Faceus Features Elaine Mickman

Faceus Features Elaine Mickman — Elaine Mickman of Lower Merion will be interviewed, 9 tonight, Oct. 20 on F.A.C.E.U.S. radio regarding her book, Court-Gate…the Courts “Divorced from the Law” : Without Liberty or Justice at all, which concerns her experiences with the Montgomery County, Pa., courts.

The show is co-hosted by Luanne Fleming, Robin Austin, Marci Friedman and Hillary Hogue and can be heard here.

Elaine is a full-time mother to 5 children. After 21 years of marriage, she was blindsided when her ex-husband filed for divorce. Four months later she found herself trapped in the eroded court system where not one court order was based on fact or law. After eight years of litigation, the court never divided the marital assets. All appeals, including those from orders that proved fraud, were denied. 

Faceus Features Elaine Mickman
Faceus Features Elaine Mickman

Pennsylvania Court Corruption Would Be Stifled By HB 38

Pennsylvania Court Corruption Would Be Stifled By HB 38

By Rep. Russ Diamond

Pennsylvania is known for its chocolate, its mountains — and its many opportunities for corruption.

In the days leading to my introduction of House Bill 38, I received the usual and expected rebuttals from mainstream journalists and Harrisburg lobbyists. I was accused of inserting gerrymandering into judicial elections and disenfranchising voters, while at the same time lectured about how “merit selection” (involving a 13-person panel) would somehow not disenfranchise them.

I can’t say I am surprised. As an outsider in Harrisburg, you can always expect pushback from special interests and the media who are always in their pocket.

Still, it makes you wonder why on earth every group of lawyers, journalists, and unions are against a bill that would seek to diversify the geographic makeup of our appellate courts. And then you remember the real problem you were seeking to solve in the first place before all of the “critics” descended: corruption.

My bill would not just diversify the gender, demographic, or geographic makeup of our appellate courts. It would also chop at the deep-seated subversion of justice in Pennsylvania.

Corruption is not something we should tolerate or ignore. It’s an embedded weed that has deep roots and has strangled other plant roots underground along the way.

For too long, Pennsylvanians have been given a raw deal by our judicial system and have been the butt of jokes about our public officials. From House speakers to trial court judges to traffic court judges, to Supreme Court judges, the commonwealth has had its fair share of judicial malpractice and public corruption.

The simple fact of the matter is that Philadelphia and Allegheny have been playing by their own rules while people like my constituents in Lebanon County suffer.

Of the most recent seven appellate court judges convicted or accused of serious crimes, four of them were from Allegheny or Philadelphia. Of the 19 judges on the Pennsylvania Superior Court, the court that decided that Speaker Bill DeWeese and Speaker John Perzel do not need to pay fines for their crimes, 12 of them are from Philadelphia or Allegheny.

You see, the current system of statewide elections for appellate court judges breeds a political class exempted from the rule of law.

Pennsylvanians for Modern Courts, the major special interest group pushing against my bill, noted in its own April 2017 study that our commonwealth “has not been a stranger to judicial scandals.” The group perceived the ethics of our higher court judges to be of such concern it issued a report in 2011 on the state’s judicial disciplinary system.

But instead of proposing a decentralization of power that could help prevent such corruption from encompassing government, Pennsylvanians for Modern Courts is proposing to move power away from the voters into the hands of a politically savvy merit selection board.

Real reform gives Pennsylvanians a fair shake instead of rigging it for the politically connected.

That’s why every special interest, media outlet, and lawyer lobbyist is against my bill. Unfortunately for them, they won’t dissuade me and other honest legislators. We will fight to get this bill approved so it becomes a ballot question, giving you a voice and opportunity to end corruption in our judicial system.

Rep. Diamond, a Republican, represents the 102nd District in the Pennsylvania House.

Pennsylvania Court Corruption Would Be Stifled By HB 38

(Note: CAP CEO, Leo Knepper had an opportunity to speak with Rep. Diamond about the proposed amendment on February 1, 2021. The video of the interview can be seen below.)

Pennsylvania Court Corruption Would Be Stifled By HB 38

Rosenbaum Raped Five Boys; Good Shooting Kyle Rittenhouse

Rosenbaum Raped Five Boys; Good Shooting Kyle Rittenhouse — We’ve noted the injustice in the first degree murder charge levied against 17-year-old Kyle Rittenhouse for shooting three thugs in self defense on Aug. 25 during the sedition in Kenosha, Wis. While we reported the violent nature of deceased felons Joseph D Rosenbaum and Anthony M. Huber, we actually underplayed how bad Rosenbaum was.

The “social justice” hero’s crimes were the rapes of five different boys as discovered by the Kenosha Record.

The charges should not just be dropped against Kyle, the boy should be given a medal.

We also never reported that the gunman Kyle wounded, Gaige Grosskreutz, was also a felon with a burglary conviction.

It’s safe to say that when all shot turn out to be felons, the event is not a peaceful protest for racial justice.

And sorry for sounding paranoid but its looking more and more that the violence is organized — note that the link is from a year ago — and there is a serious attempt to undermine the vote. Why would the Democrat governors like Michigan’s Gretchen Whitmer and Pennsylvania’s Tom Wolf push to ignore state law and let ballots be accepted after Election Day? Why would judges support them?

If people can’t figure out how to vote in the next 44 days, they don’t want to vote. The deadline should be held sacred by those who recognize the importance of social order and peaceful change of government.

It’s obviously not.

This is not a partisan thing. There are Democrats who love the Constitution and are fighting to avoid the upcoming turmoil. There are Republicans who want your money to keep flowing to D.C. and Silicon Valley and Wall Street and their pockets.

Yes, we dare call it sedition and say the names of Norm Eisen and George Soros.

Ugliness awaits.

Rosenbaum Raped Five Boys; Good Shooting Kyle Rittenhouse
Rosenbaum Raped Five Boys; Good Shooting Kyle Rittenhouse

Wolf Shapiro Bully Nuns In Pennsylvania

Wolf Shapiro Bully Nuns — The sick and evil people — that would be you Gov. Tom Wolf and Attorney General Josh Shapiro — who have acquired control of Pennsylvania’s executive branch are continuing to torment The Little Sisters of the Poor.

The bullying was started by Barack Obama who tried to force the Little Sisters –an order of Roman Catholic nuns who care for the elderly poor in homes across the country and that has a home in Pittsburgh — to offer health-insurance plans that paid for contraceptives, including some abortifacients.

This was part of Obamacare.

Obviously, this is a violation of well-understood tenets of their faith. In the grand scheme giving the order an exemption would make little difference. Why do Wolf and Shapiro feel such a need to compel these nuns to violate their beliefs?

The Supreme Court in 2016 vacated fines that had been levied against them and told lower courts to find a resolution. In 2017, the Trump Administration issued an executive order giving them the exemption.

You think that would have resolved the matter? Not for the Wolf Gang. Rather than letting sleeping dogs lie they sued the Sisters again and the equally bigoted Third Circuit agreed returning the mandate.

So now, today, May 6, oral arguments are again occurring before the Supreme Court. May God grant that the Sisters win for good this time.

Wolf Shapiro Bully Nuns

Trump Explains Law To Judges

Trump Explains Law To Judges
President Trump with Chesco Sheriff Bunny Welsh.

Trump Explains Law To Judges — Donald Trump just finished (Feb. 8) a powerful and inspiring speech to the National Sheriffs’ Association. He praised law enforcement and said those involved had a friend in the White House. He warned they most hold themselves to high standards, remove the bad actors among them and be good role models.

He said youth murders were a national tragedy and that every child — even those in Detroit, Chicago and Baltimore — had a right to play outside in peace and attend school without fear, or pressure to join a gang.

He said he wasn’t joking about building the wall on the Mexican border and that it was being designed as he spoke.

Probably most significantly he took on the activist judges and pundits snarling his ban on those seeking entry from seven terrorist-controlled nations.  It was about time. Thank God he has the spine. He read the law INA 212 (f) verbatim:

Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate. Whenever the Attorney General finds that a commercial airline has failed to comply with regulations of the Attorney General relating to requirements of airlines for the detection of fraudulent documents used by passengers traveling to the United States (including the training of personnel in such detection), the Attorney General may suspend the entry of some or all aliens transported to the United States by such airline.

He cracked a cracked joke about the pronoun “he” being politically incorrect and noted that what was being discussed by the pundit/legal class had nothing to do with the perfectly clear statement that he read.

He said he had planned to give a month’s, and then a week’s, notice regarding his ban but was dissuaded by his security advisors as it would have allowed terrorists planning entry to move up their timetable.

As the President implied, it is political-based decisions by judges that are causing the courts to come into disrespect, not anything he is saying.

In a side note, Chester County’s wonderful Sheriff Bunny Welsh was seen worldwide sitting next to the President, yesterday, when he met with leaders of theNational Sheriffs’ Association at the White House.

Trump Explains Law To Judges


Unions, Trial Lawyers Push Dems In Court Race

Unions, Trial Lawyers Push Dems In Court RaceBy Sen. Scott Wagner

Three seats on the Supreme Court are up for election and it is extremely critical for the Republican Party to maintain control.

I highlighted on Oct. 7 how important this race is and now I will show you why.

Union contributions to the three Democratic candidates ($2.1 million of their $5.9 million total) equal about $500,000 more than all contributions to Republican candidates.

It is important to note: The “Committee for a Better Tomorrow” – which is the Pennsylvania Trial Lawyers Association’s political action committee contributed $375,000 to the Democratic candidates in comparison to the $10,000 they gave to the Republican candidates.**

I have been reporting over the last two years that the public sector unions are choking off any meaningful reforms in Harrisburg.

It is imperative for everyone to understand that even if we have a Republican majority in the Senate, House, and a Republican governor, any meaningful reforms we pass over the next 20 years could be challenged and overturned.

Do not expect pension reform or property tax reform to be passed if the Supreme Court has a Democratic majority because someone could file a legal action and challenge the reforms.

A similar situation recently happened in Illinois – the Governor of Illinois signed pension reform legislation in 2013 which was overturned this year by the Illinois Supreme Court.

The union influence in Harrisburg is staggering and it is the number one reason why we cannot get financial reforms passed.

I cannot reinforce enough how critical it is for you to get out and vote on Tuesday, Nov. 3.

While there are other important races on the ballot, this is the most important race we will see in our lifetime.

Judges on the Supreme Court serve for 10 years and then they can run for retention – another 10 year term – which is a simple vote and judges rarely lose retention.

We must rally around our Republican candidates and get them over the finish line on Tuesday, November 3rd!

Please support Republicans Ann Covey, Mike George, and Judy Olson. Click on each of their names to learn more about them.
Sen. Wagner represents the 28th District in the Pennsylvania Senate.

Unions, Trial Lawyers Push Dems In Court Race

Panepinto Pennsylvania Supreme Court 2015

Panepinto Pennsylvania Supreme Court 2015
Paul Panepinto

It’s easier to hit the party button than to research those on it. We are not judging party button pushers. It is wiser, after all, to vote for the group that might look after one’s interest when one knows the other side certainly won’t.

Still, it is best to do the research and vote the person.

Which gets us to Pennsylvania Supreme Court Race 2015.

There are seven people running: three on the Republican ballot, three on the Democrat ballot and one independent.

The Republican nominees are Judith Olson, Michael George and Anne Covey. The Democrats are David Wecht, Christine Donohue and Kevin Dougherty. The independent is Paul Panepinto.

The Pennsylvania AFL-CIO has endorsed all three Democrats and in fact, Dougherty is the brother of infamous Philadelphia IBEW boss  John “Johnny Doc” Dougherty.

Unions are also giving money to Ms. Covey, a Commonwealth Court judge from Bucks County who spent years as a labor lawyer and served on the Labor Relations Board.

So that gives us a pretty clear indication that ticket splitting is the thing to do this Nov. 3. Those who care about keeping their homes will vote for endorsed Republicans George and Ms. Olson along with independent Panepinto.

We are not labor bashing here or defending greedy corporate types. Pennsylvania labor leaders, however, are not one whit interested in saving decent jobs for working people.  Their prime motives are saving their near-one-percenter lifestyles by keeping the legally mandated automatic dues deductions and the one-percenter pensions of state workers.

Regarding the backgrounds of the Supreme Court candidates, all are judges. As noted Ms. Covey sits on Commonwealth Court, the state intermediate appellate court regarding decisions by government regulatory agencies; Wecht, Ms. Donohue, and Ms. Olson are on Pennsylvania Superior Court, the intermediate appellate court for criminal and civil cases; George is an Adams County Common Pleas Court judge, and Panepinto is a Philadelphia Common Pleas Court judges.

Ms. Covey is the only candidate not recommended by the state Bar Association.

Ms. Olson and George have been endorsed by the Pennsylvania State Troopers Association.

Hat tip Donna Ellingsen.

Panepinto Pennsylvania Supreme Court 2015


Obamacare Law? LOL

So the Supreme Court, yesterday, June 25, found by a 6-3 vote that when Congress said that  Obamacare subsidies could only be obtained via state exchanges they were just goofing. Forget the turmoil and compromises (and blatant dishonesty) when the law was passed– something that should  be everybody’s memory,  Congress put in  that clause because they were goofing. Obamacare Law? LOL

At least in the view of six Supreme Court judges — including “conservatives” John Roberts and  Anthony Kennedy.

Americans have to wake up to the reality that the nation’s political division is not between Democrats Republicans but between those who want power and wealth and those who want to live in peace with their neighbor.

Let’s not forget that corporate America was and remains a strong supporter of Obamacare.

Obamacare Law? LOL

Dem Judicial Candidates Refuse Bar Review

The Delaware County (Pa) Republican Party, today, April 27, called the refusal by Democrat judicial candidates Lawrence DeMarco and Lawrence Abel to share their qualifications with the members of the non-partisan Delaware County Bar Association “insulting and disappointing.” Dem Judicial Candidates Refuse Bar Review

The Delaware County Bar Association has long asked its members to evaluate the qualifications of judicial candidates who are seeking to serve on the Delaware County Court of Common Pleas.

After reviewing their qualification, the members of the Bar Association are asked to rate candidates as “Well Qualified,” “Qualified,” “Not Recommended,” or “No Opinion.” While the Republican candidates for judge, Anthony Scanlon, Margaret Amoroso, and Dominic Pileggi each submitted their qualifications, Democrats DeMarco and Abel refused to submit their qualifications and take part in the process.

“Voters should be concerned by the lack of experience and qualifications of Democrats Abel and DeMarco if they refuse to even submit their background for review and evaluation by the non-partisan Delaware County Bar Association,” said Andrew Reilly, chairman of the Delaware County Republican Party. “Perhaps it has something to do with the fact that Demarco only joined the Bar Association a couple years ago and Abel’s application to join the bar was only submitted a few weeks ago.”

“Delaware County residents deserve and expect better from their judges than the partisan games that DeMarco and Abel are playing,” said Reilly. “It is hypocritical that they refuse to have their qualifications judged by their peers but they want to sit in judgment of others on the bench.”

Each election for Delaware County Court of Common Pleas, the Delaware County Bar Association’s Judicial Selection/Retention Committee asks the bipartisan members of the bar association to rate the qualifications of each judicial candidate. To ensure a non-partisan and fair process, the Judicial Selection Committee is led by two co-chairs, one attorney and bar association member who is a registered Republican and one who is a registered Democrat.

Dem Judicial Candidates Refuse Bar Review

Ignorantia Legis A Good Excuse

Michael Cottone has published an article in the Tennessee Law Review describing how literally no one now can keep the centuries-old principle ignorantia legis neminem excusat lady_justicei.e. ignorance of the law excuses no one.

He noted that it was a great thing in its day when laws were few and based on a commonly understood morality.

Today, however, with the advent of “regulatory crime”, which are laws written to enforce administrative schemes and called “public welfare offenses”, literally nobody can know what all the laws are.

He cited as an example a guy who got lost on a snowmobile during a blizzard and ended up on federal land where snowmobiling was illegal. Rather than be cut slack he was prosecuted. That sort of thing does not happen in a just society.

Traditionally one needed intent to become a criminal.

“Tellingly, no exact count of the number of federal statutes that impose criminal sanctions has ever been given,  but estimates from the last fifteen years range from 3,600  to approximately 4,500,” Cottone said.

Cottone notes that Congress, according to one study, enacts 60 new criminal statues a year and this does not include new regulations that carry a criminal penalty.

“Our criminal justice system fails to be “understandable” so as to comport with the internal morality of law—especially because of the highly technical nature of regulations,” he wrote.

Reforms are needed desperately.

Abuse of the legal process is by definition unjust and those entrusted to uphold it yet abuse it will face an inevitable backlash.

Cottone’s article can be found as a pdf download at this link.

Ignorantia Legis A Good Excuse