Judicial Seditious Conspiracy: 18 USC §2384

Impeachment won't remove the problem. AG Pam Bondi & FBI Director Patel have a duty to uphold the law & prosecute to the fullest extent those seeking to thwart the U.S. government.

Mar 14, 2025

Beryl Howell, Ana Reyes, Sparkle Sooknanan, Tanya Chutkan, William Alsup

Conspiring to Overthrow a Duly-Elected President. (Nick Sorter)

Article II Section 2.

The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices…
…and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.

Section 3.

He shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; he may, on extraordinary Occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them…he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed, and shall Commission all the Officers of the United States.

If one is relying on SCOTUS to weigh in thoughtfully on the Constitution, this country will be long over before one ever sees that. The Supremes will not actually protect the U.S. Constitution and uphold the foundational Article II powers of the President of the United States. In recent decades, under the Roberts Court, corrective action across a spectrum of issues has sorely lacked. Instead, from promoting the Affordable Care Act to restricting 2^nd and 4^th amendment rights, allowing FISA abuses, to ignoring national election frauds and rights violations, the Roberts Court has staked out weak and weasel positions; and/or ignored key Constitutional issues that must follow the original intent of the U.S Constitution. This while allowing lower court rulings to stand, confusing the general public-at-large. Not all of Roberts co-judges have concurred; but the ones that have, are ideological, weak on principles while long on fear of any public outcry directed at them. These unsettled Constitutional quandaries have festered far too long, allowed lower court chaos to brew up, to strangle the Office of the President of United States, and to hold hostage his sole and unified powers to faithfully execute the laws of the land to the best of his ability through his valid election.

The executive power of the President has been actively whittled away by Globalist-minded, freedom-hating apparatchiks from inside Washington D.C and throughout the country. To reduce and silo the President to just his war-making powers (without the need for a declaration of war from Congress) and have his lower-level, inferior officers overtly undermine Presidential policy choices (playing lawyer with his orders) by acts of overt subversion, contact with non-government organizational activism, and attachment and promotion of lawfare groups to overthrow Presidential actions.

These forces have been in known operation since the mid-1960s, often terrorist-minded like the Weather Underground was; but grew into institutional power as the century turned and a tipping point was reached to finalize the subversion and destruction of 250 years as an independent nation-state. Such congealed forces recruited a large majority of bureaucrats, lawyers and judges. These people were groomed and appointed by prior admins, particularly the Bushes, Obamas, the Clintons and Bidens, most recently, which obsessively push to weaken and fracture the United States for reasons both monetary and ideological. (A discussion for Part II.)

Thanks for reading DCFPRESS Post! This post is public so feel free to share it.

Many will scoff at the idea that these prior leaders and their lesser minions would be so bold, but no common man across the country, of a reasonable age and mind, could conclude otherwise. Since the birth of Globalization, dating back to August of 1971, but escalated from the 1990s to the present, the American Dream has died; debt has replaced wealth; divorce and debauchery has replaced family and intestinal fortitude that saw a better day ahead out of one’s honest struggles.

The main weapon of choice of these minions of leaders past – lawfare, courtesy of Norm Eisen, Marc Elias, and Andrew Weissmann. These men (and their affiliated lawfare teams) have eroded sensible understandings of legal boundaries and logical precedents regarding presidential power, both foreign and domestic; and such will inevitably destroy the fabric of the country due to legitimate moral retaliation and illegitimate measures as well. As such, action is needed from proper authorities – to counter and squelch this Color Revolution tactic to overthrow a sitting President.

The problem is not just at the federal level – which is now at a crisis level – but also seen at the state level. The latter is where low-key, activist judges do abominable deeds to keep their personal quirks running alongside political vendettas against Trump, and now, his 2^nd administration.

Exhibit A, for state level: Tina Peters received a 9-year sentence for the temerity to question and assert that data manipulation was involved in the 2020 Colorado elections by later accessing that data. (Note: her conviction was for:

“…[T]hree felony counts of attempting to influence a public servant, one felony count of conspiracy to commit criminal impersonation, one misdemeanor count of official misconduct, one misdemeanor count of violation of duty in elections, and one misdemeanor count of failure to comply with the secretary of state.”

Peters had never been convicted of any crime in her 7 decades on the Earth.

The unfortunate dilemma is: the politics of the present sees bureaucrats, inside their collectivist silo, and protected by U.S. federal judges, represented by law firms and blue state AGs, above the ordinary people in the country and at odds to the goals of reducing the size of government under President Trump.

Most vociferous on the federal bench is D.C. Chief Judge Beryl Howell. The hallmark of a real authoritarian – which nearly all judges are, despite their delusions to the contrary – is how they treat speech, privacy and surveillance. Howell started out as a prosecutor in the EDNY, building a reputation off narcotics cases and the prosecution of 29 building inspectors. Howell jumped into a counsel role for Democrat Senator Patrick Leahy, a key crafter of 90s censorship of the Internet and further expansion of the powers of State to wiretap.

Senator Leahy (who spent decades alongside Joe Biden in the Senate) said on Meet the Press in 2007:

“[H]e doesn't object to eavesdropping ‘provided it follows the law.’ He suggested the Federal Intelligence Surveillance Act be revised ‘so there would be no question you can co after potential terrorists with wiretaps.’”

A couple of years prior, his former assistant Beryl Howell’s thoughts on the USA PATRIOT Act included her “Myths” regarding the Patriot Act. She stated that:

“The first myth about the USA PATRIOT Act is that Congress rubber-stamped the Administration’s request for new surveillance power, giving the Ashcroft Justice Department and the Bush Administration every new power for which the Administration asked. To demonstrate its legislative prowess, the Administration has encouraged this myth. Yet, the Administration did not get everything it asked for; at the same time it got a lot it never asked for or wanted. (2)” [My emphasis.]
In fact, the Department of Justice contributed only about one-third of the provisions that became the USA PATRIOT Act, and that one-third was significantly modified from what the Attorney General presented in draft form to the Congress. While the parts of this law which have proven the most controversial come from the one-third originally proposed by the Administration, the Congress supplied most of the substantive provisions…increasing the number of translators at the FBI and practical steps for improving coordination among law enforcement personnel at different levels of government.(2)” [My emphasis.]
Howell continues to defend the PATRIOT ACT and Congress’s quick passage, stating, “this bill received more public hearings and attention in the Senate than many bills ever get before passage and certainly more than the Administration wanted.(2)”

Howell discussed then a sunset provision that never actually applied.

“The antidote to this skepticism about the USA PATRIOT Act was inclusion of a sunset provision requiring the most controversial surveillance provisions to lapse at the end of 2005. The sunset was intended to provide an incentive to the Justice Department to cooperate with the Congress in evaluating whether the surveillance powers were needed and effective in fighting terrorism and to be careful about avoiding abuses. The FBI understands the point of the sunset. FBI field guidance issued after passage of the USA PATRIOT Acton use of certain administrative subpoenas, which are used in foreign intelligence gathering and called National Security Letters, advises agents…(4)” [ My emphasis.]

Binney, Assange & AT&T: The NS F*ckin' Eh!

Jason Powers

January 7, 2024

Read full story

Howell’s 2005 erroneously thought that provisions in the PATRIOT Act would be tempered by judges. She later became a Chief Judge on the D.C. Circuit under Obama; and the FBI that supposedly understood the rules, weaponized FISA and surveilled the political campaign of Donald Trump with rubberstamping done by FISA judges on numerous occasions off a predicate crafted for money by a MI-5/6 intel goon in Christopher Steele and pitched to the FBI. Howell’s was posted to the Mueller investigation as the supervising judge regarding the fake Russian collusion hoax and her favorable rulings for the House Judiciary Committee regarding the 1^st Impeachment of Donald Trump just reinforces how errant her positions are, in real-time operation. (Here Howell is with Loretta Lynch and Lisa Monaco. Both are conspirers against the U.S. population that did not vote for them.)

Buy me a coffee!

PayPal

Howell’s rulings while a judge make clear how attached she is to ideas that were horrible enough decades ago, but are catastrophic in the present day due to the growing mass psychosis of judges appointed or voted to the judicial bench. Howell is not alone; as the other judges pictured above are antagonistic to not only Trump, but the majority electorate of the United States of America.

As of this date, March 13, 2025, 121 cases (2 closed) have been initiated against Trump’s 2nd administration according to JustSecurity.ORG. During Trump’s first term, 65 injunctions were made by the court, more than the prior 44 Presidents in U.S. History.

Litigation Tracker Legal Challenges To Trump Administration Actions

1.68MB ∙ PDF file

Download

Trump has been in office only 52 days. His very few policies – DOGE and Deportation orders included – could not be so impactful enough, RIPE ENOUGH for controversy, to be seen as worthy of any judicial review. But this is not about review; rather, it is about judicial interference and conspiring with well-known legal actors: a conspiracy that investigation (using FISA against U.S. federal judges and all means of legal pursuit could bear enormous fruit. FBI Director Kash Patel wrote Government Gangsters. He can’t be so slow as to not notice the current pattern of behavior.)

(Note: Injunctions and restraining orders are generally done to stop an irreversible harm. But every single action of a President is an irreversible harm in the eye of a sycophantic, self-deluded and spiteful beholder of them. As such, these rash, repetitive, and irrational judicial interferences can be said to rise to the level of “seditious conspiracy” [18 USC 2384] to overthrow a duly elected President and his government.

Such are serious charges and should be considered against all judges found to have been improperly contacted, selected by plaintiffs via cutouts, or have conflicts of interest or received incentives packages from former elected and bureaucratic officials identified during a deep and targeted investigation.

The statute reads:

If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.

Contrary to the collectivists, activists, and their well-aligned D.C. bureaucrats, this is not due to Trump being anymore “lawless” than others that have held the Presidency. Examples abound regarding Lincoln, Truman and Franklin Roosevelt that more than exceeded any of Trump’s exercising of his executive branch power.

Rather, as stated, this is a coordinated effort, by elitist political forces that have in their pockets, federal judges across the country – thus, a seditious conspiracy.

From: https://x.com/USWins1776/status/1899835517648195754

Multiple groups, including Democracy Forward, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), and Public Citizen, have been among the most active in launching legal challenges against Trump’s policies and DOGE’s operations. These groups are often associated with progressive or left-leaning causes and are part of broader coalitions like Civil Service Strong, which has been linked to over a dozen lawsuits targeting Trump’s early actions. Democracy Forward, for instance, has boasted of filing nine lawsuits and securing four court orders by mid-February 2025, suggesting a coordinated effort to obstruct the administration’s plans.
A key figure tied to this legal activity is Norm Eisen, a founder of CREW and co-founder of the State Democracy Defenders Fund, both part of the Civil Service Strong coalition. Eisen, a former Obama administration official and vocal Trump critic, has been explicit about his intentions. In a February 2025 MSNBC interview, he reportedly called Trump an “autocrat” and claimed he was “planning 100 lawsuits this year” to counter the administration’s moves. While he didn’t use the exact phrase “slow down DOGE,” the sheer volume of litigation—over 80 lawsuits by late February 2025, many targeting DOGE—implies a strategy of delay and disruption through legal means, a tactic commonly referred to as “lawfare.”

Trump’s 2016 through 2024 comments made about the Intel community and his political opponents (Clinton, Biden, Harris) weaponized their lawfare minions from Perkins Coie through to the Biden DOJ against Trump. These efforts came with two assassination attempts on Trump as the Biden U.S. Secret Service showed indifference, if not outright, criminally-coordinated efforts to not protect then candidate Trump.