Many complain about the bias in the media. Once the country’s watchdogs, the press has morphed into lapdogs of the rich, famous, and powerful. Amidst the obvious biased reporting, is a sinister collusion to blackout real news that would enlighten and even enrage the American patriot – those that believe governments have been instituted to protect our God-given rights. This dying breed also believes that federalism, capitalism, and republics go hand-in-hand – understanding that without federalism, our rights that are protected in our Constitution will vanish with the wind.

Media taking part in censorship

While the American Patriot is more than aware of the bias of the media when it is covering political campaigns, few are aware of the danger to our Republic through the use of blackouts. In this regard, the media has learned to censor what it doesn’t want you to know. And what it doesn’t want you to know covers an immeasurable number of issues: starting with the legitimacy of Barack Obama’s presidency to the agendas of the New World Order, but perhaps the secret best hidden from our collective eyes is the injustice exercised in our courtrooms. I am not referring to misapplied sentences or adjudications. I am talking about the complete breakdown of our judicial system as practiced by progressive judges who believe they can ignore or silence voices that offend their ideologies.

While there are many instances of judges blatantly and knowingly ruling unconstitutionally, two cases in particular are worth noting. One involved a private investigator in Ohio, Susan Daniels, who discovered that the Social Security number of Barack Obama once belonged to a deceased man from Connecticut. Ms. Daniels went through the trouble of challenging Obama’s credibility to appear on the ballot by becoming a presidential candidate in that state in order to have legal standing. Appropriately, she named the Secretary of State as the Defendant. When the Secretary of State defaulted and did not appear in court, the judge argued the case on his behalf – and then lo and behold, found in favor of his argument. No, I’m not making this up. Even I don’t have that good of an imagination.

Judicial collusion?

The second and ongoing instance involves Mr. Nicholas Purpura who is suing Governor Christie and others regarding Second Amendment violations and their assaults against federalism. The case listed an enormous amount of supporting documentation and legal precedents, which should have made it a slam dunk in an honest courtroom. As for the Governor, he would have you think he is a supporter of the Second Amendment, but he wouldn’t want you to know that he signed 23 new gun restrictive bills into unconstitutional laws in the already overly restrictive State of New Jersey. Although Mr. Purpura has asked the court 18 times to hear his legal argument, as he is entitled, nearly two years later he is still being denied his day in court.

Repeated defaults

Additionally, the defendants defaulted numerous times and filed procedurally illegitimate Motions to Dismiss, but still no justice for Purpura. Worse, can you imagine that a case of such importance against a presidential candidate who claims to be a supporter of the Second Amendment has not received one word in the media? We have certainly cringed at the photo ops of the Governor strolling along with Barack Obama on the beach after Hurricane Sandy. And we’ve heard ad nauseum about Bridgegate, but nothing – not one word – about his tyrannical abuse of our right to keep and bear arms and the possible wheel of conspiracy between a Republican Governor, his Democratic legislature, and clueless or corrupt judges.

Or…can it be that the Obama appointed Judge, Michael A. Shipp, has colluded to protect Governor Christie? Or that the case violates his gun control ideology? Or is it that the Judge simply is ignorant of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure? More shocking was Judge Shipp’s comment in a memorandum of law that stated that: (the Petitioners’) “Petition was difficult to follow because it was replete with unnecessary legal citations and analysis…” Let me get this straight: instead of placing value on the over 60 Supreme Court (SCOTUS) decisions Purpura listed in his Petition, Shipp claims he documented too much support and therefore the Petition was difficult to follow, which to him seemed to mean he could just use his lack of understanding to deprive Mr. Purpura of his right to have his case hear. Since I have read the Petition and found it be logical and understandable – even though I am not a legal scholar – can it be that this Judge does not have the mental capacity to serve on the bench, or is there another agenda playing out here?

Obama plays the media after Orlando

Before answering that last question , take into consideration Obama’s response to the Orlando tragedies. If his apples don’t fall far from his tree, then it is plausible to believe that Judge Shipp may share Obama’s ideology about the Second Amendment – that gun control is a reasonable way to control terrorism. Considering that the night club in Orlando was a gun free zone, is it possible the Judge and Obama think that the Orlando terrorist couldn’t read? Well, maybe it’s their lack of literacy that has blinded them to the clear wording in our Constitution that simply says that our right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. Either lack of literacy skills, or the exercise of an ideology that is contrary to our Constitution condemn these two men and others like them. Recently SCOTUS found that bad behavior by those who have taken an oath to uphold the Constitution is actually criminal behavior. And if criminal, then certainly public servants who are criminally liable should be removed from office, and that includes everyone from the lowest position in government right up to the president.

Any hope?

This particular situation has raised many issues, including the censorship of the media through blackouts, the collusion of the courts with those of like ideologies, and the importance of federalism, which the Supreme Court upheld in March of 2000. It was in the Department of Transportation, et al. v. The Association of American Railroads that SCOTUS ruled unanimously to uphold federalism and to support the Constitution and protect the civil rights of our people. Purpura’s case has also illuminated just how corrupt our check and balance system has become. Should Hillary Clinton become our next president (God forbid), she will be able to count on a complicit court to rubber stamp her efforts to “infringe” upon our right to keep and bear arms, as well as a complicit media that will not broadcast anything to contradict her constitutional whoremongering.

Although our Constitution is clear, the fate of our Republic is not. More information on Purpura v. Christie can be found on TPATH.org, under the SAPPA tab. As Benjamin Franklin said at the beginning of the American Revolution: “We must, indeed, all hang together or, most assuredly, we shall all hang separately.” When it comes to protecting our Second Amendment rights and federalism, you can be sure that once lost, more than our firearms will disappear. Hang with Purpura today in any way you can, and who knows, maybe no one will hang tomorrow.

Reprinted from The Daily Rant, copyright 2016 Mychal Massie. Used by permission.