On Friday a federal judge revoked Paul Manafort’s house arrest on the basis that he had allegedly violated the conditions of his bail and ordered that he be incarcerated as he awaits trial.
While the decision by U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson regarding President Donald Trump’s former campaign manager earned widespread praise from the left, it drew concerns from both pundits and average Americans about Jackson’s impartiality.
Appointed to her post by former President Barack Hussein Obama in 2011, Jackson’s ruling history skews heavily in favor of leftist causes.
Last year she dismissed a lawsuit against former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that had been filed by the family members of the Benghazi terror attack victims.
In 2013 she temporarily blocked a lawsuit by House Republicans who had sought access to the Justice Department’s records concerning Fast and Furious, a botched Obama administration ran by then-Attorney General Eric Holder. Not until after Holder resigned two years later did she finally allow House Republicans access to the documents in 2016.
Jackson once ruled against the Catholic Church, which had sought to challenge Obamacare’s contraception mandate.
And her actions prior to becoming a federal judge in 2011 reek of leftism. During her tenure as a defense attorney in 2009 she reportedly defended a corrupt Democrat politician who had been accused of bribery.
Her behavior and rhetoric in the Manafort case have likewise invariably aligned perfectly with leftist causes, despite complaints from other judges and officials.
When Manafort tried to challenge special counsel Robert Mueller’s indictment in April by questioning the limits of his authority, Jackson reportedly skewered him in court.
Yet a month later another judge — one appointed by former President Ronald Reagan — echoed Manafort’s exact complaints.
“If I look at the indictment, none of that information has anything to do with links or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of Donald Trump,” U.S. District Judge T.S. Ellis III lectured Mueller’s team in May.
“So I don’t see what relation this indictment has with anything the special prosecutor is authorized to investigate.”
He reportedly also slammed the special counsel for acting as if he possesses “unfettered power.”
A federal judge in a hearing about @PaulManafort bank fraud charges, is saying the special counsel should not have "unfettered power," raising questions about the scope of the investigation.
— Steve Herman (@W7VOA) May 4, 2018
Jackson has continually dismissed arguments such as these and instead portrayed Manafort as a veritable poster boy for corruption, resulting in the incarceration of a man who hasn’t even been convicted of anything yet …
- Swedes opting to embed chip in hand to comply with proof of vaccine requirement - December 1, 2021
- Wa-Po columnist dragged over vaccine euphoria that could have passed for satire: ‘A sucker for a sucker!’ - November 28, 2021
- Fauci laughs smugly, hangs Jan. 6 over Ted Cruz’s head when asked about call for prosecution - November 28, 2021