Click on the link above or cut and paste into your browser to view.
Are we to believe that the federal and state district court judges’ knowledge of the laws, Constitutions, and historical and traditionally correct law and precedent is so inferior to mere practitioners of law that they must be continuously corrected? Even allowing for the fleeting threat that once again casts a shadow on an entire Republic US, have judges been subjected to genetic mutations having the general effect of lobotomizing the “collective” welfare, or, in the alternative, are pro se and legal practitioners getting “smarter?” Why is it that this singular plurality of documents consisting of the California Coalition for Families and Children body of filings is the work of genius, or originally intended common knowledge and proper authority? Is there a new climate model of convenience pseudo-science that explains why the Ninth Circuit Court is the only circuit sometimes exhibiting signs that appear to be intelligence formed on the basis of sound logic and reason applied to the stage of universal humanity? If bad is the “new” good, then isn’t it good to be “bad” and disregard wrong and unjust rulings as sufficiently and substantially noticed?
Cole Stuart and the California Coalition for Families and Children are unstoppable, and RIGHT, in their relentless pursuit for truth and justice regarding the fraud of family courts and the criminal enterprise that consists of collaborative and unified Communist court systems, law enforcement, juvenile courts, and “therapist” violence and abuse perpetrated against innocent families and children. Quoting U.S. Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis, “Crime is contagious. If the Government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. To declare that in the administration of the criminal law the end justifies the means—to declare that the Government may commit crimes in order to secure the conviction of a private criminal—would bring terrible retribution. Against that pernicious doctrine this Court should resolutely set its face” (Olmstead v. United States, 277 U.S. 438, 48 S.Ct. 564, 72 L.Ed. 944 (1928)). We are forbidden by the very laws that misrepresent to “protect” us to entertain the crime and fraud of thieves and criminals. This is the Higher argument, and originates from proper and reasonable authority in all circumstances.
P.S. Wasn’t Garson the last name of the New York City Judge who, along with Simonovsky and the treasonous court clerk, was charged and/or indicted for bribery and conspiracy (R.I.C.O.) charges? There really is something in a name.