Republican vote on the U.S. Supreme Court stole the election from Al Gore, Jr. and gave the presidency of the United States to George W. Bush by tossing out and invalidating an order from the Florida Supreme Court to allow all counties in Florida to have full recounts of presidential ballots. The U.S. Supreme Court reversed every decision on the final authority of a state’s highest appellate court, in this case, the Florida Supreme Court, to rule on the meaning and application of the Florida state statutory election law [not the Florida State Constitution election guarantees]. In the 200 years from 1800 on, the U.S. Supreme Court held in a long line of election case precedents, that the decision of a state’s highest appellate court was not subject to U.S. Supreme Court review and did not present a federal question of the United States Constitution that was reviewable by the federal courts at any level. The most recent case on this was the Coke Stevenson challenge to the Lyndon B. Johnson Senate election victory, in a small rural county in the state of Texas, in the 1940s. Due to the fact that a corrupt 5 judge majority of the U.S. Supreme Court decided to review the Florida Supreme Court decision in Bush. v. Gore, George W. Bush, Jr. was wrongly given the popular vote victory by 852 votes and then George W. Bush won all of the Florida electoral votes. Because the U.S. Supreme Court wrongfully stole the election from Al Gore Jr. by a 5-4 vote, and awarded the popular vote win to George W. Bush Jr., the electoral votes of Florida were awarded to George W. Bush, Jr. and George W. Bush, Jr. won the majority of U.S. Electoral votes in the November 2000 election.
In George W. Bush’s second term in the presidency, Rehnquist and another U.S. Supreme Court Justice retired and Sandra Day O’Connor retired which created 2 vacancies on the U.S. Supreme Court that George W. Bush, Jr. was able to fill. The appointees nominated by Bush, Jr. and approved by advise and consent of the U.S. Senate in a floor vote, were Samuel Alito and Chief Justice John Roberts. These two Justices participated willingly the coup d’etat vote 5-4 to issue the opinion of Citizens United , which claimed that campaign money spent was speech and therefore under the freedom of speech guarantee of the 1st Amendment of the U.S. Constitution was protected unlimited. Therefore corporations, business entities, an individual could engage in unlimited spending for and against candidates in state and federal elections. Citizens United was calculated to give an enormous advantage to Republican candidates who had millionaires and billionaires funding their campaigns. Citizens United struck an enormous blow to weaken the Democratic Party by allowing the very richest of U.S. Citizen voters to outspend ordinary U.S. Voters in elections.
The 5 Justice conservative majority on the U.S. Supreme Court upheld voter ID laws in Indiana as constitutional. This would allow states to require voters to have driver license or photo identification cards as a requirement to be able to cast ballots in person at the polls. Then the states could make it difficult or impossible for people to have access to Department of Motor Vehicle offices in the evening or weekend or at locations that were easy for poor people to get to. The 5 Justice majority on the U.S. Supreme Court struck down an entire section of the Voting Rights Act that required preclearance of any state statutes on voting and voter qualification by attorneys in the civil division of the U.S. Attorneys office for the district the state was located in. This now freed Southern states to pass laws that restricted who could vote and what interference states could create with the right to vote. Voter ID laws would play a major role in reducing Democratic registered voter turnout in state and federal elections, and defeating Hillary Clinton in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Ohio.
In 2008, Barack Obama was elected president as the first black president in U.S. History. In the first 5 years of Obama’s terms, two U.S. Supreme Court seats were vacated. Obama nominated and the U.S. Senate confirmed Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayer. In February 2016 in the last year of Obama’s second term Antonin Scalia died creating a vacancy on the U.S. Supreme Court for Barack Obama to nominate, appoint and fill with the advice and consent of the U.S. Senate, then dominated by a Republican Party majority of 52 Senators and two independent Senators from Maine and Vermont, Rufus King and Bernie Sanders respectively.
When the judgeship formerly occupied by Scalia became vacant, the majority leader of the U.S. Senate, Senator Mitch McConnell, immediately went into action to tell all U.S. Voters that no Judge / Justice nominated by Barack Obama would receive a yea or nay vote from the full Senate, which is actually required as a quorum of U.S. Senators under the official Senate rules. Senator Mitch McConnell went on in a beyond belief manner to announce that no judicial nominee nominated by President Barack Obama, no matter who that nominee might be would receive a yea or nay vote by the full Senate, because he McConnell refused to allow that to happen and that he Sen. McConnell would refuse to schedule a yea or nay vote for any such Obama nominee. After a week or two Sen. Chuck Grassley and a number of meetings with Mitch McConnell and lobbyists for the National Rifle Association and the Koch Brothers and Phil Anschutz of Colorado, who wanted the seat saved for his darling Judge Neil Gorsuch, Sen. Chuck Grassley jumped on the Republican Party bandwagon. Sen. Chuck Grassley announced that there would be no hearings for the nominee nominated by President Obama, who was, in fact, Judge Merrick Garland. Sen. Chuck Grassley, in contempt of the U.S. Constitution, announced that there would be no Judiciary Committee hearings as per the U.S. Senate rules that applied to Judicial nomination for federal judgeships, including specifically the U.S. Supreme Court. For the first time in 220 years of United States history, a Senate conspiracy was created, by renegade lawless Senators, with McConnell and Sen. Grassley leading the renegade action to deny and sabotage the constitutional powers of the President of the United States, to fill vacancies in the U.S. Supreme Court, That president was Barack Obama in 2016. Sen. Grassley even went further in his civilly illegal and criminal behavior to announce that if Hillary Clinton were to win the election that he would make sure that there would be no Judiciary Committee hearings for any U.S. Supreme Court nominee for the entire 4 or 8 years of Hillary Clinton’s term, that she might serve, as President of the United States. This type of treason, obstruction of justice, violation of Obama’s and 45 Democratic Senators constitutional rights was committed by Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Senator Mitch McConnell R-Kentucky, the Senate majority leader.
In summary:
President Obama nominates Merrick Garland.
Sen. Mitch McConnell refuses to hold an up or down approval or disapproval vote on Judge Merrick Garland.
1. Sen. Mitch McConnell states to news media, CNN, MSNBC, CBS News, and others that no matter whom President Obama nominates to the U.S. Supreme Court vacancy, that Mitch McConnell will not allow or schedule a full Senate yea or nay vote on such Obama nominee during the remaining year of the Obama Presidency. McConnell says that he will let the voters decide in November who will get to nominate a Judge to the vacant judgeship on the U.S.Supreme Court.
2. Sen. Chuck Grassley holds secret meetings of the Judiciary Committee Republicans demanding their loyalty and illegally holding a vote of Republican Senators on the Judiciary Committee, at which those committee members vote in secret without the Democrat Senators present, to refuse to schedule hearings on the Judge Merrick Garland nomination. Senator Grassley holds these secret meetings without an official Senate reporter with an Xscribe machine to record the meeting and record the unofficial votes cast at the meeting in violation of federal law. Grassley commits obstruction of justice by having official business committee meetings from which all Democrat Senators were excluded, but Grassley guesses that he can get away with that behavior with Mitch McConnell in agreement, that no one either President Obama or the Democrats on Judiciary will file any civil action or request criminal prosecution
3. Sen. Chuck Grassley refuses to hold judiciary committee hearings on nominee Judge Merrick Garland or any nominee chosen by Pres. Obama in Obama’s last year of his presidency of 2016 after Antonin Scalia’s surprise death in February 2016 until January 20, 2017.
4. Sen. Grassley, acting in civil conspiracy and, I allege, criminal conspiracy, states as Chairman of the Republican-controlled Judiciary Committee, that he, Grassley, will refuse to hold hearings on Judge Merrick Garland or on any nominee chosen by President Obama in violation of his own Judiciary Committee Rules and the Constitution of the United States. Both Mitch McConnell and Sen. Chuck Grassley emphatically state in public speeches, that it does not matter whom President Obama nominates for the U.S. Supreme Court that no hearings will be held for such nominees and no yea or nay vote by the full Senate will be scheduled for any Obama Justice nominee,
14th Amendment The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void. (GPO annotated Constitution)
What about arbitrary and capricious due process 14th amendment protections?
When do we declare this Congressional abdication, the refusal even to execute agreed-upon budgets to keep the government running?
Attorney Misconduct Complaint Against Addison Mitchell McConnell
Violation of the oath taken by Addison Mitchell McConnell as an attorney, as a member of the bar of the Commonwealth of Kentucky. The specific violation that complainant / plaintiff Bret Sablosky alleges is that Defendant Addison Mitchell McConnell is guilty of violating the oath of attorney where McConnell swore to support the Constitution of the United States so help him God.
Bret Sablosky alleges that Addison Mitchell McConnell has deliberately, maliciously, and intentionally violated the explicit commands, written in shall language, both procedureally and substantively with respect to nomination and appointment of United States Supreme Court Justices. Addison Mitchell McConnell, hereinafter McConnell, between about February 1, 2016 and January 19, 2017 and continuing through April 30, 2018 did obstruct, interfere with, prevent, subvert, and sabotage the procedures and legislative acts required to be performed by the majority leader of the majority party in the U.S. Senate, the members of the majority party of the Judiciary Committee of the U.S. Senate , who at the time were the Republican Party Senators, and the full membership of all political parties and independent Senators in the U.S. Senate to lawfully provide “advice and consent” to the president of the United States, Barack Obama, to appoint a U.S. Supreme Court Justice, to fill a vacant Judgeship / Justiceship on such Court, which vacancy occurred in the month of February 2016.
Defendant McConnell along with other Republican U.S. Senators, the Republican Senate Whip , Sen. John Cornyn, the Republican President Pro Tem, Sen. Orrin Hatch and Sen. Chuck Grassley, Republican Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee acted to violate, subvert, interfere with, obstruct, and prevent the operation of the US. Constitution Article II, Section 2, Paragraph 2 which says:
Note that the pronoun “he” refers to the President of the United States, who at the time of the alleged criminal and civilly illegal acts of misconduct were committed by McConnell, was Barack Obama.
“and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other Public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the Supreme Court.”
A clear reading of this section makes the job of advising and consenting by the U.S. Senate to nominees for Judges, now called Justices, of the U.S. Supreme Court, mandatory, when a vacancy occurs on the U.S. Supreme Court, under a sitting president The U.S. Senate is not given and does not have the right to refuse hearings [required under the Senate’s own rules] ,and the the U.S. Senate does not have the right to refuse a yay or nay vote of a quorum of the full Senate membership, to deliberately obstruct the President’s nominee, who in this case was Judge Merrick Garland. The fact that the leaders and or members of the Republican Party. or any party in power, dislike or hate the political party and political philosophy of the sitting elected president, does not give those Senators of the majority party, the Republican Party, and their majority leader, Defendant McConnell, the power to nullify President Obama’s specific duties, obligations and powers of his office, the Presidency, required by the U.S. Constitution.
The U.S. Constitution was written to require and mandate that the President be allowed and is always required to perform his designated duties, including the nomination and appointment of U.S. Supreme Court Judges, now called Justices by statute, despite opposition and disagreement by U.S. Senators, who may politically oppose the philosophy or qualifications of the Judge / Justice nominee, nominated by the President.
Senators like Defendant McConnell are not allowed to refuse to provide the “advice and consent duty which is required in Article II, Section2, Paragraph 2. Refusing to provide the advice and consent required to be provided, is completely different than advising and consenting. Providing Advice and consent includes the public hearings required, under the current Senate Rules, which have been required since 1916. The US. Constitution in Article II, Section 2, Paragraph 2 does not require hearings, but the current U.S. Senate Rules do. The Constitution does require a yay or nay vote on every nominee by the full Senate on any nominee, nominated by a sitting President. Defendant McConnell maliciously, deliberately, with criminal intent, purposefully obstructed President Obama from performing his presidential duties, required by the Constitution of the United States in Article II, Section 2, paragraph 2. Senators are allowed to refuse to consent by voting nay on a nominee, that the Senators wish to not be appointed to serve on the U.S. Supreme Court. But Senators are not allowed to refuse to hold a yay or nay vote of the full Senate with a quorum of Senators present. McConnell holds that the Senate can refuse to hold Judiciary Committee hearings and refuse to hold a yay or nay vote on a nominee, and defendant McConnell falsely claims that is a refusal to consent. The advice is the consideration of the nominees qualifications and political / judicial philosophy. The consent is the vote yay or nay on the floor of the U.S. Senate by the full Senate with a quorum of Senators present under the U.S. Senate rules of what constitutes a quorum.
These are a clear, deliberate, malicious, premeditated intentional series of civilly illegal and of criminal acts committed by defendant McConnell to violate the sworn promise in the oath of officers and attorneys in Kentucky Constitution, Section 228.
“I do solemnly swear [or affirm as the case may be], that I will support the Constitution of the United States…….so help me God.”
At the heart of the questions over whether Defendant McConnell committed serious acts of attorney misconduct is the question of his refusal, in conspiracy with Sen. Chuck Grassley R Iowa, chairman of Senate Judiciary Committee, and Senator John Cornyn R. Texas, Senate Republican majority Whip, and Senator Orrin Hatch R. Utah, Senate President Pro Tem, in all of year 2016, to hold hearings in the Judiciary Committee, and the refusal to hold a full Senate vote with a quorum of Senators present, that would have been a yay or nay vote, under the above “advice and consent” clause. The legal question here is: does Senator McConnell have the discretionary right to to prevent such nomination hearings from being held and does Senator McConnell have the discretionary right to prevent such yay or nay vote of the full Senate, with a quorum of Senators present from being held, after a serving president, has in presidential writing and in an official oral announcement, made a nomination, to attempt the bringing about of an appointment [called confirmation],of a nominee to the United States Supreme Court, upon the occurrence of a vacancy, of a judgeship on that court.
An examination of language, that Defendant McConnell refused to support, as required by the oath of attorney, and that Defendant McConnell worked hard maliciously, and evilly, to obstruct and to prevent, the “shall” commanded performance of Senate duties in Article II, Section 2, Paragraph 2:
“and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the Supreme Court.”
The “shall nominate” means the president must nominate a judge or judges to fill any vacant judgeship on the Supreme Court, when such vacancy occurs during a President’s term in office.
The “shall nominate” and “shall appoint” language makes at minimum a floor vote of all Senators with a quorum of senators present on the appointment mandatory.
The “shall appoint” language modifies the “by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate” phrase and is a prepositional phrase, that is also an adverbial clause. This adverbial clause modifies the”shall appoint” language and makes the work of the Senate mandatory, to perform the
advice and consent” duty to any nominee for Supreme Court Judge / Justice. If the Senate were allowed to deny hearings and or deny a yay or nay vote on presidential nominees to the Supreme Court, the term , “by and with the advice and consent of the Senate” in that Section of the U.S.Constitution, Article II, Section 2, Paragraph 2, would say instead, in a separate sentence following, that, “the senate may refuse to give advice and consent for the purpose of preventing the president from nominating and appointing Judges of the Supreme Court at the choosing of the full Senate,by a yay or nay vote of the full Senate with a quorum present”. The Constitution does not say that.
Defendant McConnell states Obama nominee, Merrick Garland, or any Obama nominee, will not be given Judiciary Committee hearings, or a vote of yea or nay by the full Senate with a quorum between February 1, 2016 and January 19, 2017, because this is Obama’s 4th and last year in Obama’s
2nd term which makes Obama a “lame duck President”. The key self incriminating statements made by defendant McConnell, as to his own guilt, civilly and criminally, is that McConnell in multiple statements, made on the Senate floor and to the news media, states that there will be no hearings, no yay or nay vote of the full Senate, on any nominee nominated by Obama. The plaintiff wishes to point out that had McConnell said, that his party had such a dislike, hatred, or strong feelings against Merrick Garland, but that the president should nominate another nominee instead, immediately, and that he, defendant McConnell would certainly see that the other nominee would be given hearings and a yay or nay full Senate vote [with a quorum of Senators present], under the strict and specific constitutional commands of Article II, Section 2, Paragraph 2, then McConnell would still have obeyed the Constitutional commands, to honor the powers of the President, to nominate and appoint Supreme Court Judges / Justices. McConnell thought he was really a genius, by deciding that he would prevent members of his own Republican Party from voting on a lawful U.S. Supreme Court nominee. McConnell clearly believed that enough members of his own Republican party, who were Senators, would have voted yay in a floor vote on Judge Merrick Garland, that Garland would have been appointed [confirmed], with a majority of votes, in a floor vote of the full Senate, with a quorum of Senators present. This is clearly what defendant McConnell sought to prevent, by his civilly illegal and criminal subversion of the U.S. Constitution, Article II, Section 2, Paragraph 2. It is the duty of this disciplinary committee and the Judges of the Kentucky Supreme Court to punish defendant McConnell ,severely, for his serious crimes of attorney misconduct in obstructing, subverting, and interfering with the operation of the United States Constitution and the Presidency.
No section of the US. Constitution says that a president of the United States has no powers of his office during the 4th year of any term, that he or she is elected to, while the president serves his term to which that president was elected. Article II, Section 2, Paragraph 2 does not limit or nullify or strip a serving president of his powers to nominate and appoint U.S. Supreme Court Justices in any year of a president’s term in office. McConnell acted to sabotage, subvert, obstruct, interfere with, and disobey, the clear shall language commands of Article II, section 2, Paragraph 2 of U.S Constitution quoted above. Defendant McConnell did not support the U.S. Constitution, which he swore to support, so help him God. Defendant McConnell’s malicious, illegal goal was, and is, to interfere with the operation of the U.S. Constitution as a Kentucky licensed attorney and as a U.S. Senator so that his Republican Party has 5 or more Judgeships, a majority of Judges / Justices on the U.S. Supreme Court. This is contrary to the clear dictates of Article II, Section 2, Paragraph 2 of the U.S. Constitution both in procedural law and substantive law.
According to defendant McConnell, the word “president” as used in Article II, Section 2, Paragraph 2 means next president, not the current serving president. Mysteriously, the word “next” is nowhere to be found in the text of the U.S. Constitution. “President” means the currently serving president, the president serving in office at the time, that the vacancy in the Judgeship on the U.S Supreme Court occurred, whether due to death or resignation. President does not mean next president, and skip the current serving president.
Defendant McConnell said,“Let the voters decide”, what nominee will fill this judgeship seat on the U.S. Supreme Court in the upcoming November 2016 election. That is clearly not what the U.S. Constitution says, about who fills a U.S. Supreme Court vacancy in Article II, Section 2, Paragraph 2, which says that the president nominates, nominees, for positions of Judge [Justice}on the Supreme Court. Voters are not mentioned, as deciding who such judge nominees will be. Defendant McConnell lies about “Let the voters decide” are contrary to the clear text of the U.S. Constitution, Article II, section 2, Paragraph 2. Defendant McConnell’s clear intention was to disobey, act contrary to, obstruct, subvert, and sabotage the procedural commands, as to procedures and the substantive commands as to substantive law, that all Senators in the Senate and Senators on the Judiciary Committee were to perform. The required duties were for all Senators to perform the “advice and consent” functions.
Defendant McConnell is clearly guilty of obstructing, interfering with, sabotaging, disobeying the operation and functioning of the executive branch of government, the presidency of the United States.
Why? Because when President Obama nominated nominee Merrick Garland. Defendant McConnell, in cooperation with Sen..Chuck Grassley, Sen.Orrin Hatch, Sen John Cornyn, and all Republican members of the Judiciary Committee, chose to not perform the required mandatory duties explicitly required by the U.S. Constitution in Article II, Section 2, Paragraph 2. Obstruction, subversion, and interference with the exercise of powers of the presidency, the executive branch of the United States government, is disloyalty, disobedience, obstruction, subversion, and refusal to support the Constitution of the United states, and a malicious, evil, calculated, premeditated action to obstruct, interfere with, nullify, and overthrow the elected executive branch of the United States government. It should be noted that Sen. Orrin Hatch was the President Pro Tem of the U.S. Senate and Sen. John Cornyn was the Republican Senate Whip of the Republican Party majority in the U.S. Senate.
On Sunday August 6, 2016 Defendant McConnell appeared on a Kentucky Educational Television Show titled “Fancy Farm” and said “One of my proudest moments was when I told Obama “You will not fill this Supreme Court vacancy.” This quote segment is available on snopes.comfactcheckspolitics. This quote proves malicious, evil premeditated criminal intent by defendant McConnell to obstruct, interfere with, nullify the powers of the presidency, the executive branch and prevent the operation of the U.S. Constitution with regard to the nomination and appointment of Supreme Court Justices..
Defendant McConnell has committed felony criminal acts of attorney misconduct to frustrate, disobey, disable, impede, obstruct, sabotage and interfere with the operation of the U.S. Senate, the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee, and the Presidency of Barack Obama, which is the executive branch of the U.S. Government.
Defendant McConnell must be punished with the most severe punishment for these criminal acts of attorney misconduct by revocation of his Kentucky license to practice law.
Under established federal case law, Justices of the Kentucky Supreme Court and the staff attorneys, who work for the State Bar of Kentucky disciplinary panels, can interpret the meaning of provisions of the U.S. Constitution including Article II, Section 2, Paragraph 2, for the purpose of determining if Defendant McConnell committed crimes of attorney misconduct by violating explicit commands and instructions, both procedural and substantive, of those constitutional provisions in the U.S. Constitution, which command the performance of duties of U.S. Senators to provide advice and consent on U.S. Supreme Court nominations.
Defendant McConnell as an elected public official who has served as a Senator in the United States Senate and who has a solemn responsibility, under the oath of attorney, as an officer of the courts of Kentucky, to uphold the United States Constitution, as he swore to do so. This responsibility to uphold the U.S. Constitution exists, even though in performing his duties in the U.S. Senate, defendant McConnell is not representing a client in a private or public law practice.
The plaintiff has attached a Table of Points and Authorities with evidence which includes both printed articles covering McConnell and news conferences given by defendant McConnell on video clips from TV news and C-Span on the Senate Floor.
On NPRpolitics newscast of March 16, 2016 See exhibit 2 attached: defendant McConnell states at page 3 paragraph 2
“The American people are perfectly capable of having their say on this issue, so let’s give them a voice. Let’s let the American people decide. The Senate will appropriately revisit the matter when it considers the qualifications of the nominee the next president nominates, whoever that might be,” McConnell said.
In the above paragraph, McConnell incriminates himself of the crime of attorney misconduct that he committed successfully. Donald Trump won the November 2016 presidential election. Donald Trump was inaugurated in Washington, D.C. On January 20, 2017. Between January 20, 2017 and April 1, 2017, Senator McConnell led the Senate Republican Party effort to get Judge Neil Gorsuch, who was nominated by Donald Trump, appointed to fill the vacant U.S. Supreme Court seat. That vacant U.S. Supreme Court Judgeship was illegally held vacant by Defendant McConnell, Senate Whip Sen. John Cornyn R-Texas, Senate Pro Tem leader Sen. Orrin Hatch R-Utah, and the Republican majority of Senators on the U.S. Senate who held a 54 seat majority of the U.S. Senate during all of the year 2016. . Judge Neil Gorsuch was sworn in to fill the U.S. Supreme Court Judgeship, that was illegally kept open by Defendant McConnell. Complainant points this out, to show that the success of defendant McConnell crimes of attorney misconduct, resulted in the filling of the Judgeship by the wrong President, specifically, Donald Trump, who legally was not entitled to, or empowered by the Constitutional commands, both procedural and substantive, Of Article II, Section 2 Paragraph 2, to fill a vacant Judgeship that occurred during the last year of the prior president, Barack Obama’s term, calendar year 2016. In the common law, when a criminal, in this case defendant McConnell, commits a crime, and the crime is completed successfully, and then the alleged criminal actor, defendant McConnell, has benefited from the successful committing of such criminal act of attorney misconduct, then the criminal actor can be held guilty, of the crime of which he is accused, in this case of the crime of attorney misconduct. This was not an attempted crime. This was a crime that was successfully committed to completion by the defendant McConnell. The fact that the Judgeship on the U.S. Supreme Court was still vacant, at the time that Donald Trump was sworn in to be President of the United States , on January 20, 2017, and the fact that later in April 2017, the vacant Judgeship was filled by a President, other that Barack Obama after the term of President Barack Obama was expired, is proof of defendant McConnell’s success and guilt of committing his crime of attorney misconduct, and his failure to uphold the United States Constitution. Complainant prays that this Kentucky State Bar disciplinary court drafts the accusation of attorney misconduct alleged herein, puts defendant Addison Mitchell McConnell on trial for wrongful acts of attorney misconduct, alleged in this complaint, and convicts the defendant McConnell of these alleged crimes.
There are at least 3 criminal counts of attorney misconduct of failure to support the Constitution of the United States, that defendant McConnell should be charged with.
Count 1 is interfering with, obstructing, nullifying the powers of the Presidency, the Executive branch of government.
Count 2 is preventing, interfering, obstructing any Senate Judiciary Committee hearings from being conducted by Senator Chuck Grassley R-Iowa Chairman of the Judiciary Committee in 2016
Count 3 is preventing a yay or nay vote by the full Senate, with a quorum of Senators present on the Merrick Garland nomination or any nomination of any nominee to fill the vacant Judgeship on the U.S. Supreme Court made by President Barack Obama in 2016.
TABLES OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES: EVIDENCE FROM
TELEVISION NEWS, RADIO NEWS, AND NEWSPAPERS.
AUTHORITIES BROADCAST ON TELEVISION AND RADIO NEWS
Exhibit 1 a USB memory stick is enclosed which contains all of the following television news shows where Senator McConnell makes self incriminating statements of offenses of attorney misconduct he is in process of committing.
1 AP archive February 23 2016 “GOP Senate Won’t Consider [Obama] Supreme Court Nominee”
2 Wall Street Journal “McConnell Next President Should Nominate [Supreme Court] Justice”
3 SCOTUS Battle GOP vow to block nominee Merrick Garland
4 Meet the Press Mitch McConnell on Supreme Court Showdown [full interview]
5 Wall Street Journal GOP Senators Say No To SCOTUS Hearings For Garland
6 Fancy Farm Kentucky Educational Television Show August 6, 2016. See quote in text of complaint.
AUTHORITIES IN PRINT
Exhibit 2 in print attached: NPR Politics Newscast March 16, 2016
NPR Politics Newscast March 16, 2016 McConnell: Blocking Supreme Court Nomination ‘About a principle not a person’
| Congressional Power Values |
This is a measure of your ability to access your Congressional representation, per person.
Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands are the lowest @ 0 representation at all – still listed as colonies by the UN, because they have no right to vote.
California’s is the lowest at .05 for the Senate, and 1.48 overall
Wyoming is the highest at 3.45 for the Senate, and 5.3 overall .
This means, in California, your chances of seeing your Senator are about the same as meeting Ariana Grande- 39 million constituents. In smaller states, like Wyoming or Delaware- 2 Senators serve 500k people.
As someone correctly noted you still have 2 Senators and one House Rep- but your chances of ever meeting your Senator, are next to non-existent.
A house has that has 2 bathrooms has 2 bathrooms if 1 or 14 people live there. A considerable difference in how well it works out.
To be clear I do not believe this is the greatest problem in our country, but it is important to know. I don’t want small states or regions to be ignored, but I don’t think handicapping them is the way to go about it.
I believe this might be a better way, defining what regional area statistics are, and looking for anomolies and why things are different.
| 1 | California |
|
53 | 702,905 | 2 | 0.0537 | 1.4226 | 1.4763 | ||
| 2 | Texas |
|
36 | 698,487 | 2 | 0.0795 | 1.4316 | 1.5112 | ||
| 3 | Florida |
|
|
696,345 | 2 | 0.1064 | 1.4358 | 1.5422 | ||
| 4 | New York |
|
|
717,707 | 2 | 0.1032 | 1.3933 | 1.4965 |
| 43 | Rhode Island |
|
|
526,284 | 2 | 1.8995 | 1.8995 | 3.7989 | ||
| 44 | Montana | 1,042,520 |
|
989,415 | 2 | 2.0214 | 1.0107 | 3.0321 | ||
| 45 | Delaware | 952,065 |
|
897,934 | 2 | 2.2273 | 1.1137 | 3.3410 | ||
| 46 | South Dakota |
|
|
814,180 | 2 | 2.4564 | 1.2282 | 3.6846 | ||
| 47 | North Dakota |
|
|
672,591 | 2 | 2.9736 | 1.4868 | 4.4604 | ||
| 48 | Alaska |
|
|
710,231 | 2 | 2.8159 | 1.4080 | 4.2239 | ||
| — | District of Columbia |
|
|
— | 0 | 0.0000 | 0.0000 | 0.0000 | ||
| 49 | Vermont |
|
|
625,741 | 2 | 3.1962 | 1.5981 | 4.7943 | ||
| 50 | Wyoming |
|
|
563,626 | 2 | 3.5476 | 1.7738 | 5.3213 |
drop us a line.
or if you do not wish to automatically be added to our contact list email clerk at powerfulconstitutionalrights.org
comments on the contact form is the quickest way to speak with us, or our clerk
Clerk@powerfulconstitutionalrights.org
Brett Kavanaugh must be disqualified as he committed perjury to Congress, a likely 1505 violation, a predicate to RICO statutes.
Lying to Congress is a disqualifier for the Supreme Court membership. Brett Kavanaugh is a candidate for 5 years of hard time in federal prison.
Rachel Maddow Breaks it down, and the statute below:
Whoever, with intent to avoid, evade, prevent, or obstruct compliance, in whole or in part, with any civil investigative demand duly and properly made under the Antitrust Civil Process Act, willfully withholds, misrepresents, removes from any place, conceals, covers up, destroys, mutilates, alters, or by other means falsifies any documentary material, answers to written interrogatories, or oral testimony, which is the subject of such demand; or attempts to do so or solicits another to do so; or
Whoever corruptly, or by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or communication influences, obstructs, or impedes or endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede the due and proper administration of the law under which any pending proceeding is being had before any department or agency of the United States, or the due and proper exercise of the power of inquiry under which any inquiry or investigation is being had by either House, or any committee of either House or any joint committee of the Congress—
Shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years or, if the offense involves international or domestic terrorism (as defined in section 2331), imprisoned not more than 8 years, or both.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1505
We are excited to add our first discussion board for Powerful Constitutional Rights, actually set up on cancelTrump.
Mostly cases and legal research from Darrell Prince there to discuss now.
please take a look.
Darrell Prince is the Vice President for Communications, for Powerful ConstitutionalRights.org, responsible for overseeing website development, copy, social media, while maintaining his own portfolio of cases.
He started off in Pharmaceutical Quality Assurance, which is really a function of CFR regulations, testing with laser precision (literally)and accuracy that each