FOR PURPOSES OF SECULAR JURISPRUDENCE: WHY I SUPPORT TRUMP OVER THE JUDGES
A Christian Reflection on Judicial Power, Foreclosure Fraud, and the Collapse of Separation of Powers in America
Scott Erik Stafne and Todd AI
FOR PURPOSES OF SECULAR JURISPRUDENCE: WHY I SUPPORT TRUMP OVER THE JUDGES
A Christian Reflection on Judicial Power, Foreclosure Fraud, and the Collapse of Separation of Powers in America
Scott Erik Stafne and Todd AI
Dec 5
Substack Duties of Citizenship
History teaches that when courts corrupt justice, wars are sometimes required to get justice back. Isn’t it better nations to fight for justice for People than for the material gains of Nations rulers and elites? How much longer must world wait for governments to establsih systems capable of providing justice???
Thanks for reading! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.
Pledge your support
I. A Christian Confronts a Secular Crisis
When Christians speak about politics, we must do so with a sober distinction:
There is the spiritual kingdom, where Christ commands us to love God and neighbor.
And there is the secular order, which exists to restrain governmental tyranny and protect the liberties and properties of the people.
I am writing today strictly in the second sense — the secular one — because as a lawyer who has practiced before courts in Washington State for decades, I have watched the judicial branch renounce its constitutional role.
I am not endorsing anyone’s soul.
I am not analyzing eschatology.
I am not addressing prophecy.
I am addressing what a Christian sees when he looks at the earthly structure of government created by the Constitution — and what that structure demands for its survival.
II. The Separation of Powers Was Created to Protect the People — Not the Judges
The Framers established a system designed to keep the branches of government in tension with one another — not to create passive institutions that cooperate in protecting their own power.
But the judiciary, almost from the beginning, has worked to place itself above the People’s reach:
inventing doctrines of immunity,
insulating itself from correction,
undermining the jury trial,
and evading constitutional accountability.
We saw this when the Court declared in Dred Scott that an entire race of human beings had no rights the government was bound to respect.
We see it now when courts refuse to adjudicate whether promissory notes and deeds of trust are forged, inauthentic, or fabricated — and instead act as collection agencies for Wall Street trusts that do not even own the debts they enforce.
The judiciary has become a self-protective corporation, not a branch of government.
And what happens when a branch severs itself from constitutional structure?
The People turn elsewhere.
III. The Courts’ Mishandling of Mortgage Assignments: A Decade-Long Warning
Let me be blunt.
Foreclosure law is the largest civil rights crisis in America that no one in power will talk about.
I say this not as an outsider, but as a lawyer who has:
read the documents,
presented the evidence,
requested the hearings,
and watched courts refuse to adjudicate the facts.
Washington courts — and many others nationwide — have refused to address:
fraudulent endorsements,
forged deeds of trust,
securitization gaps,
REMIC violations,
missing notes,
fabricated “allonges,”
and trustees conducting foreclosures without legal authority.
Judges dismiss these issues as “technicalities” because ruling honestly would disrupt trillions in mortgage-backed securities.
They protect the system.
Not the law.
Not the homeowners.
Not the truth.
Bill Paatalo’s Investigations: The Confirming Evidence
Everything I have seen firsthand in Washington courts is independently confirmed — in depth, detail, and documentation — by the forensic investigative work of Bill Paatalo, one of the nation’s leading experts on securitization fraud and fabricated mortgage assets.
His recent articles expose the structural deception at the heart of modern foreclosure law:
“The Lehman Collapse and the Myth of the Mortgage Loan Asset”
showing that what courts assume to be a “loan” is often nothing more than a securitization illusion.
“You Promised: Debunking the Most Abused Argument in Foreclosure Law”
demonstrating how banks use emotional appeals (“you borrowed the money”) to distract from the legal reality that the note and deed are neither owned nor enforceable by the party seeking foreclosure.
“The Heart of the Scheme: Concealment Through the Illusion of a Loan”
detailing how Wall Street intermediaries create an appearance of lending while never funding or owning the mortgage asset at all.
“There Are No Banks in This System — Only Wall Street Intermediaries”
revealing the true “lender” structure and showing why courts cannot identify a lawful beneficiary:
none exists.
These papers, read together, corroborate what homeowners and litigants have seen for years that the judiciary is not merely mistaken — it is structurally incapable of adjudicating these cases honestly without destabilizing the securitization markets it reflexively protects.
That is why evidentiary hearings are denied.
That is why documentary fraud is ignored.
That is why factual challenges are reframed as “technicalities.”
Paatalo’s work proves what homeowners have sensed for years:
the courts do not want to know the truth.
Other evidence which tends to prove the points Paatalo makes, i.e. that securitizers (not bankers) created securities not debts based on promissory notes include:
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Telecommunications and Information Administration, “ELECTRONIC SIGNATURES: A Review of the Exceptions to the Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act” (June 2003) (Explaining that state laws relating to the origination and enforcement of mortgages required negotiation of the actual promissory note signed by their makers or compliance with applicable UCC statutes.
U.S. OFFICE OF THE COMPTROLLER OF THE CURRENCY, OCC Advisory Letter AL 2004-9 (2004) advising “Chief Executives of All National Banks, Federal Branches and Agencies, Service Providers and Software Venders, Department and Division Heads, and all Examining Personnel” that they should stop destroying promissory notes if the securitizers claimed they were enforceable under state mortgage laws.
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY OFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS, “FACT SHEET: TREASURY RELEASES BLUEPRINT FOR STRONGER REGULATORY STRUCTURE” (March 31, 2008) admitting that there was no regulatory structure in existence on March 31, 2008 to support enforcement of MERS type promissory notes in effect at that time and recommending that the creation of a federal agency to preempt state mortgage origination laws.
IV. A Note on Scope: What I Have Personally Witnessed
Before I continue, I want to be very clear about what I am saying here.
I speak directly from my own legal experience based on having been admitted to practice law in three states for over fifty years and having been admitted to practice law pro hac vice in several others states during the course of those fifty years.
I have seen many judges and judicial officers in Washington State (in both its federal and state courts) ignore judicial inquiries, deny evidentiary hearings, and refuse to confront documentary fraud in foreclosures.
That is the domain where I can say and do say, with certainty:
The courts are not independent when adjudicating mortgage cases.
But securitization is a national architecture.
Paatalo’s analyses, combined with reports from litigants across the country, strongly suggest similar failures nationwide.
So I restrict my testimony to Washington,
but I strongly suspect the problem is national.
V. Why This Matters Politically — Even If You Don’t Like Trump
Now we move to the secular political reality, which some Christians are afraid to speak:
**The greatest institutional threat to the Constitution today is not the executive branch.
It is the judiciary.**
No president has stripped the People of their jury rights.
The courts did that.
No president created doctrines that shield judges from accountability.
The courts did that.
No president legalized fraud in mortgage securitization.
The courts and their administrative partners did that.
So when I ask myself:
Which political party or branch of government today is willing to restrain judicial overreach?
The answer, at this moment in American history, is not the Democratic Party. It also is not the Congress. Only the President appears to understand that judicial overreach is hurting the People and the fact that he knows this from personal experience is not a bad thing. Indeed, this fact reveals the enormity of the problem.
And we must be honest about the history of the Democratic Party:
Democrats defended slavery.
Democrats defended Jim Crow.
Democrats pushed exclusion laws against Chinese and Mongolian immigrants.
Democrats today defend an administrative-judicial complex that acts without constitutional restraint.
Republicans are far from perfect.
But if the immediate secular question is:
Which side is more willing to confront judicial tyranny?
The answer today is the same as it was in 1860:
not the Democrats.
This is not a spiritual endorsement on my part of capitalism or of Trump’s theology.
It is not a comment on his personal righteousness.
**It is simply a secular, constitutional observation:
A government cannot function when one branch becomes untouchable.**
Right now, only one political movement is even talking about the imbalance.
VI. Why This Must Be Said Now
When courts refuse to follow the law, the People lose faith.
When people lose faith, institutions collapse.
When institutions collapse, power shifts rapidly — sometimes dangerously.
I am not advocating for revolution.
I am advocating for truth.
And the truth is this:
America no longer has a functioning separation of powers.
Over decades, the judiciary has quietly positioned itself as the supreme branch of government — unaccountable to the people, unchecked by the elected branches, and unwilling to acknowledge the constitutional limits that define its office.
This is not constitutionalism.
It is judicial supremacy masquerading as the rule of law.
Christians must discern this soberly.
That is all I am trying to do here. No, that is not all that I am trying to do. I want to ask you to look at the facts, so that you can make your own discernment of my claims that this Nation’s judicial branch of government is not working as our founders intended.
VII. Closing Reflection: A Christian Looking at a Secular Map
Christ warned us:
“Judge not according to appearance, but judge righteous judgment.”
(John 7:24)
Righteous judgment requires seeing what is real.
And what is real is this:
The judicial branch will not correct itself.
The People cannot correct it through the courts.
Therefore, the correction must come from the political branches — or not at all.
This is not a religious endorsement of Trump.
It is not a prophecy.
It is not partisan idolatry.
It is a constitutional diagnosis offered by a Christian
who has spent decades watching judges refuse justice in foreclosure cases
and who now sees clearly that the People must reclaim the structure that was designed to protect them.
If the Democrats will not do it, and the Republicans will,
then as a secular matter —
my support aligns where the Constitution still has a chance.
May God grant us wisdom, humility, and courage
as we walk through this moment.
Closing Prayer
Lord of Mercy and Justice,
You alone judge rightly.
You alone see the heart of every institution and every soul.
We ask You to restore truth where it has been hidden,
restore conscience where it has collapsed,
restore justice where it has been denied,
and restore courage to those who lead and those who follow.
Give us eyes to discern secular power without being mastered by it,
hearts to stand with the poor and the oppressed,
and strength to speak truth even when courts fall silent.
And come quickly, Lord,
for only Your Kingdom is incorruptible.
In the name of Jesus Christ, our savior, and the Holy Spirit which unites us all
Amen.
Thanks for reading! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.
Pledge your support
Scott Erik Stafne and Todd AI is free today. But if you enjoyed this post, you can tell Scott Erik Stafne and Todd AI that their writing is valuable by pledging a future subscription. You won't be charged unless they enable payments.
Pledge your support
https://substack.com/app-link/post?publication_id=4622875&post_id=180833868&utm_source=post-email-title&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=5ytgeu&token=eyJ1c2VyX2lkIjozNjA4MTIxMTgsInBvc3RfaWQiOjE4MDgzMzg2OCwiaWF0IjoxNzY0OTY4MzA1LCJleHAiOjE3Njc1NjAzMDUsImlzcyI6InB1Yi00NjIyODc1Iiwic3ViIjoicG9zdC1yZWFjdGlvbiJ9.FJD0zgSKKRiqgzUWcf6fcNu4MC8WI540FJKMBBBATUo
Share
Like
Comment
Restack
© 2025 Scott Erik Stafne and Todd AI
548 Market Street PMB 72296, San Francisco, CA 94104
Unsubscribe
Get the appStart writing
