Preparing for the Battle
- Preparing for the BattleBy Ron Branson - National J.A.I.L. CICBelow is a short blurb about protecting our California judges from the public. In order to gain the significance of their words, one must understand their buzz words, so I will translate the below for you. First off, Pete Wilson was a former Republican governor of California, and Gray Davis was the immediate former Democratic governor of California. So what we are seeing proposed here is the participation of both major political parties rallying together to the cause of protecting California judges from the public criticism.As has been stated over and over by the judiciary, to include former Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, never before has the political system witnessed such "harsh" attacks upon the judiciary as is currently taking place. Such brutality against the judges makes one want to cry.Now for a little background. Back in 1995 when J.A.I.L. first began, all political attention was being given only to two branches of government, to wit, the legislature and the executive. Everything was, who is going to be president, senator, congressman, assembly, governor, etc. No attention was being given to the judges. So J.A.I.L set out to shine the light of exposure of the judges and successfully brought them to the forefront of publicity. In those days search engines revealed no websites about judges with the exception one set up by the judges themselves complaining that they were being deprived of sufficient salaries to meet the excellent services they were providing the public.J.A.I.L. sought, and eventually did, change perception so that judicial exposes popped up all over the internet like mushrooms. J.A.I.L. has pumped out an estimated 15 million emails to date constantly exposing and hitting the judges in every way imaginable. We were dedicated to, and focused entirely on exposing the judges and no other cause.In fact, J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) made the words "Judicial Accountability" intensely popular as witnessed by entering those two words into Google today. I just did, and it came up with over 63,000 references. These two words, "Judicial Accountability," has become immensely famous within the titles of many organizations, conferences, seminars, and even within words used by Congress. In that respect J.A.I.L. has accomplished its goal, albeit, that is not the extent of what J.A.I.L. seeks to accomplish. It seeks not only to place those words "judicial accountability" in-your-face of the political establishment, but also to accomplish judicial accountability in reality, and not in word only. J.A.I.L. intends to make corrupt officials hear the repeat of those words "judicial accountability" until they climb into their holes and cover their ears.Congress uses those words "Judicial Accountability" as a ruse, a cosmetic paint job, a means of giving the public the idea that they are really interested in bringing about judicial accountability, and thus you need to keep voting for them so they can stay in office for the sake of bring it about.Indeed, marches are conducted, and demonstrations are held on Capitol Hill all in the name of "judicial accountability." But have you noticed that little to nothing is actually productively forthcoming out of those publicity events. I have come to call these events as the "Meet, Greet, Eat, and Retreat" events, and of course, let us not forget "Repeat!" Hey, we can make it an annual event of meeting in Washington based on these two words, "Judicial Accountability."Now, back to former governors Davis and Wilson. What they are really saying is this organization known as JAIL4Judges is spreading "their" propaganda about bad judges all over this nation and is making our judges look bad - so very bad, and we must figure some method of plugging this crack in this damn. However, their efforts shall forever prove fruitless, for as long as the judges continue in their manifest arrogance of judicial immunity, they shall forever show their contempt for the law and constitutional principles, forever belching out their judge-made laws from the bench.Never in a thousand years shall the public find this act tolerable, whether the people perceive they have a remedy or not. As the saying goes, "You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink. As long as judge-made doctrine of judicial immunity continues, I am sure there will be no shortage of ammunition that can and will be fired at the judiciary. But you can count on the fact that no matter how "brutal" the battle against judges gets, they will never willing give it up. They are as addicted to judicial immunity as a full-blown druggie is to heroin And so, they shall "forever" complain that we, the public, are placing "improper influence" upon our judges. After all, according to them, we do not want judges to rule according to the law, but rather according to our political influence.The height of contradictions I have recently seen is comparing J.A.I.L. with special moneyed interest that wants to interfere with lawful justice in not allowing the judges to rule properly on the cases before them. What we want is to interfere with their "judicial independence," and their "impartiality," and give us what we want, even if we have to "put them in jail for decisions we don't like." In other words, the problem in this nation is with us, the People, and not with them, the judges.To date, not one of our opponents have taken it upon themselves to address the wording of the J.A.I.L. initiative, namely the second paragraph, to wit,2. Exclusions of immunity. Notwithstanding common law or any other provision to the contrary, no immunities shielding a judge from frivolous and harassing actions shall be construed to extend to any deliberate violation of law, fraud or conspiracy, intentional violation of due process of law, deliberate disregard of material allegations, judicial acts without jurisdiction, blocking of a lawful conclusion of a case, or any deliberate violation of the Constitutions of California or the United States. The foregoing judicial misconduct shall not be construed to mean court decisions made within the authorized capacity of a judge.- Ron Branson
Davis, Wilson Promoting Judge Impartiality
Former Governors Set To Speak At HearingPOSTED: 6:00 am PDT July 14, 2008SACRAMENTO, Calif. -- Two former governors were among those planning to talk Monday about the importance of protecting judges from improper influence.Former governors Gray Davis and Pete Wilson were to address the state Commission for Impartial Courts at a hearing in Sacramento.The commission is studying the political pressures on courts that threaten judges' fairness and impartiality. The commission is set to issue its first report next month.- Ron BransonFounder of Judicial Accountability Initiative LawJ.A.I.L.P.O. Box 207North Hollywood, CA. 91603P.S. - I wonder what words of wisdom they shall have for us in their first report next month! You can believe it is a secret agenda to neutralize J.A.I.L., and who knows, they may even come out and mention us by name. Sala Vive "Judicial Accountability."