Obama’s terrifying admission: ‘We are remaking the courts’


At a Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee fundraiser in Dallas Wednesday night, the president confirmed what the public has known all along — that he is remaking the courts in his own image.

Associated Press White House reporter Josh Lederman tweeted Thursday:

According to the White House Press Office, his full remarks on the courts were:

As Lisa mentioned, we are remaking the courts. I know that we’ve got some lawyers here, and here in Texas sometimes people feel a little frustrated about the pace of appointments here in Texas. But you should know that in addition to the Supreme Court, we’ve been able to nominate and confirm judges of extraordinary quality all across the country on federal benches. We’re actually, when it comes to the district court, matching the pace of previous presidents. When it comes to the appellate court, we’re just a little bit behind, and we’re just going to keep on focused on it.

Lederman’s tweet let loose an avalanche of replies, including:




And finally a chilling prediction:


The president has made two Supreme Court appointments, Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan. The real story, however, is his lower court appointments.

Obama has appointed, and the Senate confirmed, 39 judges to the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and 168 to the federal District Court system, according to Wikipedia.

Everyone’s attention is always concentrated on the Supreme Court, but the lower courts are where all the action is. If a judge, or a panel of judges, make a boneheaded ruling, most litigants let it go. They seldom have the time, funds and wherewithal to take it further, so the ruling becomes law for that circuit or district.

Here’s one bright spot, however. U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., has vowed to hold up all nominations until the White House comes clean on events surrounding the terrorist attack on our foreign mission in Benghazi.

We’ll see. In the meantime, the president continues to fundamentally transform the United States of America.

[poll id=”135″]


  • Kimber_TLE

    As Lisa mentioned, we are remaking the courts.

    «sarcasm» I wonder if it will be as good as Obamacare? «/sarcasm»

  • NadePaulKuciGravMcKi

    Dzhokhar JAHAR Tsarnaev —
    free Jahar the Boston manufactured ‘terror’ patsy

  • rhodes autry

    this is the way a tyrant takes over

  • King Umbarrii

    Obama. have you no shame? Have you not destroyed enough of this country already?

  • SeRiOuSLy!!??

    i said this years ago during his first term. that re electing him and giving him the opportunity to appoint like minded judges, we’ll have to deal with his legacy for decades. judges service is life! so many people who don’t think further then tomorrow can’t grasp the damage this can or will cause. during clintons run the gun ban came up for a vote in the justice and only won by one vote….ONE!!! so what do you think is going to happen when all of these liberal judges get the chance/power? obama is telling you right now! just like he stated back before he even ran for his 1st term who and what he was about, but nobody obviously cared because here he is and in his 2nd term as if the 1st wasn’t enough to tell you!!!

    • Doug

      You should have started a petition years ago.

  • Maubi

    Waiting to see sharia become law under these Judges.

  • kmfloyd

    HAHAHAHAHA you used something from WIKIPEDIA?!?!? Shame on you.

    You wrote, “If a judge, or a panel of judges, make a boneheaded ruling, most litigants let it go. They seldom have the time, funds and wherewithal to take it further, so the ruling becomes law for that circuit or district.” As a paralegal student, I can tell you that this is not 100% accurate. What happens is a trial court makes a decision and if it is a “boneheaded ruling,” they are entitled at least one appeal by constitutional right, regardless of if they can afford it or not (this is why there are public defenders). Most people would MAKE the time to seek justice, which is what the whole process is ultimately designed for. The ruling becomes law, but each time a higher court makes a decision, that higher court’s decision becomes law. The appellate courts try the TRIAL COURTS’ decisions and only rule on the facts of law, not the facts of the case, in other words, whether or not there was an error of law made in the trial court’s proceedings. So if the trial courts had improper information, lack of evidence, etc., the appellee cannot submit new evidence to the appellate court; the Court can only critique the way the law was applied to the facts presented at trial.

    I am a Republican and I hate Obama. However, I think this piece of his speech at the committee fundraiser was taken out of context and this article is an insult to the competency of all judges and justices within the United States. Judges and Justices only make interpretations of law, they don’t create the law. Who creates the law? The legislature, Congress. Who controls Congress? At the present, the Democratic Senate. Who is an influential Democrat? The president. Get the twerks out of your tweets people, and get your info straight.

    • reinhold

      kmfloyd You talk lile a lawyer or otherwise deluded person. You search in vain for Due Process in a sea of complicit public servants claiming to be Officers of the Court.

      A lawyer, especially a Public Defender is a shameless lackey- merely a paid surrogate to witness the conviction of the innocent and the release of the guilty. A cloud of culprits that continually plague our formerly free society.

      Were that Mulatto Bastard from Kenya the actual cause of the Current Calamity we could celebrate your inane boast that you are “a paralegal student” and “a Republican that hates Obama.” But you produce no cause for celebration. Your mockery indicts yourself.

      Your silly statements betray the futility of the ridiculous position you invoke. If the Republican “party” were any different than the Democratic “party” there might exist a scintilla of hope for a Reform of this fallen Republic. To actually reconstitute the Free Society for the lawful inhabitants of the several free States within this Union it will be necessary to expel or eradicate hostile Money Morons like yourself.

      The cure is very simple. Eradicate all Renegade Public Servants and those they serve that now engage the current insurrection.

      We shall not request their repentance. Like you these hostile aliens demonstrate no remorse. Americans cannot repent because Americans will not confess.

      You cannot now deny your complicity. That Little Prick From Kenya does not cause all this destruction! YOU AND DID THIS!

      There is but one cure:

      No King But King Yeshua (Jesus)

      Our Ruler, Yeshua, (Jesus) the Christ admonishes, “No man can serve two masters for he will love one and hate the other.” It is obvious that you serve but one master; That Evil Tower of Central Power that are “teaching for doctrine the commandments of men.”

      No tyrant ever resigned by request. Last of all are those like you that serve the tyrant.

      All those that would live free are called upon to rise up with all necessary force and Take Down That Evil Tower. To live free It shall be necessary to:

      Arrest, abolish and exterminate The Kosher Kabal of The Bogus Bank of Credit Fraud.

      No King But King Yeshua (Jesus) The Christ

      In His name and by His power


  • theissuesnow

    The bigger they are the harder they fall.

  • curmudgeon

    Full of lesbians, homo’s and other extreme left wing activists out to destroy the Constitution and the country. Time for Federal judges to be removed from their lifetime appointments. There is no longer a system of checks and balances in our Federal government os at this point, “What difference does it make”?

    • Detfan1

      When we elect a President, we get what we sow. If you don’t want the types of judges he’s appointing, elect a conservative as President next time. Appointments will then be more conservative than progressive. It is a simple message that voter’s don’t ever seem to consider when at the voting booth. At this point it might take 16 straight years of conservative appointments to make our country resemble a freedom loving and independent, and exceptional nation again.

    • Doug

      Stop referring to Alito and Alioto that way.

      • curmudgeon

        You affected by a frontal lobotomy? The three twisted sisters and Breyer are the activist liberals who want to destroy the Constitution. Apparently you missed this in your public school indoctrination.

  • Kenneth Clark

    Yes the courts, from local to supreme are to interpret only and, as a result of their interpretation, apply the law to the specific case. However, over the past 30+ years we have seen many laws created by the courts based upon the justice’s personal interpretation of a given law. This has become the MO of the courts from local to supreme.

    Separation of Church and State: The Constituion is very clear on this subject. It states that the Government shall not establish a State sanctioned religion, like Britain had done with the Anglican Church making it the only religion that a Brit could legally participate in. Our courts have re-interpreted this without a lawful basis. It was done upon personal opinion only of what they wanted ot to be thus creating law without the legislature being involved at all.

    Another that has been and is being attacked is the Second Ammendment. Once the courts are “stacked” with justices of a like opinion of Obama and people like him, the courts will again attempt, if not suceed in creating new law that will effectively render this very clear law, null and void.

    There are many, many examples of the courts creating new law without legislative involvement based upon interpretaion and ideology. This should not be and we the citizens have allowed this to happen.

    Therefore appointment of justices to the various courts is a critical move in Obama’s ideology of national transformation to what HE WANTS and not the people.

    • Doug

      Kenny how would you handle the religion question? Would you have a state religion? Which one? Enlighten me?

      • Kenneth Clark

        I would follow the Constitution. It is very clear on its own. One must only have a small amount of reading comprehension to understand it. It is not Rocket Science, maybe Lincoln Log Science…

Related Posts