Skip to main content may receive compensation from affiliate partners for some links on the site. Read our full Disclosure here.

MASSIVE Corruption Revealed In Our Courts



I know that President Trump appointed some of these people, but everyone including Lyndon Johnson appointed these judges in question, so don’t let a lefty tell you this is a Trump thing.

This is a systemic issue, an actual systemic injustice.

The bombshell report from The Wall Street Journal revealed that 131 federal judges violated federal law by refusing to recuse themselves in cases where they had some vested financial interest.

Why this is surprising to anyone is beyond me.

If anyone thinks that being a judge is a noble position, then I have but one question: why do people clamor to be judges?

I’ll give you a hint: it has absolutely nothing to do with justice!

The thing about public service is that no one should want to do it—that’s the mark of great public service, think of jury duty for example—no one wants to do it.

This is how all public service positions should work—the last thing any society should be doing is conferring power upon those who want it.

Give it to those who don’t want it through random selection.

If someone fights tooth and nail for a certain public position—like that of a judge, rest assured that they are not noble, nor is the position they are applying for, nor is their intent in taking that position.

It is about money and power only, and this proves it:

The absolutely seismic report from The Wall Street Journal found:

More than 130 federal judges have violated U.S. law and judicial ethics by overseeing court cases involving companies in which they or their family owned stock.

A Wall Street Journal investigation found that judges have improperly failed to disqualify themselves from 685 court cases around the nation since 2010. The jurists were appointed by nearly every president from Lyndon Johnson to Donald Trump.


The Hill continued:

The cases took place between 2010 and 2020, and of the two-thirds of federal district judges who disclosed individual stock holdings, about 20 percent of them heard at least one case that involved their stock, according to the Journal.

After the Journal notified the judges of its findings, 56 of them began to alert parties involved in 329 of the lawsuits of their conflict of interest.

The judges gave the Journal various explanations for failing to recuse themselves, including issues with conflict-screening search software and their insignificant roles in cases that did not require legal exemptions.


Join the conversation!

Please share your thoughts about this article below. We value your opinions, and would love to see you add to the discussion!

We Love Trump
Thanks for sharing!