WorldNetDaily continued its war against Judge James Boasberg in a March 16 article by Bob Unruh:
James Boasberg, a federal judge in Washington who has been one of the most active and aggressive members of the federal judiciary using his courtroom to oppose President Donald Trump’s agenda, has done it again.
He’s ruled against subpoenas from the Department of Justice for Federal Reserve chief Jerome Powell and other Fed information.
Boasberg, who was part and parcel of the FISA court scheme to spy on Trump and his associates, who wildly ordered jets carrying deported illegal alien criminals to be turned around mid-air and returned to the U.S., who ordered the president to go overseas and fetch back to America 100 already deported illegal alien criminals, claimed the investigation into the Fed was part of an agenda to provide lower interest rates for Americans.
Boasberg, given his lifetime job by Barack Obama, said the subpoenas to Powell and the Federal Reserve Board were political.
He cited a “mountain of evidence” that the federal government wanted to pressure the board for provide those lower interest rates, and then dramatically suggested the “displeasing the president” actually was a “crime.”
[…]A number of judges, including Boasberg, have been subject of formal ethics complaints for their political opposition to the president, only to be protected by other judges.
Unruh offered no actual evidence Boasberg is wrong here. Instead, he whined:
Entry-level judges in the federal court system repeatedly have overruled, or tried to overrule, Trump, actually imposing their will, sometimes on a worldwide basis, on his Executive Branch actions. They’ve decided who the president can hire, or fire, from the Executive Branch. They’ve decided what prisoners can be jailed and where. They’ve decided what Trump must spend on various programs.
Unruh offered no evidence Boasberg is an “entry-level judge.”
Unruh further groused in a March 18 article:
The chief justice of the United States Supreme Court says “personal” criticism of federal judges is unacceptable to him and “it’s got to stop.”
That’s apparently, based on his comments, even when judges issue wildly political and injurious opinions, such as James Boasberg, who at times has ordered President Donald Trump to turn around in mid-air jets carrying deported illegal alien criminals, or to go and fetch those deported illegal alien criminals from a foreign country’s jail.
Boasberg is the activist just who was part and parcel of those false schemes created by Democrats to damage Trump’s campaign in 2016, and then hurt his first term with false claims he conspired with Russia.
[…]Trump also called Boasberg, who recently ordered an end to a federal investigation of possible corruption issues before evidence has been assembled, “wacky, nasty, crooked and totally out of control.”
Boasberg, appointed by Barack Obama during his leftist regime, displayed “open, flagrant, and extreme partisan bias and contempt against Republicans and the Trump administration,” Trump said.
Evidence now confirms that Obama was included in the scheme to injure Trump during his first campaign and first term.
Unruh kept up his attacks on Boasberg in a March 19 article:
A federal judge in Washington who repeatedly has used his judicial role to attack President Donald Trump and his agenda for making American great again now has ramped up his war on the Executive Branch by changing the rules for grand juries and their indictments.
A report from Fox News explains Judge James Boasberg, who the report called “a frequent thorn in President Donald Trump’s side,” now has issued an order changing those grand jury requirements.
The new notification requirement imposed by Boasberg demands that the “duty magistrate judge” must be notified whenever a grand jury “fails to concur in an indictment.”
Boasberg wrote, “This court has reviewed current practices relating to the return of indictments and notification of instances in which a grand jury has declined to indict. In furtherance of the interests of consistency and transparency, and pursuant to its authority under Rule 57.14(b), this court finds that notification should be provided to the duty magistrate judge whenever a grand jury fails to concur in an indictment, regardless of whether the defendant has already been charged.”
[…]The Barack Obama appointee has been suggested by members of Congress for impeachment and has been a part of a coalition of activist judges across the nation trying to control the president’s decisions regarding the operation of the executive branch of government.
Again, Unruh failed to demonstrate how anything Boasberg wrote was wrong.