Comment: So, uh,

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: ... (see in situ)

So, uh,

you seem to think there is something magical about doing that. There isn't. No matter what your favorite youtube guru told you, or no matter what you tell your followers (choose shoe that fits).

First, the court and the workers there, incl judge, do not need to 'prove oath of office' to each party. There's caselaw on it.

Second, even if they did, so what? Do you really think they DIDN'T take an oath?

Third, even if they are required, and didn't take an oath, so what? Do you assume that somehow would invalidate everything? Or do you assume that by judicial fiat an oath would be entered "nunc pro tunc."

Get real. Only in your alternative universe does that have any importance. In real court, it's a useless idea.

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."-- Albert Einstein