PDA

View Full Version : Obama's new supreme court justice nominee and globalist pawn



Matt P
16th March 2016, 19:53
Most around here at least have a basic understanding of the criminality of the government of the united states corporation. We also know they like to promote their own, people who have already proven willing to lie, kill, manage cover-ups and more.

Merrick Garland, Obama's recent supreme court justice nominee, is just the next example, in my opinion.

But media will likely continue on their Trump/Bernie/Clinton circus show while nothing will be said about this guy's past and what it means. I wonder how many even in the alternative community will talk about it (I haven't seen anything yet).

I think the table is being set for something nasty, folks.

Let's connect some dots.

We all know Justice Antonin Scalia's recent death and many have wondered why no autopsy, why no investigation, why at a secret gathering place for elite, etc. The timing was interesting also, just before the end of Obama's final term and an opportune time to change the court for decades towards a globalist/criminal agenda.

Who is Merrick Garland? I'll tell you all you need to know in one simple sentence. Garland lead the US government's investigation and prosecutions of the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing of the Murrah Federal building, a well-documented false flag. He was the lead guy, making sure the light of truth didn't shine on the actual perpetrators.

You remember the official story, don't you?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oklahoma_City_bombing

But have you seen A Noble Lie? There is a LOT more evidence than just this one documentary but it's a good starting point.

UpNIMSDwvOw

So Garland was one of the main characters involved in, at the time, one of the largest false flags the world had ever seen.

It gets worse.

Why was the Oklahoma City Murrah building targeted? I just happened to watch an amazing presentation from Katherine Austin Fitts a few days ago where she explains exactly why the building was blown up. Short version, it's where the evidence in the investigations against the Bush/Clinton crime families was being kept, including evidence against Hillary's scams in Arkansas. This is a fabulous video if you want to understand how the secret space program and secret government are funded but where she talks about the Murrah building being blown up is at about the 36 min. mark.

w0mimIp8mr8

Sound familiar? It should. Remember where the Pentagon was bombed? Remember what was in Building 7? Records of crimes and a deeply hidden secret world financial system.

So, Merrick Garland is one of theirs. One they know will do their bidding and protect them...because he already has.

So, it should come as no surprise that the Associated Press is reporting Hillary has come out in strong support of the Senate approving Garland quickly.

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2016/03/16/us/politics/ap-us-obama-supreme-court-the-latest.html?ref=aponline&_r=0

"Hillary Clinton says Supreme Court nominee Merrick Garland has a "brilliant legal mind and a long history of bipartisan support and admiration" and it's up to the Senate to perform their Constitutional duty "they swore to undertake."

Clinton says the confirmation of a justice "should not be an exercise in political brinkmanship and partisan posturing." She says it's a "serious obligation" that doesn't depend "on the party affiliation of a sitting president, nor does the Constitution make an exception to that duty in an election year."

She notes the Senate has never taken more than 125 days to vote on a Supreme Court nominee and Garland deserves a "full and fair hearing followed by a vote.""

Clinton knows a Justice Garland will continue to protect her and her organization's criminal activities.

Then, in the same (continually updated) AP story we get this...

"Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders is calling Judge Merrick Garland a strong nominee for the Supreme Court and arguing that refusing to hold hearings for his nomination would be unprecedented."

Now you know who's side Bernie is on (if you didn't already).

Now you also know a little about Obama's man.
The "Supreme" Court has already helped steal an election in 2000 that helped cement the criminal cabal in power. With a justice Garland joining them, who knows what they could be up to next. I don't know but the timing on all this sure doesn't appear to be a coincidence.

Matt

JChombre
16th March 2016, 19:53
http://nyti.ms/1Uzridf



http://nyti.ms/1M7TbaO


By MICHAEL D. SHEAR and GARDINER HARRIS
MARCH 16, 2016

WASHINGTON — President Obama on Wednesday nominated Merrick B. Garland as the nation’s 113th Supreme Court justice, choosing a centrist appeals court judge for the lifetime appointment and daring Republican senators to refuse consideration of a jurist who is highly regarded throughout Washington.

Mr. Obama introduced Judge Garland to an audience of his family members, activists, and White House staff in the Rose Garden Wednesday morning, describing him as exceptionally qualified to serve on the Supreme Court in the seat vacated by the death of Justice Antonin Scalia, who died in February.

The president said Judge Garland is “widely recognized not only as one of America’s sharpest legal minds, but someone who brings to his work a spirit of decency, modesty, integrity, even-handedness and excellence. These qualities and his long commitment to public service have earned him the respect and admiration from leaders from both sides of the aisle.”

He added that Judge Garland “will ultimately bring that same character to bear on the Supreme Court, an institution on which he is uniquely prepared to serve immediately.”

Mr. Obama said it is tempting to make the confirmation process “an extension of our divided politics.” But he warned that “to go down that path would be wrong.”
Mr. Obama demanded a fair hearing for Judge Garland and said that refusing to even consider his nomination would provoke “an endless cycle of more tit for tat” that would undermine the democratic process for years to come.

“I simply ask Republicans in the Senate to give him a fair hearing, and then an up-or-down vote,” Mr. Obama said. “If you don’t, then it will not only be an abdication of the Senate’s constitutional duty, it will indicate a process for nominating and confirming judges that is beyond repair.”

But shortly after the ceremony, Senator Mitch McConnell, the majority leader, took to the Senate floor to reiterate his position that the nomination process should be blocked.

WhiteLove
16th March 2016, 20:31
All supreme courts are on corrupt territories. The legal systems all around the world is a major part of the sufferings that human beings go through. It works on three levels in a - 0 - polarity pattern. On the lowest level you don't have justice. On the middle level you have neutral/fake/fair justice and at the top level you have the final verdict of the elite.

Marikins
16th March 2016, 20:56
Mpennery Absolutely brilliant post!

moekatz
16th March 2016, 22:21
All the players are moving into position now and it won't be long before many more of us will have to face the fact that world systems are all corrupt. We must ask ourselves, why are we here at this moment in time? What did I sign up for in this incarnation? No way to hide from any of this USA stage play of politics. No justice except for JUST US...the psychotic elite.

mojo
16th March 2016, 22:37
Two things to consider, its really sad that Dr Judy Woods entered the whistleblower program to help prove the false flag of 911 and the supreme court refused to hear her case. That speaks volumes right off....and this new nominee Garland from DC wants to change the second amendment as he opposed Judge Scalia's viewpoint on this. Why is Obama pushing this? Its too important to let him decide as he didnt do anything to help cross and bridge the political aisles in the Senate or Congress. All he did was to make executive decisions and go around the Constitution.

ThePythonicCow
17th March 2016, 02:38
[edit: hilarious that I posted this at exactly the same time as another member posted about the same topic. Synchronicity, baby!]


WASHINGTON — President Obama on Wednesday nominated Merrick B. Garland as the nation’s 113th Supreme Court justice, choosing a centrist appeals court judge for the lifetime appointment and daring Republican senators to refuse consideration of a jurist who is highly regarded throughout Washington.
I merged the two Merrick B. Garland threads.

A key concern of some against Merrick B. Garland is that he has a clear record of opposing gun rights, and of supporting government confiscation of guns.

I have long been puzzled by the US government's attack on gun rights. The hand guns and rifles available to the average armed American are no match for the militarized weapons available to the police and military in the US.

I think I just figured it out. The US government is deliberately instigating armed Americans ... like a thug taunting his victim "Go ahead ... move ... I dare you!" so that the thug can kick the victim again if he moves.

(Mind you, I don't think that the "deliberation" aspect of this is being done by the government ... government is too stupid for that. The deliberators are the Bastards in Power.)

To put this in a more straight forward manner: The Bastards figure that there is good overlap between [A] those who might rebel, by any means, and [B] those who defend their right to bear arms. If they piss off [B] enough, then they can instigate sufficient rebellions, riots and "terrorism" to justify killing or imprisoning the ones they worry about, [A].

Problem: Government confiscating arms.
Reaction: F*** the government.
Solution: Kill or imprison the "terrorists" who would say "F*** the government."

ThePythonicCow
17th March 2016, 03:17
I think I just figured it out. The US government is deliberately instigating armed Americans ... like a thug taunting his victim "Go ahead ... move ... I dare you!" so that the thug can kick the victim again if he moves.

In a related manner, as I just posted here (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?89046-Trump-...-dead-man-walking&p=1053811&viewfull=1#post1053811), Trump's running for President may be another example of such deliberate instigation.

Jayren
17th March 2016, 05:19
I think I just figured it out. The US government is deliberately instigating armed Americans ... like a thug taunting his victim "Go ahead ... move ... I dare you!" so that the thug can kick the victim again if he moves.

In a related manner, as I just posted here (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?89046-Trump-...-dead-man-walking&p=1053811&viewfull=1#post1053811), Trump's running for President may be another example of such deliberate instigation.

They believe what they see on the media such as trump being the next Hitler, if they can believe that they can believe more positive solutions but it's going to take something to cause one. And hopefully it's not a violent reaction either. We need more leaders in the world.

Its sad to see her death especially coming out about 911, she was just trying to do the right thing probably awakening to it all coming out of the matrix, and they killed her and replaced her or are trying to with another puppet, her death will cause controversy among her peers and people who knew about her. Actually it already has, by doing this they have already raised the awareness. And 9/11 is a big one..... Yes also the Malaysian airlines flight, does that ring a bell? How many people still talk about that? It's not normal at all for a plane that size to go missing. Or for a skyscraper to fall. Two skyscrapers. Now we have one.

Citizen No2
17th March 2016, 07:44
Paul wrote:



I think I just figured it out. The US government is deliberately instigating armed Americans ... like a thug taunting his victim "Go ahead ... move ... I dare you!" so that the thug can kick the victim again if he moves.

(Mind you, I don't think that the "deliberation" aspect of this is being done by the government ... government is too stupid for that. The deliberators are the Bastards in Power.)

To put this in a more straight forward manner: The Bastards figure that there is good overlap between [A] those who might rebel, by any means, and [B] those who defend their right to bear arms. If they piss off [B] enough, then they can instigate sufficient rebellions, riots and "terrorism" to justify killing or imprisoning the ones they worry about, [A].

Problem: Government confiscating arms.
Reaction: F*** the government.
Solution: Kill or imprison the "terrorists" who would say "F*** the government."

Kinda reminds me of this:

Idg-JpAfV_c


When it comes to the machinations of the Gub'ment, I have to doff my cap to David Icke. He has been right on the money for nearly 30 years:

Problem
Reaction
Solution


Regards.

cursichella1
17th March 2016, 07:44
I think I just figured it out. The US government is deliberately instigating armed Americans ... like a thug taunting his victim "Go ahead ... move ... I dare you!" so that the thug can kick the victim again if he moves.

In a related manner, as I just posted here (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?89046-Trump-...-dead-man-walking&p=1053811&viewfull=1#post1053811), Trump's running for President may be another example of such deliberate instigation.

Thinking along the same lines, instigating and outing the (Trump's) "rebels" (similar to the use of agents provocateurs in Ferguson, Oakland, Baltimore and Occupy?) while at the same time creating an over-the-top divide and conquer scenario to facilitate Hillary's smooth sailing into the White House.

JChombre
17th March 2016, 15:38
[edit: hilarious that I posted this at exactly the same time as another member posted about the same topic. Synchronicity, baby!]


WASHINGTON — President Obama on Wednesday nominated Merrick B. Garland as the nation’s 113th Supreme Court justice, choosing a centrist appeals court judge for the lifetime appointment and daring Republican senators to refuse consideration of a jurist who is highly regarded throughout Washington.
I merged the two Merrick B. Garland threads.

A key concern of some against Merrick B. Garland is that he has a clear record of opposing gun rights, and of supporting government confiscation of guns.

I have long been puzzled by the US government's attack on gun rights. The hand guns and rifles available to the average armed American are no match for the militarized weapons available to the police and military in the US.

I think I just figured it out. The US government is deliberately instigating armed Americans ... like a thug taunting his victim "Go ahead ... move ... I dare you!" so that the thug can kick the victim again if he moves.

(Mind you, I don't think that the "deliberation" aspect of this is being done by the government ... government is too stupid for that. The deliberators are the Bastards in Power.)

To put this in a more straight forward manner: The Bastards figure that there is good overlap between [A] those who might rebel, by any means, and [B] those who defend their right to bear arms. If they piss off [B] enough, then they can instigate sufficient rebellions, riots and "terrorism" to justify killing or imprisoning the ones they worry about, [A].

Problem: Government confiscating arms.
Reaction: F*** the government.
Solution: Kill or imprison the "terrorists" who would say "F*** the government."


Paul, thank you for your perspective.

I have always been amazed by the weight and the importance of guns in our lives in the US.

I did not find this to be true when I lived abroad in several places, in different continents. And yes, I know about the second amendment.

Many blessings to you.

JC

conk
17th March 2016, 18:30
Does it really matter until we rid ourselves of Commerce & Maritime Law?

Curious77
17th March 2016, 18:40
Jayren -- "her death" ... who are you talking about there?

There is neo-Nazi, White Supremacist, KKK backing for the GOP candidates.

Needless to say, if the government wished to, these groups would be immediately gone.
They serve some purpose for the right wing. As the Mafia does.

There has been a long term alliance as well between the "pro-life" and "White Supremacist
Movements" -- at least two of the murderers of doctors at women's clinics were specifically
identified as White Supremacist members.

These bombings, arson, murders at women's clinics are of course "domestic terrorism" but
very clearing long been ignored by our DOJ.

Curious77
17th March 2016, 18:46
Thank you for the info on Garland - don't have time right now to watch all of both videos and hope to be back soon.
Is the recent meeting where Catherine Austin Fitts appeared fully available to be viewed?