Why didn't the MSM report the Assassination of the Judge who Destroyed the Brady Bill

Did you even know who Judge Roll was (before reading this thread)???

  • No.

    Votes: 7 100.0%
  • Yes.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    7

The2ndAmendment

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2013
Messages
12,757
Reaction score
2,432
Points
245
Location
In a dependant and enslaved country.
When Jared Lee Loughner unleashed his hail of bullets in Tuscon Arizona, Federal District Court Chief, Judge John Roll, perished. This man was the KEY in assisting Sheriff Mack destroy the Authoritarian Gun Grabbing Scheme, and even assisted Sheriff Mack in getting an ORDER OF PROTECTION against the Clinton Administration.


Yet the Mainstream Media said nothing about this man, this outstanding public servant. IN fact, Obama is the only person on the left that even mentioned his name in the last two years:

President Barack Obama commented on Roll's death in his statement issued after the shooting, noting that Roll "served America's legal system for almost 40 years".
That's all the public ever heard about him.

udge Roll, considered by some to be one of the most constitutionally-centered judges in history, was a defender of liberty who, prior to his murder, had begun working with Rep. Giffords to build a new courthouse and to assert Arizona's sovereignty in dealing with illegal immigration. In essence, Rep. Giffords and Judge Roll were effectively breaking down the false 'left/right' political paradigm that paralyzes Americans from fighting back against government tyranny. This unique alliance between 'left' and 'right', and the potential it had to dismantle a whole host of encroaching federal interventions in state affairs, may be one of the reasons why Judge Roll's murder is conveniently being left out of the spotlight.

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/031326_Judge_John_Roll_Giffords.html#ixzz2rLh4SwSi
http://www.naturalnews.com/031326_Judge_John_Roll_Giffords.html

Suspicious no?

Just days before being murdered, Judge Roll had issued a preliminary ruling with intent to rule against the case of 'United States of America v. $333,520.00 in United States Currency et al'. The subject of the case involved giving the Obama Administration power to seize citizens' assets regardless of whether or not it could be proven that they committed any sort of crimes. And Judge Roll had planned to declare it unconstitutional.

Even though previous presidents have gained similar asset-seizing powers, the recent case would have represented a significant milestone in overriding due process by giving the federal government arbitrary power to steal private property without legitimate cause. And regardless of whether the one doing the seizing was a Democrat or a Republican, Judge Roll would have made the same ruling because, to him, it was a matter of constitutionality, not partisan politics.

Unlike most other judges, Judge Roll backed the Constitution and its provisions for individual liberty even when it was not popular. His conservative ideologies were secondary to fulfilling his primary oath of office in defending the U.S. Constitution. And for this reason, he was often hated by both sides for making unpopular, but justified, rulings based on constitutional guidelines.

Was Judge Roll the real target?
Judge Roll's unwavering commitment to the Constitution was a major roadblock for those trying to advance unconstitutional agendas. Few, if any, judges are as knowledgeable and principled as Roll was on constitutional issues. And from what is known of him, he could not be bought off by political lobbyists. In fact, many from both sides of the aisle were upset at his decisions because they did not always strictly align with any one political party. As a result, he received many death threats throughout his tenure as a judge. But when considering how significant his contributions were to both Arizonans and to Americans at large, why is his murder being left out of the headlines?

Interestingly, some reports that do mention him indicate that he had not even planned to attend Rep. Giffords' rally the day of the shootings, but decided to do so after allegedly receiving a call asking him to stop by and speak to the Congresswoman.

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/031326_Judge_John_Roll_Giffords.html#ixzz2rLi61k00
 
Last edited:

pvsi

VIP Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2013
Messages
2,527
Reaction score
116
Points
85
Why didn't the MSM report the Assassination of the Judge who Destroyed the Brady Bill
Come on now, there's more important news out there these days:
(Oh, and if you care, there's my newworldgovernment.net web site to change things, but I know you don't)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WI9CTwUGhPo]MSNBC Interrupts Congresswoman For Report On Justin Bieber - YouTube[/ame]
 

Wry Catcher

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2009
Messages
51,323
Reaction score
6,454
Points
1,860
Location
San Francisco Bay Area
Was there a conspiracy, is that what the OP believes? I suspect the death of a young girl and the shooting of a Member of Congress merited the headline. If the judge wanted to be noticed he should have gotten shot while on the bench with a gun which had previously been outlawed, but was now legal. Irony has some pull.
 

bendog

Platinum Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2013
Messages
34,610
Reaction score
3,987
Points
1,140
Location
Dog House in back yard
As a person who does not support any gun control legisation (at least I've not seen anything you don't object to, I don't see the logic behind you conjuring some media conspiracy in the failure to Broadcast LOUD AND CLEAR that one of the Judges who found the fed govt did not have the power to compell state law enforcement personnel conduct background checks on hand gun sales was murdered by an insane person who BOUGHT A HANDGUN
 
OP
The2ndAmendment

The2ndAmendment

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2013
Messages
12,757
Reaction score
2,432
Points
245
Location
In a dependant and enslaved country.
If the judge wanted to be noticed he should have gotten shot while on the bench with a gun which had previously been outlawed, but was now legal. Irony has some pull.
http://www.naturalnews.com/031326_Judge_John_Roll_Giffords.html

There is only irony if the premise of your argument is true: Gun Control would have prevented this.

Your premise is false.

It's primarily depraved left-wingers on dangerous prescription meds that commit these acts of mass slaughter.
 
Last edited:
OP
The2ndAmendment

The2ndAmendment

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2013
Messages
12,757
Reaction score
2,432
Points
245
Location
In a dependant and enslaved country.
4-0 point proven.

"It never happened."

"Of course it happened, thousands of us were there fighting!"

"Son, if it's not in the newspaper, it didn't happen."
 
Last edited:

Wry Catcher

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2009
Messages
51,323
Reaction score
6,454
Points
1,860
Location
San Francisco Bay Area
If the judge wanted to be noticed he should have gotten shot while on the bench with a gun which had previously been outlawed, but was now legal. Irony has some pull.
Was Judge John Roll the actual target of the Giffords shooting?

There is only irony if the premise of your argument is true: Gun Control would have prevented this.

Your premise is false.

It's primarily depraved left-wingers on dangerous prescription meds that commit these acts of mass slaughter.
LOL, did you purchase the straw at a better price because it was wet?

Gun control may prevent some atrocities, but it will never be the panacea for man's inhumanity to man.

Guns simply make killing easy, it can be done at a distance and without the victim knowing it will happen or who killed them. It allows the coward the ability to destroy another human being without getting his or her hands dirty and/or risking injury to themselves. It makes little men feel powerful, and gives cowards bravado.
 

bendog

Platinum Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2013
Messages
34,610
Reaction score
3,987
Points
1,140
Location
Dog House in back yard
If the judge wanted to be noticed he should have gotten shot while on the bench with a gun which had previously been outlawed, but was now legal. Irony has some pull.
Was Judge John Roll the actual target of the Giffords shooting?

There is only irony if the premise of your argument is true: Gun Control would have prevented this.

Your premise is false.

It's primarily depraved left-wingers on dangerous prescription meds that commit these acts of mass slaughter.
LOL, did you purchase the straw at a better price because it was wet?

Gun control may prevent some atrocities, but it will never be the panacea for man's inhumanity to man.

Guns simply make killing easy, it can be done at a distance and without the victim knowing it will happen or who killed them. It allows the coward the ability to destroy another human being without getting his or her hands dirty and/or risking injury to themselves. It makes little men feel powerful, and gives cowards bravado.
The irony is the shooter did have history of past run ins with the law, but not a felony, and he had been identified as possbily being mentally ill, but had not received treatment, so logically, the lesson is that the Brady Bill did not go FAR ENOUGH.

But because his agenda is simply to say the Brady Bill would not have prevented the purchase of the handgun, HE DON'T NEED NO STINKING LOGIC.
 
OP
The2ndAmendment

The2ndAmendment

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2013
Messages
12,757
Reaction score
2,432
Points
245
Location
In a dependant and enslaved country.

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top