Additional Titles








Chertoff Created Terror Pretexts for US Police State

Missile Defense, Nuclear Technologies Transferred to Russia, China

Forces at Work to Build a US Police State









Patrick Briley
March 7, 2005

Much has been made of the battle in the US Senate over the confirmation of federal judges between Republicans and Democrats. The struggle has become so keen that the Republicans are now threatening what they call a "nuclear option" to change the rules in the Senate over debate and voting on federal judges. If you listen to both sides, they will tell you that the other side is the bad guy in the selection and misuse of federal judges. A closer examination of the track records of Republican and Democratic leaders in Congress and the White House over the years reveals that they are both correct; both sides are as bad as the other for some of the same reasons and for some differing reasons. Regardless of the reasons, however, the outcome remains that America's judicial system is suffering because of the unethical abuses of federal judgeships by both the Republican and Democratic leaderships.

Senator Arlen Specter was recently made the Chairman of the Senate Judiciary committee to handle the latest contest for confirmation of federal judges. Conservative Christian Republicans and Democrats who are against abortion and for a strict interpretation of laws and the Constitution are being ignored by the Bush White House and Republican leadership for ramming through Specter as chairman in the face of their opposition. Specter has been pro abortion, has a curious belief in an alternate system of law- Scottish law, and led the defeat of conservative federal judge nominee of judge Bork.

Republicans make the point that Democrats confirm liberal activist judges who are not strict constructionists and interpreters of the law and constitution, and instead try to legislate new law from the bench. Yet Specter helped defeat judge Bjork who had all the constructionist qualifications that Republican leaders claimed they are for.

There is no dispute though that the Democrats select and try to confirm activist judges who legislate from the bench. But the question is, how sincere and reliable are Republican leaders in picking federal judges since GW Bush and Republican leaders are now very socialistic and back many of the same liberal agendas of the Democrats including abortion, gays, the UN, illegal alien amnesty, outsourcing of American jobs, cover up of failures of government agencies to stop terror attacks like 9-11, and support of unconstitutional and freedom robbing measures of the Patriot Act. It turns out that the Republican leaders have a history of appointing federal judges who are just as liberal and anti constitution as the Democrats.

GW Bush appointed federal judge Bury of Arizona. Bury took the unprecedented step on behalf of the Republican elite leaders like McCain and Bush to attempt to block the Proposition 200 requirements denying benefits to illegal aliens in Arizona. Another former federal judge whose career was launched by HW Bush, Michael Chertoff, recently told Congress during his Homeland Security confirmation that Chertoff will back Bush's illegal non enforcement of existing laws against illegal aliens in the US as well as guest worker programs leading to amnesty for the illegal aliens. Bush and the Republican leaders illegal chicanery with respect to illegal aliens using Bury and Chertoff makes it likely that Bush the Republican leaders will nominate and try to push through Congress men who will no uphold the laws again illegal aliens in the US.

Bush appointed federal judge Reggie Walton. Bush and the Republican DOJ picked the Walton courtroom to win an illegal ruling in favor of maintaining a state secrets gag order placed on FBI translator and 9-11 whistleblower Sibel Edmonds by Attorney General Ashcroft. Bush also picked Walton to manipulate and block the case of 20 OKC bombing victims against Iraq.

Bush and the Republican DOJ have used other federal judges in similar fashion to block claims against Iraq by victims and their families of the first Gulf War and the 9-11 attacks. In these cases the federal appointees of Bush ruled that the President had the prerogative to block monetary awards in the cases to be used instead for Iraqi reconstruction. Bush used over $2 million of funds earmarked for Iraqi reconstruction instead to fund putting down legal protests by FTAA demonstrators in Florida in 2003 rather than allow compensation of victims who had already won monetary judgments in lower courts.

Bush and the DOJ shop around to find the federal judges and courts they want who will rubber stamp Bush false claims of national security to block accountability and information coming out showing Bush failures in stopping 9-11 as this article clearly reveals

Thankfully there have been a few federal judges not selected by Bush and the Republicans who have now ruled that Bush and the Republican DOJ illegally retroactively classified the allegations by Sibel Edmonds, allegations of corruption of elected and bureaucratic officials in the White House, FBI, CIA, State Department, Air Force and CIA that led to 9-11.

Federal judges not selected by Bush and the Republicans have recently overturned legal findings by Ashcroft, Gonzales and former Bush appointee and DOJ criminal division head Michael Chertoff that enemy combatants cannot be held indefinitely without being charged. Fortunately other uncompromised federal judges severely limited the DOJ case against the 20 th hijacker Zacarias Moussaoui because Chertoff and the Attorney General Alberto Gonzales had blocked testimony in court that would expose the illegal torture and renditions for torture of terror suspects in violation of the Geneva conventions and international laws ratified by Congress. But that did not stop Bush and Chertoff from shopping for a federal judge and court appointed by Republicans in the 4th circuit of appeals to attempt to overturn the lower federal court decision.

Supreme Court judges Breyer, Kennedy and Ginsburg made illegal decisions last year without being contested by the Bush White House, DOJ or Republican controlled Congress. These judges publicly stated in their written opinions and in interviews that many of their legal decisions were illegally based on applying the EU constitution that they helped write and international laws and treaties not ratified by Congress. This is illegal because it violates the supreme law of the land, the constitution, which says the constitution is not to be amended by Supreme Court judges, but instead by a three fourths vote of all the states. Breyer, Ginsburg and Kennedy should be impeached and removed from the bench because they violated the law and the US constitution. Yet the Republican leaders and Specter and Bush violated their oaths to uphold the Constitution by not moving to remove these Supreme Court judges for their illegal acts against the Constitution.

The Republican leaders in Congress also had an opportunity to limit the jurisdiction of liberal activist federal courts in accordance with Article 3, section 2 of the Constitution in matters such as the pledge of allegiance, the Ten Commandments, the national motto "In God We Trust", but so far have passed it up after Bush and Specter became involved.

Bush and the Republican leaders claim of wanting strict conservative interpreters of the Constitution is a myth and really a fabrication when one considers they deliberately have taken no action in Congress to remove these Supreme Court judges and have not moved to limit the jurisdiction of the liberal activist federal courts.

The Republican and Democratic leaders share a rotten and unethical track record of shopping for their own compliant judges, of subverting and not defending the Constitution, and of not limiting federal court jurisdiction of activist liberal judges. Given this corrupt record, why should the Republican leaders be trusted any more than the Democratic leaders in not selecting federal judges who would carry out illegal and unethical agendas for either of the two parties?


1, article,"Bush Wielding Secrecy Privilege to End Suits"

2005 Patrick Briley - All Rights Reserved

E-Mails are used strictly for NWVs alerts, not for sale

Patrick Briley is a Navy Viet Nam era veteran who served on a Polaris ballistic missile nuclear submarine patrol in the Pacific." My Polaris submarine patrol in the Pacific was in far East Asia near China but I can not elaborate any more than that other than to say it was a very special, historically significant and exceptionally dangerous.

Briley was chosen to work under Admiral Rickover at Naval Reactors. He volunteered for Naval service from 1968 to 1976 during the Viet Nam era including being in Naval ROTC, a batallion commander of my ROTC unit and a Midshipman on board the ballistic missile submarine, SSBN 624, the Woodrow Wilson, as well as serving at Naval Reactors in DC for Admiral Rickover.

Patrick started research and investigation into terrorist attacks after the Oklahoma City bombing. Pat submitted his findings concerning the OKC bombing and the 9-11 attacks in briefings to high-level staff for the Senate Judiciary and Senate and House Intelligence committees, House Speaker Dennis Hastert, and the 9-11 Commission. E-Mail:









The Republican and Democratic leaders share a rotten and unethical track record of shopping for their own compliant judges, of subverting and not defending the Constitution...