An Obama judge should have never been in a position of power over cases that only exist because her boss’ administration targeted the political opposition. But Judge Amy Berman Jackson has a long and compelling track record of ruling on behalf of Obama and Hillary.
In May, U.S. District Court Judge Amy Berman Jackson dismissed a lawsuit by the families of the victims of Benghazi against Hillary Clinton. Judge Jackson decided that the families couldn’t sue Hillary either for wrongful death or for defamation. That isn’t too surprising as Jackson is a former Clinton donor who had been appointed by Obama. And a Clinton donor should never have been ruling on a Clinton case.
But now Judge Jackson will be presiding over the Paul Manafort case.
And the Roger Stone case, more recently.
And that first juror was an only-in-D.C. character, a former Obama-era press secretary for the Office of Management and Budget whose husband still works at the Justice Department division that played a role in the Russia probe that ultimately snagged Stone. She even acknowledged to having negative views of President Donald Trump, and said she had followed the media coverage of special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation.
Still, the woman said she did not have strong views about Stone, and Jackson denied a request from Stone’s lawyers to strike the woman as a potential juror.
In other words, Judge Amy Berman Jackson shows every sign of being a partisan hack.
And at the Gates sentencing, another case manufactured by her boss’ people she should have never been involved in, Judge Amy Berman Jackson broke out into a partisan defense of Spygate.
Federal Judge Amy Berman Jackson took several minutes during her sentencing of top Mueller cooperator Rick Gates on Tuesday to comment on the Russia investigation, the significance of Gates’ choice to cooperate and the gravity of the facts that investigators found regarding Gates’ and Paul Manafort’s crimes and Russian’s interaction with the Trump campaign.
All of this is inappropriate, but so is Judge Amy Berman Jackson’s presence on any case involving the intersection of Democrat investigations and Trump people.
“Gates’ debriefings, his multiple incriminatory bits of evidence on matters of grave and international importance are a reminder that there was an ample basis for the decision makers at the highest level of the United States Department of Justice — the United States Department of Justice of this administration — to authorize and pursue a law enforcement investigation into whether there was any coordination between the campaign and the known foreign interference in the election, as well as into whether there had been any attempt to obstruct that investigation, and to leave no stone unturned, no matter what the prosecutors determined they had evidence to prove at the end of that investigation.”
That’s a New York Times editorial. It’s also a pathetic and inappropriate attempt at shoring up an increasingly discredited witch hunt.
“This deliberate effort to obscure the facts, this disregard for the truth undermines our political discourse and it affects our policymaking. If people don’t have the facts, democracy doesn’t work.”
Like the facts about Judge Amy Berman Jackson’s political affiliations and partisan agendas.
This deliberate effort to obscure the facts, this disregard for the truth undermines our justice system.