WorldNetDaily continued its war against judge James Boasberg for committing the offense of ruling against President Trump with a July 16 article by Bob Unruh that, as usual, begins with a lengthy screed:
The news has been filled in recent months with instances of federal judges delivering attacks on the administration of President Donald Trump, releasing rulings that take control of Executive Branch decisions, restrict Trump’s programs to secure the border and remove illegal alien criminals from U.S. shores.
Those cases have involved cutting federal spending, removing illegal aliens, eliminating destructive DEI programs, protecting children from transgender ideologies, and mutilations, stopping anti-Semitism and much more.
There has been the appearance of bias in the judiciary.
And now there’s confirmation of that very bias from none other than the judiciary itself.
It is in a report at the Federalist that investigative reporter and senior legal correspondent Margot Cleveland reveals James Boasberg, a federal judge in Washington, D.C., advised Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts that his colleagues were “concern[ed] that the Administration would disregard rulings of federal courts leading to a constitutional crisis.”
Boasberg is the chief judge in the judicial district and has been at center of a judicial campaign to prevent Trump’s agenda to secure the American borders and deport illegal aliens, those who are in the United States illegally, and often have committed subsequent crimes.
Further, Boasberg also was at the center of activism before President Trump’s first term when he was under attack in the fabricated Russiagate conspiracy theory launched by the Hillary Clinton campaign and others with lies about Trump campaign collusion with Russia.
Boasberg was chosen for his job by leftist Barack Obama, who now is just one subject of a congressional investigation into a vast conspiracy that developed in Washington targeting Trump.
Boasberg, in fact, when sentencing an ex-FBI lawyer, Kevin Clinesmith, who admitted doctoring a 2017 email regarding Deep State’s work against Trump, refused to give him any prison time but told him to do community service.
Boasberg ruled against Trump in one deportation dispute and told him to order airplanes carrying illegal aliens out of the United States to turn around mid-air and come back.
The White House responded that the jets, carrying the “terrorist alien” individuals, already had left U.S. airspace and the judge had no jurisdiction there.
[…]The report noted, “Judge Boasberg’s comments reveal he and his colleagues hold an anti-Trump bias, for the Trump Administration had complied with every court order to date (and since for that matter). The D.C. District Court judges’ ‘concern’ also went counter to the normal presumption courts hold — one that presumes public officials properly discharged their official duties. Apparently, that presumption does not apply to the current president, at least if you are litigating in D.C.”
The Federalist noted just days later, “Boasberg, in a case in which he completely lacked jurisdiction, as the Supreme Court would later confirm, entered a lawless order commanding the Trump Administration to halt removals to El Salvador. So, one of the judges concerned about Trump following the law, ignored the law.”
He went even further in his agenda, the report said: “Boasberg would later find ‘the Trump Administration committed criminal contempt of court’ by failing to turn the planes around or fly the gang members back to the U.S., even though the court’s written (and unlawful) injunction ordered neither.”
Cleveland explained that Boasberg and his colleague “prejudged Trump as a scofflaw,” even though that’s not the case.
Also as usual, Boasberg was given no opportunity to respond to the hateful Federalist piece, and Unruh failed to explain why it’s “not the case” that Trump is a scofflaw. And contrary to Cleveland’s claim that “the Trump Administration had complied with every court order to date (and since for that matter),” right-wing influencers have encouraged the administration to violate court orders, and Trump’s Department of Justice has violated more than 50 court orders in New Jersey alone.
Unruh parroted the Trump administration’s attack on Boasberg the next day:
An anti-Trump judge in the federal judiciary now has been described as a “threat to the rule of law,” by an official in the Department of Justice.
The comments come from Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche and are about James Boasberg, who repeatedly has used his own agendas in his court rulings that have struck down the president’s.
In one case, he demanded that the president order airplanes carrying illegal alien criminals on deportation flights be turned around mid-air and brought back to the U.S., without regarding to whether those jets had enough fuel to do that.
Those airplanes were outside of American airspace already, however, and the White House explained Boasberg’s jurisdiction didn’t extend to international locations and foreign countries.
It was revealed this week that Boasberg, at a recent judicial conference, had made disparaging remarks about Trump, even though he’s supposed to be neutral on issues and people in his court, where Trump is a defendant in a number of cases brought by activists trying to undermine his agenda for America.
A report at the Washington Examiner said Blanche was responding to Boasberg’s comments and said, the judge was in “serious breach of the judicial oath and a threat to the rule of law.”
Again, Unruh refused to give Boasberg an opportunity to respond.
Unruh served up more Trump stenography against Boasberg in a July 29 article:
An anti-Trump federal judge who already had been described as a threat to the rule of law now is the target of a complaint filed by the Department of Justice accusing him of undermining the nation’s judiciary.
Attorney General Pam Bondi explained the complaint over “misconduct” by James Boasberg, a federal judge who once wildly ordered the administration of President Donald Trump to turn around airplanes that already were in international airspace to return the illegal alien criminals they were deporting to America, involved his “making improper public comments about President Trump and his administration.”
These comments have undermined the integrity of the judiciary,” she confirmed.
A DOJ official confirmed, “Judge Boasberg first tried to persuade Chief Justice Roberts and other federal judges that the Trump administration would not follow court orders, despite having no basis for his belief. Then he acted on his baseless belief again and again in litigation over which he was presiding. Judge Boasberg violated the Canons of the Code of Conduct for United States Judges, including the requirement that he ‘promote public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.'”
As we’ve established, the idea that Boasberg has “no basis for his belief” that the Trump administration would not follow court orders is very much a lie. Unruh didn’t call out the DOJ official on that falsehood.