Amy Berman Jackson is an Obama appointed judge who is well known as an activist judge, who never allows the law to get in her way.
Jim Hoft in a guest post in the Gateway Pundit makes the case that Jackson should be impeached and removed from the bench over her handling of the Paul Manafort case. This is not the first big case that Jackson has issued a political judgment rather than one based on the law. She is the judge who dismissed the case against Hillary Clinton for wrongful death in the Benghazi case.
She is also the judge that ruled that the Catholic church must lay aside its tenet that should not be forced to pay for abortions and contraceptives that the church is against on religious grounds. One thing that almost all Obama appointed judges have is that they are activists and not arbiters of the law. Jackson is no exception.
Then on January 19th of this year, a Paul Manafort’s case was reassigned to Judge Jackson on January 19th, a few weeks after being filed.
It is unknown why she was assigned to this case or by whom.
What is clear is that with her atrocious and slanted record to date, the Deep State and the Mueller team certainly wanted Judge Jackson overseeing the Manafort case and this is supported by her record to date.
On January 3rd we reported that Paul Manafort filed a suit against the “Deep State” DOJ (Jeff Sessions), Assistant AG Rod Rosenstein and Corrupt Investigator Robert Mueller that would possibly shut down Mueller’s corrupt investigation.
We know that Rod Rosenstein and Robert Mueller discovered that Russians were paying out bribes to US officials to get the okay to buy 20% of this country’s uranium, yet despite that fact, they both signed off on the deal that netted the Clinton Foundation 145 million dollars. That alone should have forced both to recuse themselves from the alleged Russian collusion case. And if it’s not, then the fact that even if it did happen, which it didn’t, it would not have been against a single law as no law forbids collusion.
However, there is a law that forbids campaigns from accepting foreign donations and it also forbids campaigns from paying foreign sources for damaging information against an opponent. So, Hillary paying British spy and Russian sources for the fake Hillary dossier was totally against the law, so why is no one investigating that?
More From The Gateway Pundit
FOX News Legal Analyst Gregg Jarrett explained this in an article last year that the entire Mueller investigation is lawless. Jarrett argued that:
… George Papadopoulos pled guilty to a single charge of making a false statement to the FBI. He was not charged with so-called “collusion” because no such crime exists in American statutory law, except in anti-trust matters. It has no application to elections and political campaigns.
It is not a crime to talk to a Russian. Not that the media would ever understand that. They have never managed to point to a single statute that makes “colluding” with a foreign government in a political campaign a crime, likely because it does not exist in the criminal codes.
It is against the law for the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee to funnel millions of dollars to a British spy and to Russian sources in order to obtain the infamous and discredited Trump “dossier.” The Federal Election Campaign Act (52 USC 30101) prohibits foreign nationals and governments from giving or receiving money in U.S. campaigns. It also prohibits the filing of false or misleading campaign reports to hide the true purpose of the money (52 USC 30121). This is what Clinton and the DNC appear to have done.
Manafort’s lawyers pointed all of this out to Jackson, who then ignored the law and ruled using her liberal ideology. For that, she should be impeached.