Thank you for
joining in my posts on Acting vs. Reacting.
This is the second post in the series.
Within the first article "Acting vs.Reacting" I shared the definitions of the terms: (1) act, (2)
react, (3) reaction, and (4) acting.
If you are just
joining us on this topic please click the preceding link, so that you will
understand the context that these terms are used throughout this discussion of
Acting vs. Reacting.
In this article I
submit that Judges Noel L. Hillman, Karen M. Williams, Christopher C. Mauro and
DAG, Kathleen M. Bartus are pretending to be moral judicial officer, when the
facts are to the contrary.
For our Courts to
serve those within its jurisdiction, all judicial officers of that court should
take action (MOVE), conduct themselves (BEHAVE), and perform the specific
function of the due administration of justice (SERVE), in accordance with the
law.
When the judicial
officers of a court comply with the above, the public it serves can have
confidence in said court. If a judicial
officer is found to "act" contrary to the above, he or she is not
upholding their oath to uphold the highest law of the United States of America,
the Constitution of the United States of America.
Those familiar with
this blog know that I have filed a motion seeking the recusal of judges Noel L.
Hillman and Karen M. Williams. For those
that aren't aware of this fact, or forgot it, you can review this fact at:
"Absolute Immunity via Recusal."
Judge Noel L.
Hillman, wanting to present the appearance that he is "just," did
issue a hearing date of February 21, 2012, to render a decision on the motion
seeking his recusal. The physical
evidence supports this act of Hillman's.
But, what is hidden is the fact that said act was nothing but Hillman's
"reaction" to conceal his perfidy to uphold his oath to uphold the
Constitution of the United States of America. (I guess such behavior is to be
expected from one following in the footsteps of one of his former defendants.
See "Abramoff Should Be Flattered.")
The act of setting
the date of Feb. 21, 2012 was made 33 minutes after the motion was filed. How many lawyers out there can say that they
normally receive such a speedy response from a judge. (I'll wait...) Not to many huh? You'd have to be standing in
front of the judge to get a response that quick, even then, you'll have to pray
he doesn't call a recess, or it's not to close to lunch.
If judge Hillman
writes that he will "take action (MOVE)" on 2/21/2012, why is it that
as of April 17, 2012, there is no physical evidence that he has moved on this
motion? Do you agree that justice delayed
is justice denied? Well it was written
that the motion to recuse would be moved upon on 2/21/2012. Yes, that's what was written and it's not
what was done. Hence, Noel L. Hillman was acting.
He was presented
with the stimulus, and 54 days after the purported hearing date there is no
response. Hmm? But wait, the plot
thickens, or should I say the (JSHIT) deepens. I will reveal further facts that
show this judges lack of integrity. Said
lack of integrity going beyond his proselytization of Magistrate Judge Karen M.
Williams. (See Proselytization of KMW)
Without an answer to
the motion to recuse himself, judge Noel L. Hillman is pretending to serve as a
U.S. District Judge, when in fact he is not doing so, and he is not just running a little behind on conducting the business of the Court. Do you agree?
Thank you for
viewing, and please join me for the next post.
Gaming Oracle!
No comments:
Post a Comment