Corrupt Judge Who Bought His Judgeship By Shoveling Millions to Biden and the Democrat Party Refuses to Recuse Himself Despite Having a Financial Interest in Keeping the Phony Grant Grift Going

So many surprises and plot twists that I'm having trouble keeping up.

Judge's Failure To Recuse Himself From Trump Spending Freeze Case Shows How Court Is Rigged

A nonprofit board member himself, Judge McConnell has a motive to keep federal funding flowing to nonprofits.

Beth Brelje

Judge John McConnell, chief judge of the federal district court of Rhode Island, has such a deep conflict of interest in one of the Trump Administration's spending freeze cases that it is obvious he should have recused himself. His continued involvement in the case is another sign that the court system is rigged, leaving the majority of U.S. citizens who voted for President Donald Trump's policies watching lawfare instead of seeing progress.

When the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) told federal department heads in January to place a temporary pause on grant, loan, and other financial assistance programs, the left rushed to court to fight it. The OMB wanted to assure taxpayer money was not going to support programs promoting diversity equity and inclusion (DEI), woke gender ideology, and the Green New Deal.

In this case, a group of 22 states and the District of Columbia went to court calling the administration's freeze on federal funding unconstitutional. McConnell ordered the administration to unfreeze the funds and the administration is now appealing.

...

McConnell has held an 18-year leadership role in Crossroads Rhode Island, a $31 million nonprofit that gets over half its funding from federal money. It received more than $18 million in 2023 according to its tax exempt 990 form, first reported by researchers at America First Legal (AFL).

McConnell is a member of the board of directors for Crossroads Rhode Island. Founded in 1894 as The Travelers Aid Committee of the YWCA, Crossroads now builds and manages low income housing. Much of its funding comes through the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).

AFL reported Crossroads Rhode Island received more than $128 million in federal and state funding by way of federal funding during McConnell's time on the board.

Helping the poor is lucrative when the taxpayers foot the bill. In 2023, Crossroads Rhode Island's highest paid employee was then-CEO Karen Santilli, who earned almost $374,000 including base salary and deferred compensation, the nonprofit's tax exempt 990 form shows. Santilli has since left Crossroads Rhode Island to become the CEO of the YMCA of Greater Providence.

...

Is it for housing? No. The grant money is quite flexible. According USAspending.gov, the money is for "economic development initiative, community project funding, and miscellaneous grants."

It may be used "to provide investment in a wide variety of projects such as housing, homelessness prevention, workforce training, public facilities, parks, resilience planning and other critical infrastructure and services," according to the federal grant guide book.

...

As a board member on for Crossroads Rhode Island, which has partnered with One Neighborhood Builders, McConnell had a clear motive to keep federal funding flowing. AFL notes two federal laws McConnell appears to have ignored.

One requires judges to disqualify themselves if there is even an appearance that their impartiality might be questioned.

The law also "requires judges to disqualify themselves when they are a fiduciary or have any other interest that could be substantially affected by the outcome of the proceeding." AFL posted on X.

It does not take a law degree to see McConnell should recuse himself from this case.

This is the guy who essentially purchased his judgeship. Democrats are no longer hiding their Tamany Hall corruption any longer.

Meanwhile, in a closely related Fake Lawsuit, the Supreme Court sent a case back to corrupt Democrat judge. The judge had ordered Trump to pay out $2 billion despite the elected president's decision to cancel these grift-grants. The Supreme Court declined to overrule the judge, but did send the case back, instructing the judge to be more precise about how much of the $2 billion he believed must be spent.

The judge appears to have blown this order off completely, and has just re-demanded Trump to pay out the $2 billion in grift money by Monday.

The Supreme Court plainly envisioned this judge would re-examine his decision and narrow it. Nope, the corrupt hack said YOLO and just issued the same order again, this time with a 48 hour deadline.

Is this what the Supreme Court had in mind when instructing Judge Amir Ali to proceed with his TRO ordering payment to USAID groups "with due regard for the feasibility of any compliance timelines"? Two business days?

...

So why Monday? Two possibilities come to mind, and they are definitely not mutually exclusive. First, Ali might want to prevent another appeal of this order from reaching the Supreme Court again, where he knows four justices want another crack at this case. Second, Ali may want to punish the Trump administration for challenging him as well as cutting this spending, and is setting them up for a failure which will allow Ali to assess punitive damages and other sanctions when compliance can't be achieved.

That may be why Ali is holding off on the specifics on the amounts and recipients, too, although that's more of a hindrance than an obstacle to appeal. They will need the full order before taking this to the DC Circuit court of appeals, which tried to slow-walk the last appeal before John Roberts reached down and grabbed it out of frustration. This time, the DoJ may appeal to both levels concurrently, especially since it's clear that Ali is defying the Supreme Court order to consider the "feasibility of compliance timelines" with another absurd deadline for payment. That should come back before the court that issued the instruction, and again, at least four justices would agree.

Will Chamberlain of the Article III project explained how lawless this ruling was. The grant grifters claimed that Trump was violating their contract with the government.

But contract disputes with the government are not brought to district courts. The federal government has sovereign immunity, and does not grant permission to sue them. The federal government does allow lawsuits, but not in Article III courts, but instead in executive courts, specifically Federal Claims Courts.

Amy Coney Barrett and Roberts refused to simply tell this judge, who has been on the job for a single month, that he had no jurisdiction. Instead, they continue to play pussyfoot with the #Resistance.

posted by Ace at 03:00 PM

| Access Comments