With a major case, the first of its kind, on the way, the government has gone Cyndi Lauper… in it has shown its true colors. The criticisms of Judge Cannon have picked up and the DOJ wants to move the case to NJ. It seems that Judge Cannon should put “Trump appointed” on her name plate next to her name. During the former President’s reign in office, President Trump stated much of the same, claiming Obama appointed judges were out to sabotage his policies, with a sharp rebuke coming from Chief Robertson when he tried, to no avail, to set the record straight by outright stating that the Judicial branch is a separate part of government and does not get persuaded by politics. With the right going to a judge in Texas and the left going to the 9th circuit to get favorable decisions, the public is left wondering what judges can they go to to get a fair and neutral decision, I’m partial to Judge Mills Lane, if you can’t come to an agreement you can always duke it out and Judge Lane was one of the best boxing referees of all time.

Judge Cannon is under scrutiny because she, a female Hispanic Judge, appointed a special master to oversee evidence. I’m guessing her thinking was to keep things apolitical and neutral. The DOJ disagreed and challenged her decision and the 11th circuit reversed her decision. The DOJ then celebrated by appointing a special prosecutor so they could keep things apolitical and neutral. But even the appointment of the “special” people were criticized as having political leanings. I have no idea what’s up with these “special” people, but where I came from, if you were called “special”, you rode on a short bus and weren’t given any sharp items to play with. I don’t think this is the same thing. Either way, the Judicial branch isn’t only being criticized by the public, it’s also being attacked by the institutional people (where I lived, those were the ones that rode the short bus and never came back, again, I don’t think it’s the same thing). So, if the public doesn’t trust the Judicial branch and the institution, the other two branches, don’t either (is it don’t?, doesn’t?, don’tdoesn’t?, donesn’t?) anyway, how can we get a fair and neutral outcome? What is it that we can do to fix this problem?

Luckily, I have the solution, we use a Ouija board… No, maybe….. No. What we do is we let the Supreme Court decide who can be a judge. We let the experts pick qualified people and not the people that were voted in that used to work at Hooters, because wet T shirt judges are much different and a lot less sober than Judges that practice law… most of the time. The other two branches can than make a final selection of the chosen judges and confirm these qualified people. What you will have then is people criticizing neutral judges and not politically chosen ones. What are they going to say, this Supreme Court chosen Judge….? The solution seems like a no brainer, it has to be because I thought of it but the chances that they implement this plan and give up power is the same chance of me winning the lotto twice on the same day while just being missed by lightning. Because if I hit the lottery twice in one day, I am definitely getting hit by lightning.

A lot of people think the courts are an extension of the Justice Department as in a lot of the current federal judges used to be prosecutors for the Justice Department. This makes a lot of sympathizing for one side. It’s no wonder that they have a 97 percent winning record. I don’t even have that kind of percentage in spelling my name right. But if you add that advancement to a higher court depends on the same branch that the Department of Justice is in, that winning rate makes a lot more sense. That’s why advancement should be left to Judicial Branch, where advancement depends on you not forgetting to bring your boss coffee. At least it gives the illusion of the separation of powers.