🚨 BREAKING: Grok and ChatGPT both say Obama Judge Paul Engelmayer, who is currently facing impeachment, authors the appeal rulings upholding his own rulings. This denies the Defendant’s civil rights and undermining the judicial process. Engelmayer is currently facing impeachment for "high crimes" and "corruption", led by @RepEliCrane and @derrickvanorden following his unconstitutional attempt to block @elonmusk 's @DOGE. Grok and ChatGPT are explicit that the tics and mannerisms in both rulings make it obvious they have the same author, noting: “These five mannerisms—‘There is no indication that,’ obsessive citation parentheticals, italicized ‘core of criminality,’ ‘We review de novo’ intros, and snarky footnote dismissals—nail Judge Engelmayer as the exact author” (Grok analysis) and “Despite the attribution difference, the overwhelming consistency in sentence structure, case citation method, logical organization, tone, and phrasing strongly indicates that the author of Document 138 also wrote Document 150” (ChatGPT analysis). Links to their full analysis, unedited by any human, are in the next tweet in this thread. Here’s why this matters and why @FBIDirectorKash @KashPatel and Representatives Eli Crane and Derrick Van Orden should investigate: ▪ Violation of Constitutional Rights If Engelmayer wrote the Second Circuit’s ruling affirming his own decision in USA v. Teman, as Grok and ChatGPT are certain he did, it risks bias and lacks impartial review. Appellate courts exist to independently assess lower court rulings, as established in cases like Liteky v. United States (1994), which stresses impartiality as a bedrock of fair justice. ▪ Such actions infringe on defendants’ rights: ◦ 5th Amendment (Ensures due process, meaning a fair hearing without improper influence or bias affecting the outcome.) ◦ 14th Amendment (Guarantees equal protection under the law, requiring courts to treat all parties fairly without favoritism.) ▪Engelmayer’s admitted unrecorded Ex Parte communications with government attorneys and other judges violate judicial ethics: ◦ Canon 3, Code of Conduct for U.S. Judges: Prohibits ex parte contacts that might influence rulings, ensuring transparency as reinforced by In re McCarthey (1979). ◦ 28 U.S.C. § 455: Requires recusal if impartiality might reasonably be questioned, a standard upheld in Liljeberg v. Health Services Acquisition Corp. (1988). ▪ Second Circuit Oversight Concerns: The Second Circuit’s participation in- and failure to address this conduct may violate 28 U.S.C. § 351, which mandates investigation of judicial misconduct complaints to maintain public confidence in the judiciary. ▪ Potential Criminal Implications: If these actions intentionally deprive rights, they could violate 18 U.S.C. § 242 (deprivation of rights under color of law), a federal statute penalizing willful violations of constitutional protections. ▪ Absurd, Legally-Baseless Appellate Rulings The Second Circuit in Teman made a number of absurd arguments that suggest Engelmayer's ex parte input: ◦ Ruling that Engelmayer holding approximately $2 Million in shares in the alleged victim bank while denying expert witnesses who were to testify the bank was actually the party at fault was not a violation of the defendant's right to am impartial judge. ◦ Ruling that a competitor lying his way onto the jury and hiding that he had followed the defendant on social media for years was not a denial of the defendant's right to an impartial jury. ◦ Allowing the Government to coach witnesses mid-testimony during breaks in cross-examination to correct their perjury, violating the rule of sequestration. ◦ Placing the burden of proof of innocence on the defendant. ◦ Many others, as called out by respected Harvard Law School professors and others (Links below). ▪ Physical harm to innocent defendants The "absurd" and "legally baseless" rulings by Engelmayer -- as reviewed and stated pro bono by @Roncoleman, @AlanDersh, @Lessig, @molmccann , @mikeyoder , @Cernovich , @KurtSchlichter and others -- led to the illegal imprisonment and confinement of Defendant @AriTeman, depriving him of liberty without fair process. Following this, Engelmayer denied the defendant medical care against the emphatic urging of three board-certified medical experts -- literally torturing an innocent man for months. ‣ Investigation of regular ex parte communications warranted: FBI Director Kash Patel and @AGPamBondi must please investigate Engelmayer’s ex parte communications and the authorship of the Teman appeal ruling (which legal experts and Grok have all torn apart) to ensure accountability. Transparency is critical to preserving trust in our judicial system. Links to Grok, ChatGPT, and expert analysis in next post... (image credit: @amuse. Disclaimer: Statements herein are opinion only made in the interest of protecting the public. Do your own due diligence. )