98

IN GENERAL, IT SEEMS THAT THERE IS ANOTHER BIG ABUSE TO PEOPLE HERE BY DISFIGURING THE CONSTITUTION AND THIS TIME THROUGH OUTRAGEOUS INTERPRETATION TO HANDLING THE JUDICIARY BRANCH.

LOOK AT ALL THIS FALSE INSINUATION SPEAKING ABOUT LIFE TIME APPOINTMENT FOR  FEDERAL JUDGES. THE CONSTITUTION DID NOT SPEAK ABOUT NEITHER LIFE TIME NOR FIVE MINUTES APPOINTMENT FOR FEDERAL JUDGES. THAT IS BECAUSE IT HANDLED THAT CONDITIONALLY THROUGH BEHAVIOUR EVALUATION. THE "good Behaviour" STATEMENT IMPOSES A REQUIREMENT TO CONTINUOUSLY SATISFY A VERY HIGH DEGREE OF SCRUTINY ON ALL ACTIONS OF FEDERAL JUDGES. THE SYSTEM THAT SEEMS TO BE CREATED HERE WHERE FEDERAL JUDGES CANNOT BE REMOVED FROM OFFICE UNLESS THEY COMMIT THE KIND OF THINGS MENTIONED IN ARTICLE 2 SECTION 4 , IS AN IMAGINARY CREATION AND HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE CONSTITUTION. NOT ONLY SUCH ARGUMENT IS VERY WEAKLY SUPPORTED IN COMPARISON WITH THE MUCH LESS RESTRICTIVE UNDERSTANDING TO THE "good Behaviour" IN ARTICLE 3 SECTION 1, BUT IT IN ITSELF ACTUALLY ALSO SUPPORT THAT UNDERSTANDING. THAT IS BECAUSE THE SCRUTINY LEVEL IN APPLYING ARTICLE 2 SECTION 4 ON ELECTED "CIVIL OFFICERS" CLEARLY SUGGESTS A HIGHER LEVEL OF IT FOR THOSE APPOINTED WITHOUT TIME LIMIT.