[Bob]

Judicial Discipline Reform

A study of judges’ unaccountability and consequent riskless abuse of power: advocating exposure, compensation of abusees, and reform

Author: Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq., is a doctor of law and researcher-writer attorney. He is a member of the New York State Bar and lives in New York City. He earned his doctorate of law from the University of Cambridge in England, where his thesis dealt with the integration of the banking industry in the European Union. He earned a French law degree from La Sorbonne in Paris, where he concentrated on currency stability and the abuse of dominant positions by entities in commerce, similar to American antitrust law. He also earned a Master of Business Administration from the University of Michigan, where he concentrated on the use of computers and their networks to maximize workflow efficiency and productivity. Dr. Cordero worked as a researcher-writer at the preeminent publisher of analytical legal commentaries, Lawyers Cooperative Publishing, a member of West/Thomson Reuters. There he wrote commentaries on the regulation of financial activities under federal law. Currently at Judicial Discipline Reform, he is promoting the creation of a multidisciplinary academic and business team to advocate judges’ accountability and discipline reform. The need for such reform is based on his analysis of official statistics, reports, and statements of the Federal Judiciary and its judges, who are the models for their state counterparts. That analysis is set forth in his study of the Federal Judiciary and its judges, the models for their state counterparts: Exposing Judges’ Unaccountability and Consequent Riskless Wrongdoing: Pioneering the news and publishing field of judicial unaccountability reporting; http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf Dr. Cordero offers to make a presentation at a video conference or in person to you and your colleagues of the evidence of judicial wrongdoing so that you may learn how to join the effort to expose it and bring about judicial reform. Contact him at [email protected]. Dare trigger history!(* >jur:7§5)…and you may enter it. * http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf
If a former president can be held accountable, so can the members of a justice system because “Nobody is above the law”Under the law are also prosecutors, police officers, and judges
as well as the commissions on judicial conduct.

All of them should be held accountable for
their abuse of power and dereliction of duty
http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/IAB/DrRCordero_holding_justice_system_accountable.pdf

By Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Ph.D., University of Cambridge, England
M.B.A., University of Michigan Business School
D.E.A., La Sorbonne, Paris
Judicial Discipline Reform
New York City
[email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

NOTES: a. The text below had a consistent format when posted. If it shows irregularities when displayed here, they crept in and are beyond my control. Kindly overlook them. A pdf version of the text -as such likely to be free of irregularities- is downloadable through the link below.

b. To subscribe to articles similar to the one hereunder:

1) go to <left panel ↓Register; or
2) click + New  or  Users  >Add New; or
3) fill out the New User form at https://www.judicial-discipline-reform.org/wp-admin/user-new.php.

c. To read the latest articles, go to http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL3/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates3.pdf.

Dear  Journalists, Media Outlets, Attorneys, and Advocates of Honest Judiciaries,

Former president Donald Trump was arraigned in a court in Lower Manhattan, NY City on April 4, 2023. He is being held accountable for his conduct.
The members of the justice system must also be held accountable. This is a proposal for holding accountable those members who have sought and obtained indictments against likely thousands of people based on false accusations raised by prosecutors and police officers with the connivance of judges.
It is reasonable to expect that the journalists and media outlets that scoop this story will be rewarded professionally and personally handsomely. Their scoop will launch a generalized media investigation through our country at a time when current events, e.g., the current investigations of Mr. Trump and demonstrations against police brutality, have focused the national public’s attention on the fairness and honesty of prosecutors, the police, and judges, and intensified its demand for holding public officers accountable for their performance and liable to compensation to their victims.
Hence, the proposed investigation can do for a journalist and his or her media outlet what the investigation did for those who scooped the breaking and entering into the Democratic National Headquarters at the Watergate complex in DC on June 17, 1972, namely, then-rookie reporters Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein of The Washington Post, and those who continued to lend them their unwavering support, to wit, WP publisher Katharine Graham and editor Ben Bradlee.
Their competent and courageous journalistic investigation and publication were rewarded with a Pulitzer Prize; a best-seller and a blockbuster movie, both bearing the title All the President’s Men -a reference to all his White House aides ending up in jail-; and the catapulting of The Washington Post to the level of The New York Times as a preeminent investigative journal.
Moreover, as part of the Watergate scandal that they broke, they are studied in all schools of journalism as icons of journalists playing their role at their best: holding the powerful accountable. They were instrumental in causing the unthinkable to pass: the resignation of president Nixon on August 8, 1974.
However, the stakes of the investigation proposed below are much higher. The investigation will take place at the most propitious time, that is, when not only the four current investigations of Trump, but also the primaries and the general campaign for the 2024 Presidential Election will keep directing journalistic attention to the conduct of prosecutors, the police, and the courts, and make the national public ever more critical and demanding of consequences.
As a result, the unthinkable can happen: the resignation of one, several, or all the justices of the U.S. Supreme Court for committing as principals civil or criminal offenses under the law or even only failing to “avoid improprieties”(Canon 2 of the Code of Conduct for U.S. Judges); covering up as accessories those of their colleagues; and disregarding their supervisory duty to safeguard the integrity of the judiciary and judicial process.
Yet, that outcome is thinkable on the strength of multiple precedents(OL3:1482, Section C). This can bring about, not just the fall of the top officer of a branch, i.e., president Nixon’s, but rather a branch itself, that is, the Federal Judiciary due to unaccountable judges risklessly running it as a racketeering enterprise.
Accordingly, Section A of the article below discusses the extensive investigations by top media outlets from which you can reasonably conclude that abuse of power among federal and state prosecutors, police, and judges is pervasive, pernicious, and persistent so that it has become their modus operandi, that is, their way of doing business based on “intertwined corruption”.
For its part, Section B will convince you that you can cost-effectively undertake the initial proposed investigation because it is realistically limited to abuse in one district attorney’s office and one court of a single state concerning only one case for which concrete leads are provided:
a. names of people and places

b. dates of events

c. nature of abuse

d. a contemporaneous detailed statement of facts

e. official, court public records containing the names and whereabouts of people indicted and arraigned at the time;

f. official letters of public officers involved; etc.

For good measure, the second article hereunder provides a brief description of cases that I have made ripe for class action. Their journalistic investigation is promising because they involve millions of abusees and a corresponding large audience interested in being informed about the exposure of their abusers, obtaining compensation, and compelling reform.
That audience consists in part of the people abused by:
a. Medicare and HMOs, which condone illegal balance billing and surprise medical bills, both of which can drive their insureds into a financial predicament where they have to choose whether to pay those bills, buy food, make rent…or declare bankruptcy;

b. Walgreens (the second largest pharmacy chain in the U.S.) and its purchase incentivizing and deceptive Cash Rewards program;

c. those indicted on false accusations, who have been sent to jail, forced into a dire financial situation to make bail, and inflicted devastating professional and reputational injury due to having a criminal record;

d. the public officers who in their personal and collective interest abuse the means and opportunity of their government entities to intercept the emails and mail of the public at large in order to detect and suppress those critical of them; and

e. a commission on judicial conduct that in dereliction of its duty has left complainants and the rest of the public without any remedy and at the mercy of the abusers.

The audience of abusees will be increased by their affected relatives and their friends, their neighbors, their suppliers and buyers, their competitors, the stakeholders of the abusers, etc.
Attracting all of them to your audience warrants examining the investigation proposed next. Hence, I look forward to hearing from you.
Dare trigger history!…and you may enter it.

Sincerely,

Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Judicial Discipline Reform
2165 Bruckner Blvd
Bronx, New York City 10472-6506
tel. +1(718)827-9521
[email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

https://www.linkedin.com/in/dr-richard-cordero-esq-0508ba4b

Top media outlets have exposed how
prosecutors, police officers, and judges
abuse people unaccountably and thus, risklessly.
A current story illustrates how you too may have been abused.
Here is a test case showing how you can
expose them, demand compensation, and compel reform,
thus becoming a nationally recognized Champion of Justice.
http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/IAB/DrRCordero_holding_justice_system_accountable.pdf

By

Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.

A. Media outlets that have exposed abuse in an unaccountable justice system
The Wall Street Journal, in its article “131 Federal Judges Broke the Law by Hearing Cases Where They Had a Financial Interest”, published initially on September 28, 2021, wrote thus:
“[Federal] judges failed to recuse themselves from 685 lawsuits from 2010 to 2018 involving firms in which they or their family held shares, a Wall Street Journal investigation found…Alerted to the violations by the Journal, 56 of the judges have directed court clerks to notify parties in 329 lawsuits that they should have recused themselves. That means new judges might be assigned, potentially upending rulings.”

a. One of its updating articles, published on April 27, 2022, under the title “Dozens of Federal Judges Had Financial Conflicts…”, stated the following:

“A Wall Street Journal investigation found that 152 federal judges around the nation have violated U.S. law and judicial ethics by overseeing 1,076 court cases involving companies in which they or their family-owned stock. As a result of the Journal’s reporting, judges in 883 cases have notified courts that they presided in the lawsuits improperly and that the cases are eligible to be reopened.”

Thomson Reuters is a major U.S. news organization with some 2,500 journalists and some 600 photojournalists. In “The Teflon Robe” report, whose first of three parts was published on June 30, 2020, it reported “hardwired judicial corruption”: corruption that is an integral element of state judiciaries and that intertwines their judges and the conniving entities duty-bound to supervise them. Far from doing so, those entities cover up their abuse of power by not investigating, let alone punishing, them, not even disclosing the names of complained-about judges and their accomplices.
3. The Boston Globe published on September 30, 2018, its investigative report “Inside our secret courts”, in whose “private criminal hearings, who you are –and who you know– may be just as important as right and wrong”. Those conducting the hearings may not be lawyers or know the law.

4. Competitors of the above publishers, such as The New York Times[1], The New Yorker[2], The Washington Post, Above the Law, LexisNexis, and your own media outlet may not want to cede to any of those courageous competitors the exposure of judiciaries as racketeering enterprises.[3]

[1] “2 Ex-Timesmen Say They Had a Tip on Watergate First”, by Reporter Richard Pérez-Peña, who rightly remarked that “If [Mr. Phelps’s] and Mr. Smith’s accounts are correct, The Times missed a chance to get the jump on the greatest story in a generation”; NYT; 24may09. Do not let others jump on this tip and earn all the credit for turning it into their scoop.
[2] The New Yorker’s article exposing sexual abuser Harvey Weinstein, together with that of The New York Times, published on October 10 and 5, 2017, respectively, caused the MeToo! movement to erupt. The world has not been the same since. Their articles are precedent for the transformative impact that an article can have.
[3] See my three-volume study* † ♣ of judges and their judiciaries titled:

Exposing Judges’ Unaccountability and
Consequent Riskless Abuse of Power:
Pioneering the news and publishing field of
judicial unaccountability reporting* † ♣

Also, visit my website Judicial Discipline Reform at http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org. My articles posted there have so positively impressed its countless webvisitors that as of July 28, 2023, they had turned into subscribers 48,294 of them.

B. Story of abuse by prosecutors and the NYPD covered up by the Commissioner, the Chief Judges, the Mayor, et al., though injuring likely thousands of people
On May 23 and 24, 2022, Bronx ADA Burim Namani and supervising ADA Diana Jetta presented an indictment for murder allegedly committed on or around May 24, 2021, early in the evening in a Bronx street flanked by restaurants and bodegas. When they asked whether grand jurors had questions, I, a grand juror, asked critical ones because the 12 exhibits that they presented contained:
a. not a single photo or video of the scene of the crime or of the victim whether taken by the police, a surveillance camera of the neighboring restaurants and bodegas, or any bystander…in the age of the ubiquitous smartphone with camera and a citizens journalist mentality!;

b. no police report or autopsy report by the medical examiner; no statement by relatives;

c. nothing but the allegations of five NYPD officers, including detectives, and an alleged friend that had been walking with the alleged victim that evening but who did not witness the murder.

On May 25, I was summoned to the courtroom of Grand Jury Justice Laurence E. Busching. He acted as lead counsel for those who had accused me of ‘being disruptive and making other grand jurors feel uncomfortable’; denied me the opportunity to confront them and present witnesses; showed no evidence; had me surrounded by four intimidating NYPD officers; and discharged me.
I described these events in a 4,743-word, 8-page sworn statement and submitted it to his supervisor, Administrative Justice Alvin Yearwood, tel. (718)618-3700, at the Bronx County Supreme Court Criminal Term, 265 E. 161st St., Bronx, NY 10451. Without acknowledging receipt or taking my calls, he forwarded it to J. Busching. The latter, as judge in his own cause, biasedly dismissed it on the trivial fact that the grand jury term had expired.
They condoned and aided prosecutors and NYPD officers seeking indictments on false accusations. Thousands may have been indicted, sent to prison, devastated financially while trying to make bail, and ruined professionally and reputationally by being tainted with a criminal record.
NYPD Commissioner Keechant Sewell and Internal Affairs Bureau Chief Miguel Iglesias; former NYPD captain and now NYC Mayor Eric Adams; Public Advocate Jumaane Williams, and many other public officers(OL3:1568) have failed to even reply to my repeatedly submitted complaint. Two Chief Judges of the Court of Appeals -the highest court in NYS-, former CJ Janet DiFiore and Acting CJ Anthony Cannataro, have been derelict in their supervisory duties as have IGs.
The Commission on Judicial Conduct dismissed the complaint by dishonestly alleging that ‘those judges are not NYS judges, so we lack jurisdiction’. The inaction of these officers points to an implicitly or explicitly coordinated reciprocally beneficial agreement not to investigate.
C. Proposed action: a presentation by me, and an investigation and articles by us
I respectfully propose that journalists and their outlets take action on behalf of thousands people injured by indictments obtained through false accusations.
Let’s meet in your office or on Zoom for a presentation by me and a Questions and Answers session. We can discuss taking the next steps: holding a press conference; publishing one or a series of my(A and B) and our articles; and conducting a joint investigation. That is how a generalized media investigation can be launched that turns you and your media outlet into nationally recognized Champions of Justice.
Dare trigger history!…and you may enter it.

Sincerely,

Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Judicial Discipline Reform
2165 Bruckner Blvd
Bronx, New York City 10472-6506
tel. +1(718)827-9521
[email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

https://www.linkedin.com/in/dr-richard-cordero-esq-0508ba4b

Share this:
Share

Like this:
Loading…

FacebookTwitterEmailShare
Posted on April 6, 2023Author Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.Leave a comment on If a former president can be held accountable, so can the members of a justice system because “Nobody is above the law”
In search of one or more knowledgeable, experienced, and financially capable law firms, investigative journalists, and Information Technology (IT) experts with whom to join forces to further prosecute cases with national scope that are ripe for class action

FacebookTwitterEmailShare
‡ The link to this posting is http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_proposal_for_class_actions.pdf .

By

Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Ph.D., University of Cambridge, England
M.B.A., University of Michigan Business School
D.E.A., La Sorbonne, Paris
Judicial Discipline Reform
New York City
[email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

(To read the latest articles, go to
http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL3/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates3.pdf)

Dear Attorneys, Journalists, Professors, IT experts, and Advocates of Honest Judiciaries,

I am searching for qualified parties among you to whom to propose a joint venture to further prosecute any or all of the three cases that I1 have brought to ripeness for class action2.
This search is an exercise of the rights most cherished by We the People, namely, those guaranteed by the 1stAmendment to the Constitution to “freedom of speech, of the press, the right of the people [the sovereign source of all public power in a democracy] peaceably to assemble [on the Internet too], and to petition [also through class actions] the Government [such as its third branch, the judiciary, and its agencies, e.g., Medicare; as well as private parties] for a redress [through transparency, accountability, and compensation] of grievances”.
You can expand the cases’ brief description below by going to the file at ‡, which has links to detailed information.
a. Medicare administers $100s of billions for the benefit of its more than 33 million insureds. It works with hundreds of HMOs and other health insurance entities. They have common interests: pay the fewest claims and attract to, and maintain in their, networks the largest number of medical services and equipment providers.

1) To advance their interests they:

a) deny and uphold the denial of as many of their insureds’ claims as possible;

b) disregard the legal obligation to accept as total payment Medicare’s schedules of fees for medical provisions3; and

c) condone the billing of insureds for the unpaid balance.

2) Most insureds who appeal denials and balance billing appear pro se. Due to their ignorance of the law, they are abused by having their rights denied or disregarded.

3) I appealed to the Medicare Appeals Council. After I appeal to the Medicare Board, the class action can be filed in a federal district court.4 The recovery can be huge and force transformative change in the health insurance system.

a4) A Supplemental Brief was filed by me on March 13, 2023; its link is http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/ALJ/23-3-11DrRCordero_supp_brief-Medicare_Appeals_Council.pdf. It describes the lengths to which administrative law judges (ALJ), other officers of the Office of Medicare Hearings and Appeals and the Medicare Appeals Council, and the opposing parties have gone to withhold evidentiary materials from me that incriminates them in coordinated complicit conduct and its cover-up.

5) This is attested to by ‘a smoking gun’ “Report of Contact”. It shows, among other things, that a party and an ALJ office engaged in ex parte communications and that they knew that my appeal had been denied before I had filed my Statement on Appeal and before the ALJ hearing had even been scheduled. The outcome of the hearing had been predetermined and the holding of the hearing was pro forma.

6) The ALJs, officers, and parties have turned the health insurance and Medicare appeal process into a pretense to the detriment of the tens of millions of their insureds. Their conduct warrants bringing a class action against them.

b. Walgreens is described as having had $139.5 billion in revenue in 2020 and 277,000 employees in 2021. Its purchase-incentivizing program is Cash Rewards. It is a misnomer, for rewards are not earned by paying in cash and cannot be redeemed for cash despite its false advertisement: “Save time. Redeem your rewards instantly at checkout”. But at checkout you cannot pay the total cost of the purchase with your Cash Rewards. You can only apply a single “tier” per purchase of either $1, $3, $5, or $10 if it is equal to or less than the purchase cost, i.e., “tiers” cannot be stacked. You must pay the balance with your money. Your rewards, though earned, are not yours, for they expire and you can use them only at Walgreens. The program is a bait and switch scam.

1) This is a test case for suing big businesses that make enormous gains by defrauding millions of customers of small amounts that do not justify the substantial cost of individual prosecution.

c. While serving as a grand juror, I witnessed how prosecutors and New York Police Department (NYPD) officers charged people with a murder that those people could not have committed because no evidence of a crime was contained in the 12 exhibits presented:

i. not a single photo or video of the scene of the crime, which allegedly occurred in the middle of a street flanked by restaurants and bodegas; or of the victim, whether taken by the police, a surveillance camera of those restaurants and bodegas, or any bystander…in the age of the ubiquitous smartphone with camera and a citizens journalist mentality!;

ii. no police incident report; no medical examiner autopsy report; no death or burial certificate;

iii. nothing but the allegations of five NYPD officers, including detectives, and an alleged friend that had been walking with the alleged victim that evening but who did not witness the murder.

1) The indictment was sought to gain plea bargain leverage by taking advantage of the well-known grand jurors’ indifference and uncritical judgment.

2) When I asked critical questions, the presenting and the supervising prosecutors referred me to the grand jury judge, who discharged me without affording me the opportunity to confront my accusers.

3) I described these events in a 4,743-word, 8-page sworn statement and submitted it to the administrative judge. Late enough, he sent it to the grand jury judge, who with no discussion dismissed it on the trivial fact that the grand jury term had expired. I filed a complaint with the NY State Chief Judge, the NYS and NYC administrative judges, the NYPD Internal Affairs Bureau chief and the Commissioner, the Bronx council members, public advocates, et al., who have not replied.

4) They form the defendant class: They do not investigate judges to avoid retaliation5. They also pursue a pecuniary benefit, which is anything to which a monetary value can be assigned. Their dereliction of duty is a policy and a systemic cover-up based on actual or constructive complicit coordination; cf. companies that coordinate their anti-competition practices by following the price leader, which has been held illegal under antitrust law and case law.

5) Acting under color of law, they have violated the civil rights of the likely thousands of people against whom they have levelled false accusations, thus causing them injury in fact by being indicted, jailed, prosecuted, devasted financially in an effort to make bail, and ruined reputationally by having a criminal record.

6) The latest statement of facts, dated February 23, 2023, in this case describes the flagrant misconduct of the New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct. It is aimed to protect the two judges involved in covering for the prosecutors and police officers who based on false evidence accused two people of murder: The Commission has founded its dismissal of my complaint on the demonstrably false grounds that those two judges are not members of the NYS Unified Court System. See the Commission’s letters at http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/IAB/DrRCordero-Commission_Judicial_Conduct.pdf.

7) Meantime, the number keeps growing of those who have been abused by false accusations. They form the plaintiff class. Their claims for compensatory and punitive damages keep growing too…but so does the abuse that they continue to suffer.

8) Competent and principled lawyers capable of joining the legal team being assembled to bring this class action can do the right thing on behalf of the plaintiffs while making for themselves both a substantial amount of money, including treble damages and attorney’s fees, and a national name as Champions of Justice.6

I offer to make a presentation on these cases via video conference or, if in New York City, in person.
Every meaningful cause needs resources for its advancement;
none can be continued, let alone advanced, without money

Put your money
where your outrage at abuse and
quest for justice are.

Support the professional law research and writing, and strategic thinking conducted at

Judicial Discipline Reform

DONATE

by making a deposit or an online transfer through
either the Bill Pay feature of your online account or Zelle

from your account

to TD Bank account # 43 92 62 52 45, routing # 260 13 673;

or Citi Bank account # 4977 59 2001, routing # 021 000 089.

Dare trigger history!…and you may enter it.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely,

Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Judicial Discipline Reform
2165 Bruckner Blvd
Bronx, New York City 10472-6506
tel. +1(718)827-9521

[email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

https://www.linkedin.com/in/dr-richard-cordero-esq-0508ba4b

ENDNOTES

1 This email and its above-stated link‡ can be shared with others who are potentially interested in joining any of the class actions under FRCP Rule 23 and attending my presentation on this proposal. The latter is supported by my professional law research and writing, and strategic thinking; they are the skills that undergird my three-volume study* † ♣ of judges and their judiciaries, which is titled and downloadable thus:

Exposing Judges’ Unaccountability and
Consequent Riskless Abuse of Power:
Pioneering the news and publishing field of
judicial unaccountability reporting* † ♣

a. The study collects and discusses abundant evidence(OL:194§E) showing that judges ensure each other’s unaccountability by systematically dismissing 100% of complaints against any fellow judge and denying 100% of petitions to review dismissals.

b. They are also protected connivingly by the politicians who put them in office and for whom they are ‘our men and women on the bench’.

c. Judges engage in abuse of power risklessly for their gain and convenience individually and as a coordinated class. Their pattern of conduct shows that they run their judiciary as a racketeering enterprise. See footnotes 5 and 6 hereunder.

d. Some of my articles have been posted to my website Judicial Discipline Reform. That site has attracted countless webvisitors and as of 18 March 2023, had turned into subscribers 46,757 of them. They are potential class members.

e. The latest articles are included in Volume III♣ of the study.

2  The class actions can expect sympathetic juries. Indeed, since the advent of the MeToo! and BLM movements, and the demonstrations against police brutality, and racial and socio-economic inequality, the national public has become ever more intolerant of all forms of abuse, as expressed in its self-assertive rallying cry:

Enough is enough!
We won’t take any abuse from anybody anymore.

a. Trump lawyers settled a case on their way to the first trial day rather than risk a huge verdict from one of the blue-collar juries in the Bronx, New York City, known for their distrust of, and resentment toward, big companies and government; and more ready than others to “stick it to ‘em”.

3 Section 1902(n)(3)(B) of the Social Security Act, found in Title 42 of the U.S. Code of federal laws, as modified by Section 4714 of the Balanced Budget Act of 1997, prohibits Medicare providers from balance billing Medicaid QMBs [Qualified Medicare Beneficiaries] for Medicare cost-sharing. The provider must submit its bill to Medicaid and accept as full payment what Medicaid pays.

4 Victims of abuse by Medicare officers, including administrative law judges, can share their story with the Medicare Appeals Council. The latter is the venue for the fourth of five levels of appeal in the Medicare system (the fifth level appeal lies with the Medicare Appeals Board). Hence, if you have not gone through the previous appeal levels, which begins with your HMO or other medical services or equipment provider, the Council will not treat your story as a complaint on appeal.

a. However, you together with as many victims as possible can submit your story in order to inform the Council of the nature, frequency, and gravity of abuse within the Medicare system. There is strength in numbers. Numerous statements from unrelated parties yet consistent with each other allow for the detection of patterns of abuse of power. Patterns make an impression in the minds of those who detect, or are made aware of, them.

1) The federal criminal code provides at 18 U.S.C. §1961(5) that a ‘pattern is constituted of at least two acts committed within ten years’.

b. By writing your story, you take the first step toward showing that you have questions of law or fact and claims common to the class suing Medicare and providers, and qualify as a member of it(R.23(a)), entitled to share in any compensation that the action may win for it.

c. Your story must be brief. Never-ending rambling and whining sagas are wasteful of your and everybody else’s effort and time. They are not read to the end or taken seriously.

d. By contrast, a story written in up to 500 words is more likely to be impactful if it consists only of verifiable and accurate facts, names, and addresses identifying only the most outrageous events that may have developed during months or years of abuse and litigation. Read and apply the two-phase method for writing such a story. You will be happily surprised by how helpful that method is. By applying it, you can write a story that may get you invited to tell it to the state or national public at the proposed UNPRECEDENTED CITIZENS HEARINGS on judges’ unaccountability and riskless abuse of power.

e. Your story can contribute to detecting the most persuasive type of evidence of abuse: patterns of conduct of the same, related, or similarly situated officers and their cronies that harm many unrelated individuals in similar ways. A pattern of similarities may show that officers and cronies acted in a coordinated rather than coincidental way; and that stories have common facts and claims that qualify you and other abusees as members of the class action.

f. By making public your story, you too will be asserting your rights under the First Amendment to “freedom of speech, of the press, the right of the [little] people peaceably to assemble [on the Internet too], and to petition [as a numerous and thus big class] the Government [of which judges form the third branch] for a redress of grievances [including by holding judges and their cronies accountable and liable to compensation]”.

g. Add at the top of your story the following reference; and mail and email it to the following addresses:

Reference: for consideration by the Medicare Appeals Council and the Board in appeal M-23-386

1) Go to https://dab.efile.hhs.gov/, register, and “File correspondence…and other written material in pending case” M-23-386. Thereby your story may become part of the record that may be filed on appeal in a federal district court and contribute to the formation of the class action and the holding of the citizens hearings.

2) Department of Health and Human Services
Departmental Appeals Board
Medicare Appeals Council, MS 6127
Cohen Building Room G-644
330 Independence Ave., S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20201

3) [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

5 Developments in the judiciary establish strong precedents that support a favorable expectation for the class actions:

a. In the civil suit Stricklandv. U.S., the Judicial Conference of the U.S., the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, et al., the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit held on April 26, 2022, that the Federal Judiciary and its judges in their official and individual capacities can on due process and equal protection grounds be sued and held liable. The plaintiff’s exposure of 4th Circuit judges’ complicit coordination forced all the judges of that Court to recuse themselves! Judges from other circuits were seated by designation on the three-judge appellate panel.

b. Ninety gymnasts sued the FBI and agents for over $1 billion last June 8 for its failure to act on the complaints against sexual predator Dr. Larry Nassar brought to FBI agents and the FBI’s cover-up of their dereliction of duty. This is in addition to the $380 million that USA Gymnastics and the U.S. Olympic Committee had to pay to Nassar sexual abuse victims.

c. A Pennsylvania state court ordered judges who sent juveniles to government paid/privately run detention facilities in exchange for kickbacks to pay $206 million in compensatory and punitive damages.

6 The Wall Street Journal has published a series of articles that began on September 28, 2021, under the initial title “131 [now 152] Federal Judges Broke the Law by Hearing Cases Where They Had a Financial Interest”.

a. Led by their motive of protecting their illegal gains and gain schemes, judges intercept -which is illegal under 18 U.S.C. §§2511– people’s emails and mail to detect and suppress those of their critics.

b. The Federal Judiciary has the means of doing so, as it runs one of the largest national computer networks and has the Information Technology (IT) expertise necessary therefor: It handles daily the filing, storage, and retrieval of hundreds of millions of briefs, motions, applications, records, reports, recordings, dockets, calendars, orders, decisions, certificates, etc., through its Public Access to Court Electronic Records (PACER) system.

c. Judges have the opportunity to also compel such interception by the intelligence agencies to which in a quid pro quo they grant 100% of their secret requests for secret orders for secret surveillance under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act(50 U.S.C §§1801-1885c).

d. There is proposed to hire IT experts to examine the communications and computers of critics of judges. The exposure of judges’ interception in a suit with counts under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act (RICO;18 U.S.C. §1961) on behalf of their victims can generate national outrage, treble damages, and attorneys’ fees. The examination can be announced at a press conference intended to capture national attention and to interest critics and victims of judges’ abuse in sharing their stories with the IT experts.

1) See former CBS reporter Sharyl Attkisson’s suit against the U.S. Department of Justice for $35 million for the latter’s hacking into her home and CBS computers to spy on the stories that she was investigating and that had deeply embarrassed the Obama administration and Attorney General Eric Holder. Eventually, AG Holder was held in contempt of Congress for withholding evidence on those stories and forced to resign.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/dr-richard-cordero-esq-0508ba4b

NOTE: Given the interference with Dr. Cordero’s email and e-cloud storage accounts described at *>ggl:1 et seq. and † >OL2:1114§G, when emailing him, copy the above bloc of his email addresses and paste it in the To: line of your email so as to enhance the chances of your email reaching him at least at one of those addresses.

Dare trigger history!…and you may enter it.
**************************************************************

Share this:
Share

Like this:
Loading…

FacebookTwitterEmailShare
Posted on January 15, 2023Author Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.Leave a comment on In search of one or more knowledgeable, experienced, and financially capable law firms, investigative journalists, and Information Technology (IT) experts with whom to join forces to further prosecute cases with national scope that are ripe for class action
A proposal for a presentation on how law and journalism schools can benefit from pursuing three class actions in the public interest

FacebookTwitterEmailShare
http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_presentation_to_professors&students.pdf

By

Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Ph.D., University of Cambridge, England
M.B.A., University of Michigan Business School
D.E.A., La Sorbonne, Paris
Judicial Discipline Reform
New York City
http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org

[email protected] , [email protected] , [email protected]

NOTES:   a. To subscribe to articles similar to the one hereunder:

1) go to <left panel ↓Register; or

2) click + New  or  Users  >Add New; or

3) fill out the New User form at https://www.judicial-discipline-reform.org/wp-admin/user-new.php.

b. The text below had a consistent format when posted. If it shows irregularities when displayed here, they crept in and are beyond my control. Kindly overlook them. A pdf version of the text -as such likely to be free of irregularities- is downloadable through the above link:

Deans of Law and Journalism Schools and
in their care to their peers and the officers of the student class and other          appropriate student organizations
Law and Journalism Schools

Dear Deans, Professors, and Officers,1

This is a proposal1 for a presentation on how through a series of steps2 (see the article below this one) and a public interest course (since it will include real representation of clients by students under the supervision of professors it is known as a clinic) you all can counter the problems besieging law schools: dwindling enrollment, imperiled financial viability, and diminishing chances of finding a law job upon graduation. It is based on precedent..
.

a. In the civil suit Strickland v. U.S., the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit held last April 26 that the Federal Judiciary and its officers, including judges, can on constitutional grounds be sued and held liable in their official and individual capacities.

.

b. 90 gymnasts sued the FBI and agents for over $1 billion last June 8, for its failure to act on the complaints against sexual predator Dr. Larry Nassar brought to FBI agents and the FBI’s cover-up of their dereliction of duty.

.

c. A PA state court ordered judges who sent juveniles to government paid/privately run detention facilities in exchange for kickbacks to pay victims $206 million in compensatory and punitive damages.

.

2. The presentation will center on three ongoing cases that can be further prosecuted through the device that can gain the highest payoff for law schools and compensate the largest number of victims: class actions including RICO charges. They can provoke national outrage3; open the floodgates of motions that create a niche practice for law students; and lead schools to hold citizens hearings that transform their role into We the People’s watchdog4 on unaccountable judges and their judiciaries.

.

a. A person in an official capacity acquired knowledge firsthand about prosecutors, NYPD officers and detectives, and judges of a NY criminal court colluding to obtain an indictment against people charged with murder even though their ‘supporting evidence’ revealed that no crime had even occurred. A complaint was filed with the NYPD Internal Affairs Bureau (IAB) requesting that it investigate its members’ participation in such wrongdoing. Its handling by over a dozen officers for three months indicates that IAB has coordinated a cover-up. A complaint against it has been escalated to NYPD Commissioner Keechant Sewell5. The potential class action plaintiffs are thousands of people who were charged and/or prosecuted on false indictments and even incarcerated. The potential defendants are the wrongdoers and the tens of administrative judges, elected officers, public defenders, and their institutions chargeable with dereliction of duty for failing to investigate.
..
b. Medicare administers a budget of $100s of billion for the benefit of its more than 33 million insureds. It works with hundreds of HMOs and other health insurance entities. They have common interests: pay the fewest claims and attract and maintain in their networks the largest number of medical services providers. To advance their interests they deny and uphold the denial of as many of their insureds’ claims as possible; disregard the legal obligation to accept as total payment Medicare’s schedules of fees for services; and condone the billing of insureds for the unpaid balance. The majority of insureds who appeal denials and balance billing appear pro se. Due to their ignorance of the law, they are abused. The recovery can be huge and force transformative change6.
.
c. Federal judges intercept7 people’s emails and mail to detect and suppress those of their critics. Thereby they deprive the People of their most cherished rights, i.e., those guaranteed by the 1st Amendment to “freedom of speech, of the press, the right of the people peaceably to assemble [on the Internet], and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances [e.g., compensation]”8.

The professors and students participating in the proposed public interest clinic can reasonably expect broad support: The MeToo! and BLM movements and those against police brutality, and for racial and socio-economic equality are expressions of the People’s self-assertive rallying cry: Enough is enough! We won’t take any abuse from anybody anymore. So, the participants can give rise to a key midterm issue and be nationally recognized as the People’s Champions of Justice.
Dare trigger history!…and you may enter it.

Every meaningful cause needs resources for its advancement;
none can be continued, let alone advanced, without money

Lip service advances nothing; but it continues to enable the abusers.
Put your money where your
outrage at abuse and
quest for justice are.

Support the professional law research and writing, and strategic thinking at:
Judicial Discipline Reform
http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org

DONATE by making a deposit or an online transfer through either the Bill Pay feature of your online account or Zelle
from your account

to TD Bank account # 43 92 62 52 45, routing # 260 13 673;

or Citi Bank account # 4977 59 2001, routing # 021 000 089.

Dare trigger history!…and you may enter it.

Sincerely,

Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Judicial Discipline Reform
2165 Bruckner Blvd.
Bronx, NY 10472-6506
tel. +1(718)827-9521

[email protected] , [email protected] , [email protected]

**************************

Endnotes

1   a. This letter is at http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_presentation_to_professors&students.pdf. It and its link can be shared widely; distributed at the student organizations fair at the start of the academic year, and posted to social media. The letter is sup-ported by my professional law research and writing, and strategic thinking; they under-gird the production of a three-volume study of judges and their judiciaries titled thus:

Exposing Judges’ Unaccountability and
Consequent Riskless Abuse of Power:
Pioneering the news and publishing field of
judicial unaccountability reporting* † ♣

Open the downloaded files using Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available for free.

♣ Volume 3: http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL3/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates3.pdf >from OL3:1144-1492+

b. The study collects and discusses abundant evidence(OL:194§E) showing that judges ensure each other’s unaccountability, which is also protected connivingly by the politicians who put them in office, and for whom they are ‘our men and women on the bench’. Hence, judges engage in abuse of power risklessly for their gain and convenience individually and as a coordinated class.

c. Some of my articles have been posted to my website Judicial Discipline Reform at http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org. That site has attracted countless webvisitors and turned into subscribers 44,711 of them as of 5 September ‘22. They are potential class members.

2 http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-ProfSRAckerman_ProfJSGersen.pdf

3 http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-journalists_politicians_scooping_judges_racketeering.pdf

4 http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_from_abortion_decision_to_new_constitution.pdf

5 http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/IAB/DrRCordero-NYPDCommKSewell.pdf

6 http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/ALJ/22-8-17DrRCordero_motion_recuse_ALJLFleming.pdf

7 http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_emails_mail_intercepted_by_judges.pdf

8  The most recent and indisputable evidence of unaccountable judges’ abuse of power is found in the series of articles that The Wall Street Journal began to publish on September 28, 2021, under the initial title “131 Federal Judges Broke the Law by Hearing Cases Where They Had a Financial Interest”.

a. At last count, 58 of those judges had instructed their clerks of court to notify the parties to those cases that those judges should have recused themselves then, have done so now, and new judges will be assigned to their cases. However, to date, not a single of those judges has been investigated, subjected to disciplinary measures, let alone referred for impeachment, or forced to disgorge the gains that they made by resolving in their favor their conflict of interests.

Share this:
Share

Like this:
Loading…

FacebookTwitterEmailShare
Posted on September 5, 2022Author Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.Leave a comment on A proposal for a presentation on how law and journalism schools can benefit from pursuing three class actions in the public interest
Proposal to law and journalism deans, professors, and students for exposing judges’ abuse of power through a series of steps leading up to transformative change in their schools’ role in society

FacebookTwitterEmailShare
By

Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Ph.D., University of Cambridge, England
M.B.A., University of Michigan Business School
D.E.A., La Sorbonne, Paris
Judicial Discipline Reform
New York City
http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org

[email protected] , [email protected] , [email protected]

NOTES: a. To subscribe to articles similar to the one hereunder:

1) go to <left panel ↓Register; or

2) click + New  or  Users  >Add New; or

3) fill out the New User form at https://www.judicial-discipline-reform.org/wp-admin/user-new.php.

b. The text below had a consistent format when posted. If it shows irregularities when displayed here, they crept in and are beyond my control. Kindly overlook them. A pdf version of the text -as such likely to be free of irregularities- is downloadable through the link below.

Professor Jeannie Suk Gersen Harvard Law School [email protected]
Professor Susan Rose-Ackerman
Yale Law School
[email protected]
Dear Professor Gersen, Professor Rose-Ackerman, peers, and students,‡
‡ http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-ProfSRoseAckerman_ProfJSGersen.pdf

I read with interest, Prof. Rose-Ackerman, your paper “Judicial Independence and Corruption”.
Thanks to your arguing, Prof. Gersen, of Strickland v. U.S., the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit held on April 26 that the Federal Judiciary and its officers, including judges, can on constitutional grounds be sued and held liable in their official and individual capacities.
This is a proposal to follow a series of strategic steps to expose judicial independence as unaccountability that allows judges’ riskless corruption and abuse of power for their gain and convenience. Those steps should lead to a class action to compensate their victims. Yale and Harvard law students can take the lead in that exposure as they did in the opposition to the nomination of J. Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court. The action can be a teaching event, as shown infra.
The first step is for you and your students to invite me to present the proposal by video conference or in person to you, them, and your peers. You can preview it my article at♦ and on my website Judicial Discipline Reform at http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org. That site has attracted countless webvisitors and turned into subscribers 44,711 of them as of September 4, 2022..
They have been induced to subscribe by my professional law research and writing, and strategic thinking. You all can assess the validity of that statement by reviewing the foundation of my articles posted there, namely, my three-volume study of judges and their judiciaries♣:
Exposing Judges’ Unaccountability and
Consequent Riskless Abuse of Power:
Pioneering the news and publishing field of
judicial unaccountability reporting* † ♣

That study collects and discusses abundant evidence(OL:194§E) showing that judges individually and as a class through coordination engage in corruption and abuse of power.
a. The most recent and indisputable evidence thereof is found in the series of articles that The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) began to publish on September 28, 2021, under the initial title “131 Federal Judges Broke the Law by Hearing Cases Where They Had a Financial Interest”. At last count, 58 of those judges had instructed their clerks of court to notify the parties to those cases that those judges should have recused themselves then, have done so now, and new judges will be assigned to their cases.

The Federal Judiciary has not taken any disciplinary action against any of those judges. Judges protect each other through their explicit or implicit reciprocal cover-up agreement: ‘Today you protect me and tomorrow I’ll protect you, for if you let them take me down, I’ll bring you with me!’
This explains why no action is going to be taken by AG Merrick Garland given that he was a member, and for 7 years the chief judge, of the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
a. Any investigation of judges authorized by him even if he subsequently recused himself would incriminate him as their accessory: He kept quite after learning of their act of corruption and abuse, whereby his expected silence enabled them before their next act; let alone if he were a principal. So, it falls on law professors and students, and lawyers to muster the courage and take the initiative to expose judges’ misconduct and the cover-up agreement that perpetuates it.

9. The second step envisages your and your students’ sharing this proposal with the officers of the student class and associations that will vie for new members during the fair of associations to be held at the beginning of next academic year. Thus, time is of the essence. It is also so because the public is getting ready to vote in the midterm elections. It can hold accountable the politicians who nominated and confirmed judicial candidates and since then protect them as ‘our men and women on the bench’, their harm to others notwithstanding. Hence the importance of turning into a key electoral issue judges’ corruption and abuse of power and politicians’ condonation of them.

The third step aims to do that by professors and students holding press conferences where they ask the media to join them in demanding that President Biden release the secret reports that the FBI has submitted to presidents after vetting judicial candidates by exercising, when needed, its subpoena power. That demand will be justified by the need to answer this question: What did the President and his predecessors know about their corruption and abuse and when did they know it? Will they claim that the reports were ‘accidentally erased during a system upgrade’, as the Secret Service and Homeland Security have concerning emails related to the January 6 Capitol assault?
The fourth step is the class action on behalf of judges’ victims. It will be supported by a public informed and outraged by journalists pursuing a scoop. It finds a strong precedent in the suit brought by 90 gymnasts against the FBI and agents for over $1 billion last June 8, for its failure to act on the complaints against sexual predator Dr. Larry Nassar brought to FBI agents and the FBI’s cover-up of their dereliction of duty. In the same vein of suing even top government officers, seven Capitol Police officers have sued former President Trump and the organizers of the rally at the Ellipse where he held the inflaming speech that preceded the January 6 assault on the Capitol.
The above are manifestations of the strongest support for the class action, to wit, the national mood of intolerance of any form of abuse.
a. Indeed, the public has grown increasingly determined to hold public figures and officers accountable and liable to compensate their victims since the eruption of the MeToo! and BLM movements; the protests against police brutality, socio-economic inequalities, and the Supreme Court’s reversal of Roe v. Wade; the public hearings of the House January 6 Committee and the lip service assurance by AG Garland that “nobody is above the law” so that the Department of Justice will prosecute all Capitol assault organizers and participants.

The class action will generate a flood of motions to vacate, remand, and for new trials; for the reimbursement by recused judges of the cost of judicial process that they rendered useless and of disentangling contracts based on their now void or voidable decisions; and for actions against state judges and judiciaries. They will create a much-needed niche practice for you and your students.
Judges’ and their judiciaries’ conduct forms a pattern of racketeering that warrants bringing a count against them under federal and/or state civil RICO (18 U.S.C. §1961). They provide that the injured party “shall recover threefold the damages he sustains and at the attorney’s fee” (§1964(c)).
The fifth step is for professors and students to develop their niche practice through public interest clinics centered on consulting and bringing those motions and actions on behalf of judges’ victims. Those clinics can return a profit for law schools at a time of dwindling enrollment and revenue.
Instead of teaching lofty principles of law only in theory applied by judges, law schools can give practical effect in their own and the public interest to their knowledge that judges have institutionalized their corruption and abuse of power as their modus operandi. Judges do so risklessly for their gain and convenience because they are held by themselves and politicians unaccountable.
You, your peers, and students‡ can take the proposed steps to lead the transformative change of law schools into a pole of power that uses its independence and knowledge of legal grounds to hold judges and their judiciaries accountable and liable. Let your actions speak with facts a tenet of our justice system: Nobody is Above the Law. Dare trigger history!…and you may enter it.
Every meaningful cause needs resources for its advancement;
none can be continued, let alone advanced, without money
Lip service advances nothing; but it continues to enable the abusers.
Put your money where your
outrage at abuse and
quest for justice are.

Support the professional law research and writing, and strategic thinking at:
Judicial Discipline Reform
http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org

DONATE by making a deposit or an online transfer through either the Bill Pay feature of your online account or Zelle
from your account

to TD Bank account # 43 92 62 52 45, routing # 260 13 673;

or Citi Bank account # 4977 59 2001, routing # 021 000 089.

Dare trigger history!…and you may enter it.

Sincerely,

Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Judicial Discipline Reform
2165 Bruckner Blvd.
Bronx, NY 10472-6506
tel. +1(718)827-9521

[email protected] , [email protected] , [email protected]

Share this:
Share

Like this:
Loading…

FacebookTwitterEmailShare
Posted on September 5, 2022Author Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.Leave a comment on Proposal to law and journalism deans, professors, and students for exposing judges’ abuse of power through a series of steps leading up to transformative change in their schools’ role in society
The SCt. abortion draft opinion has set the mood for national outrage to explode by the media exposing justices and judges running the Federal Judiciary as a racketeering enterprise

FacebookTwitterEmailShare
Proposal to Reuters, WSJ, WP, and all other media outlets
for a joint venture at the most propitious time:
when the Supreme Court’s leaked abortion draft opinion
has set the mood for national outrage to explode as a result of
the exposure of justices’ and judges’ participation in
abuse of power and financial criminality
so coordinated and widespread as to amount to
their running the Federal Judiciary as a racketeering enterprise:
“Scandal sells” and can win Pulitzer Prizes by leading to
the serial resignation of justices, judges, and courts;
the loss of public trust in the Federal Judiciary that brings it down;
the calling of the constitutional convention already petitioned by 34 states;
and a new constitution by today’s We the People
http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_from_abortion_decision_to_new_constitution.pdf

By

Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Ph.D., University of Cambridge, England
M.B.A., University of Michigan Business School
D.E.A., La Sorbonne, Paris
Judicial Discipline Reform
New York City
http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org

[email protected] , [email protected] , [email protected]

NOTES: i. To subscribe to articles similar to the one hereunder:

a. go to <left panel ↓Register:    or
b. click + New  or  Users  >Add New; or
c. fill out the New User form at https://www.judicial-discipline-reform.org/wp-admin/user-new.php .

ii. This article had a consistent format when posted. If it shows irregularities when displayed here, they crept in and are beyond my control. Kindly overlook them. A pdf version of this article -as such likely to be free of irregularities- is found here and downloadable through the next link

A. The foundation for exposing judges’ and justices’ abuse of power and financial criminality
The leaked draft opinion by Supreme Court Justice Samuel A. Alito revealing that a majority of the Court favors overturning Roe v. Wade has caused national jubilation but even more outrage.
.
That outrage would pale by comparison to that which can be provoked and overcome much jubilation by a series of responsible and principled articles, such as those already written and available for review(Appendix 6§A) or that can be written on commission(Appendix 6§B), exposing how the justices, who are unaccountable and not even held to any ethics code, run and condone the running of the Federal Judiciary as a racketeering enterprise.
.
There is solid basis for raising these charges against justices and judges. To begin with, there is the series of articles that The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) began to publish on September 28, 2021, under the initial title “131 Federal Judges Broke the Law by Hearing Cases Where They Had a Financial Interest”.
.
…….a. Another article in the series was published on November 2, 2021, titled “Hidden Interests – Federal Judge Files Recusal Notices in 138 Cases After WSJ Queries. [U.S. Chief District Judge of the Eastern District of Texas] Rodney Gilstrap initially argued he didn’t violate financial-conflicts law”; [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected].
.
…….b. The judges who failed to recuse themselves in order to grab money necessarily engaged, lest they incriminate themselves, in inside trading, fraud, concealment of assets, tax evasion, and money laundering. Those are crimes. They are complex and require coordination. When judges committed them as principals or condoned them as accessories, they became the judicial class that turned the Federal Judiciary into a ‘racketeer influenced and corrupt organization’(Cf. Title 18 of the U.S. Code of federal law, section 1961 (18 U.S.C. §1961)).
.
…….c. When a chief judge engages in such systematic abuse of power and financial criminality, how strongly do his fellow judges feel justified and encouraged by his example in committing any and all sorts of abuse and crimes so that abuse and criminality become their judiciary’s institutionalized way of doing business?
.
…….d. Today journalists must ask the famous question that Sen. Howard Baker, the ranking minority member of the Senate Watergate Committee, asked of every witness at the Watergate hearings to find out what President Nixon knew about the Watergate affair(paragraph 14 infra), adapting it so:
1) What did Supreme Court Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., know about the abuse and criminality of his fellow judges, whom he is supposed to supervise, and when did he know it?

2) What did Justice Samuel A. Alito, the circuit justice assigned under 28 U.S.C. §42, to, and with supervisory duties over, the Fifth Circuit, which includes Texas, know about it, and when did he know it?

3) What did Justice Clarence Thomas know about his wife’s effort to overturn the 2020 election results; and when did he know it? Let him “deal with it” and with his failure to report in his annual financial disclosure reports her earnings(jur:72§b).

4) What did Then-Judge, Now-Justice Sonia Sotomayor know about the DeLano case, over which she presided and which so clearly “beyond a reasonable doubt” incriminated her in a cover-up of a bankruptcy fraud scheme that it was suppressed from the documents on her submitted to the Senate Committee on Judicial Nominations dealing with her confirmation to the Supreme Court; and when did she know it(jur:65§§1-3).

5) What did President Joe Biden know through the FBI secret vetting reports about the participation in judges’ abuse and criminality, or their cover-up, by former Chief Judge Merrick Garland of the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, now his Attorney General, and Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson, who sits in that Circuit; and when did he know it?

Thomson Reuters, on the strength of its 2,500+ journalists and 600+ photojournalists, can scoop the story of the justices’ abuse and criminality. It already dare publish on June 30, 2020, the first of its three-part report “The Teflon Robe” on its massive investigation of state judges led by [email protected] and [email protected]. It found that “hardwired judicial corruption” intertwines state judges and the state commissions on judicial performance that are duty-bound to supervise and discipline them.
.
a.   a. Reuters asked readers to send it their stories of abuse by judges…and it was “inundated” with them. This goes to showing that people who have suffered or witnessed judges’ abuse want to tell their story to the largest public possible.
.
The mood for exposing the justices’ unaccountability and their consequent riskless abuse of power and financial criminality is manifest in Congress. This is shown by The Hill, in its article “House panel to explore impeachment [of Justice Clarence Thomas], judicial ethics in wake of Ginni Thomas texts” by Emily Brooks, published on April 2, 2022. It reported that:
.
a. “Representative Hank Johnson (D-Ga.), the chairman of the House Judiciary courts subcommittee, …last year introduced the Supreme Court Ethics Act to implement a judicial code of conduct that applies to the Supreme Court. Jones co-led the Twenty-First Century Courts Act, which would similarly implement a code of conduct for the justices.
.
b.b. b. “He said, “Recent reports that the text messages of a justice’s spouse urging the overturning of a free and fair election may have been at issue in a case in front [sic] the Supreme Court — but that the justice did not recuse himself from the case — is just the latest and particularly egregious example in an unfortunately long list of illustrations as to why Supreme Court justices need to follow a formal code of ethics,” Johnson told The Hill. “I have been calling for this sort of reform for years, and I am encouraged to see a large, bipartisan majority of the public in favor of this long overdue legislation…Johnson called for Thomas’s resignation.”
.
6. Strickland v. U.S., no. 21-1346, is a civil case where a decision was handed down by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit on April 26, 2022. It is unprecedented, for it holds that the Federal Judiciary and its officials are suable on grounds of the 5th and 14th Amendments due process and equal protection of the law clauses, as well as specific acts of Congress. Hence, it reversed the outright dismissal by the trial court, which had invoked judicial immunity –a doctrine self-servingly conjured up by judges themselves in defiance of the Constitution– and remanded for further proceedings.
.
…….a. Strickland opens the door for all abusees joining forces to collectively demand compensation from the Federal Judiciary and the justices themselves. Imagine the amount of business generated if Thomson Reuters, I, and other media outlets showed the abusees how to demand such compensation.
B. What I bring to the joint venture
I established Judicial Discipline Reform. Its website is at http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org. There I post articles with law research findings and legal strategy to which the national public has access. Those articles have attracted so many webvisitors and appealed to them so positively that as of June 8, 2022, the number of them who had become subscribers was 44,206+.(Appendix 3)
.
…….a. Do you know of any law firm, let alone a lawyer, that has so many subscribers to their website?
.
The subscribers to my site have found my articles appealing although the articles are intellectually demanding and written in long form. It is reasonable to assume that the subscribers are mostly the type of highly educated and well-off readers of such top publications as The New York Times and its Sunday Edition, The Washington Post, The New Yorker, TIME Magazine, The Atlantic, The Boston Globe, etc.
.
These subscribers can afford the books and services of Thomson Reuters and other publishers, just as their lawyers can.
.
10. The general public too, including pro ses, is attracted to the website and can patronize its sponsor’s advertisement there thanks to the concrete, reasonable, and feasible ways in which I have proposed that people take action in their own interest; e.g.:
.
…….a. the two-phase method for writing their own story;
.
…….b. how to use legal sources of information for brief writing(see a list of them at Appendix 6§C);
.
…….c. the folly of pro ses improvising themselves as lawyers;
.
…….d. how to seek free legal assistance.
…
11. Judicial Discipline Reform, its articles, and site rely on a three-volume study of judges and their judiciaries, the product of professional law research and writing, and strategic thinking. It holds the materials corresponding to the (blue references) herein; and is titled and downloadable thus* † ♣:
Exposing Judges’ Unaccountability and
Consequent Riskless Abuse of Power:
Pioneering the news and publishing field of
judicial unaccountability reporting* † ♣

Open the downloaded files using Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available for free.

♣ Volume 3: http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL3/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates3.pdf >from OL3:1144-1484+

112. Moreover, I bring to the joint venture a plan of also concrete, realistic, and feasible actions that media outlets and I can undertake right away and that is reasonably calculated to be financially and reputationally beneficial for all venturers. It includes an investigative plan with an abundance of leads(OL:194§E).

C From judicial resignations, an institutional crisis, a constitutional convention, to a new constitution by today’s We the People
113. Reuters, WSJ, The Washington Post (WP), and all other media outlets can do so much better than merely sit back and watch as spectators how other publishers and Congress scoop the exposure of judges’ and justices’ commission or condonation of abuse of power and financial criminality, just as Politico scooped the abortion draft opinion. They have the means of taking the reins of the investigative bandwagon and set out towards Pioneering the news and publishing field of judicial unaccountability reporting.
.
114. The Washington Post published with courage and persistence a series of articles that set in motion a generalized media investigation of the crimes that President Nixon and ‘All his Men’ committed by organizing and covering up the break-in at the Democratic National Committee headquarters at the Watergate building in Washington, DC, on June 17, 1972, to commit political espionage. WP was instrumental in forcing Nixon to resign and causing ‘All his Men’ to go to jail. For that, WP became the symbol of excellence in journalism in the public interest, in general, and investigative journalism, in particular.

115. Today, Reuters, WSJ, WP, and all other media outlets can do much more than just bring down a group of men who went rogue. Rather, they can expose how a whole branch of government, the Federal Judiciary, has gone rogue to become a racketeering enterprise.

116. They can inform the national public about, and so outrage it at, judges’ and justices’ abuse and criminality as to stir up the public, having lost its trust in their integrity and honesty, to demand the resignation of judges, justices, and even a whole court, such as the Supreme Court.

117. This inform and outrage strategy is realistic, for the public is strongest during primaries and in view of elections. Then it wields its enormous power to donate money, volunteer as campaign workers, spread positive word of mouth, and vote.

a. Ironically, this strategy is unintentionally validated by Justice Thomas, who recognized the dire impact on the Supreme Court of the loss of trust in it when he said in connection with the leaked abortion draft opinion: “”When you lose that trust, especially in the institution that I’m in, it changes the institution fundamentally. You begin to look over your shoulder…What happened at the court was tremendously bad,…I wonder how long we’re going to have these institutions at the rate we’re undermining them. And then I wonder when they’re gone or destabilized, what we’re going to have as a country.” Clarence Thomas says Supreme Court leak has eroded trust in institution; Robert Barnes; The Washington Post; May 14, 2022.

b. The likely answer to his rhetorical question is ‘we are going to have a summer of rage’. That is precisely the mood that can fuel the series of events leading to those discussed hereunder.

118. There is also precedent for the inform and outrage strategy in the forced resignations of(OL3:1423§c):

…….a. Supreme Court Justice Abe Fortas on May 14, 1969;

…….b. Former Ninth Circuit Chief Judge Alex Kozinski on December 18, 2017;

…….c. Circuit Judge Maryanne Trump Barry, the sister of President Donald Trump, who resigned from the 3rd Circuit on February 11, 2019;

…….d. Circuit Judge Robert Bork of the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit had his resignation preempted by the Senate’s rejection on October 23, 1987, of his nomination to the Supreme Court. He was doomed by the public outrage that he had provoked more than a decade earlier when he carried out President’s Nixon’s order to fire Special Watergate Prosecutor Archibald Cox in the Saturday Night Massacre on October 20, 1973.

119. Public outrage is a powerful force very difficult to resist. The outrage unleashed by the exposure of justices’ and judges’ abuse and criminality can set off an institutional crisis: Which of the other two branches would dare hold judges accountable, who could retaliate by holding their laws and even their electoral programs unconstitutional or interpret them so expansively or restrictively as to render them ineffective?(jur:23fn17a)

220. That crisis can force the occurrence of what 34 states have petitioned Congress to do since April 2, 2014, but its members will not do voluntarily, lest they lose their privileges and power: call a constitutional convention in accordance with the amending provisions of Article V of the Constitution.

221. A constitutional convention ran away with its mandate and instead of reforming the Articles of Confederation that the Second Continental Congress had approved on November 1, 1777, cast them aside. The convention, likewise made up only of white landed Christian free men, drafted the current Constitution, which was ratified by the 13 states in 1789.

122. Public outrage has been building up since the eruption of the MeToo! and BLM movements, the protests against social and economic inequality, the resentment against the Covid mandates and discrimination of Asian and Pacific Islanders communities, the fast-intensifying animosity among supporters and opponents of the leaked abortion draft opinion.

.23. That outrage can reach its paroxysm and clear the way to the irrepressible will of the living today to break free from the now dead hands of those who wrote the Constitution 233 years ago. Never conceived to deal with a world that their heads could not even imagine, that Constitution is twisted to read one way at one time and the opposite way at another time by nine unelected justices…who even unaccountably and risklessly participate in, or cover up, their and their colleagues’ abuse of power and criminality.

Enough is enough!
We won’t take any abuse by anybody anymore.

224. Their outrage casting aside the current Constitution even before they become assembled in a constitutional convention, today’s men, women, and LBGTQs, rich and poor, those of faith and no faith, of any color, whether in cities, suburbs, rural areas, and Indian land, workers at desks or with tools in their hands, from young adults to senior citizens, all of them can choose for themselves as the sovereign source of all public power the fundamental rules by which they want to live. They can author the Code of Governance of Today’s We the People.

D. First steps toward the key objectives of the business venture
225. The media outlets that are instrumental in launching this chain of events can become for generations the symbol of excellence in journalism and its power to bring about transformative change in the public interest. Such recognition can begin with winning Pulitzer Prizes and making money, for “Scandal sells”.

226. You all and I can in our own financial and reputational interest take the lead by Pioneering the news and publishing field of judicial unaccountability reporting. Our audience will be, in general, the national public in voting mood, and, in particular, the scores of millions of people who have suffered or witnessed judges’ abuse of power and financial criminality.

227. The first steps of the joint venture consist in both the serial publication by you of the following articles that I have written and can edit upon your review of them(Appendix 6§A); and others that I can write on commission, whether along the lines of my sample of subjects(Appendix 6§B) or a subject proposed by you; and the further investigation to follow the leads that they contain; e.g.:

…….a. judges’ interception of people’s emails and mail to detect and suppress those of their critics; and its investigation by forensic Information Technology experts;

…….b. the mathematical demonstration that the overwhelming majority of briefs are not read by judges, but rather are disposed of to lighten their workload by their having clerks rubberstamp reasonless, unresearched, fiat-like 5¢ dumping forms; and its further statistical strengthening by auditing judges’ decisions, most of which they post to their courts’ websites, whose addresses can be found through the federal court finder;

…….c. the development of advanced statistical, linguistic, and literary research software to analyze all sorts and vast amounts of writings to detect the most persuasive kind of evidence: patterns and schemes of abuse;

…….d. the Follow the Money! and Follow the Wire! investigations that apply forensic research techniques, e.g., Fraud and Forensic Accounting(jur:102§a; OL:194§E) to discover assets that judges have grabbed, concealed, evaded taxes on, and money laundered(OL:1); and determine their illegal use to do so of government property, such as the Federal Judiciary’s vast, national digital network and expertise; cf. CM/ECF (Case Management/Electronic Case Filing) and PACER (Public Access to Court Electronic Records);

…….e. judges’ abuse of the congressional grant to them of self-discipline authority under the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act of 1980(28 U.S.C. §§351-364) by dismissing 100% of complaints filed against any federal judge and denying 100% of petitions to review those dismissals, thus institutionalizing judges’ implicit or explicit complicit agreement for reciprocal exoneration from all complaints: ‘Today I exempt you from the complaint against you, and tomorrow you exempt me and my friends from any complaint against us, no matter the nature, extent, and gravity of the abuse complained-about’;

…….f. the investigation of Supreme Court justices and congressional leaders, which can benefit from the abundance of leads that I have collected(OL:194§E; jur:65§B).

228. The business venture can also enhance my site technologically into a clearinghouse and a research center. This will allow people to post their stories of abuse by judges that they have suffered or witness as well as their complaints against judges already or to be filed; and to research them for patterns and schemes of abuse of power and financial criminality that but for coordination among judges and between them and their cronies would not have been organized and become operational.

229. The venture can enable people to tell their stories to the national public at unprecedented citizens hearings. The latter will be organized by Reuters, WSJ, WP, other media outlets, their journalists, and professors and students. They will be held at university auditoriums, media stations, and via video conference to make it inexpensive for the largest number of people to tell their stories and virtually attend the citizens hearings.

…….a. Those hearings will be a source of invaluable leads for researchers to further their investigation of justices’ and judges’ abuse and criminality. The hearings can be expected to become a self-reinforcing research mechanism that makes any investment in mounting the learning curve pay off and become long-term financially and reputationally profitable.

E. My offer to make a presentation on this proposal for a joint venture
330. I offer to present this proposal for a joint venture via video conference and, if in NY City, in person. Preview its key features by reviewing my webinar and its slides.

331. To schedule the presentation use my contact information below.

332. To invite people to attend the presentation and send you their complaints and stories of judges’ abuse that they have suffered or witnessed  you can as widely as possible share this article with all your friends, relatives, workmates, etc., and post it to social media, such as:

Facebook,   YouTube,   LinkedIn,   Instagram,   Google Plus,   Pinterest,   Reddit,   Snapchat,   WhatsApp

Tweet: Tell journalists your story of justices’ & judges’ abuse, which can lead to citizens hearings, their resignations, the Federal Judiciary’s fall & Today’s We the People constitution http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_from_abortion_decision_to_new_constitution.pdf

333. To encourage the investigation of justices and judges by top journalists(OL3:1452§1) and the law professors who were members of the Biden Commission on the Reform of the Supreme Court, place each of the following blocs of email addresses in the To: and the cc: box, respectively, of this email so that they too receive this article. Then  every day go to your “Sent” folder, where a copy of the emails that you sent is found, open it, click “Reply All” and “Send“.

To: [journalists]

[email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] ,[email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],  [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],

cc: [professors]

[email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],

334. This is an opportunity for you and the rest of the media, so unjustly denigrated as “the enemy of the people”, to redeem yourselves by informing the people and channeling their outrage so as to enable them to assert their status as the Masters of all public servants, including justices and judges, entitled to exercise their authority as such to hold them accountable for their abuse of the public power entrusted to them and liable to compensate the victims of their abuse.

335. By so doing, we can become financially and reputationally rewarded not only with Pulitzer Prizes, but also by being nationally recognized by a grateful People as their Champions of Justice.

F. Every meaningful cause needs resources for its advancement;
none can be continued, let alone advanced, without money
336. Lip service advances nothing; but it continues to enable the abusers.

Put your money where your
outrage at abuse and
quest for justice are.

337. Support the professional law research and writing, and strategic thinking at:

Judicial Discipline Reform
http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org

338. DONATE by making a deposit or an online transfer through either the Bill Pay feature of your online account or Zelle

from your account

to TD Bank account # 43 92 62 52 45, routing # 260 13 673;

or Citi Bank account # 4977 59 2001, routing # 021 000 089.

Dare trigger history!…and you may enter it.

Sincerely,

Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Judicial Discipline Reform
2165 Bruckner Blvd.
Bronx, NY 10472-6506
tel. +1(718)827-9521

[email protected] , [email protected] , [email protected]

Share this:
Share

Like this:
Loading…

FacebookTwitterEmailShare
Posted on May 14, 2022Author Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.Leave a comment on The SCt. abortion draft opinion has set the mood for national outrage to explode by the media exposing justices and judges running the Federal Judiciary as a racketeering enterprise
Journalists and primarying politicians can ask: What did J. K. Brown Jackson, Justice Thomas, and Attorney General M. Garland know about judges’ abuse of power and when did they know it?

FacebookTwitterEmailShare
Journalists interested in a scoop and a Pulitzer Prize,
primarying politicians, and
those outraged by The Wall Street Journal
finding in only a sample of cases that
“131 Federal Judges Broke the Law by
Hearing Cases Where They Had a Financial Interest”,
yet they have been
neither investigated by either their Federal Judiciary or
former chief judge now Attorney General Merrick Garland,
nor required to disgorge the gains that they grabbed,
can use the official statistics of his and J. Ketanji Brown Jackson’s
District of Columbia Circuit to show their participation in a cover-up
concerning their peers’ law-breaking and other forms of abuse of power, and
effected by dismissing 100% of complaints against their peers and
denying 100% of petitions to review those dismissals,
thus revealing their lack of courage to expose their peers’ abuse and interest
in not being shunned as traitors but rather
in being accepted by their “brothers and sisters of the robe”
at the expense of the complainants and
the integrity of the system of justice, left to fester with
the underlying and untreated cause for complaint:
judges emboldened by reciprocally ensuring
the risklessness of their abuse
http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-journalists_politicians_scooping_judges_racketeering.pdf
By
Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Ph.D., University of Cambridge, England
M.B.A., University of Michigan Business School
D.E.A., La Sorbonne, Paris
Judicial Discipline Reform
New York City
http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org
[email protected] , [email protected] , [email protected]

NOTE: This article was formatted consistently. However, after posting it, changes in paragraph indentation, spacing, character color, etc., creep in. They are unintended. Kindly overlook them.

To subscribe:
a. go to <left panel ↓Register;   or
b. click   + New   or   Users   >Add New; or
c. fill out the New User form here https://www.judicial-discipline-reform.org/wp-admin/user-new.php .

Dear Journalists, Politicians, and Advocates of Honest Judiciaries,

1. Justice nominee Ketanji Brown Jackson was confirmed by the Senate on April 7, 2022. However, she will not take her seat on the Supreme Court until the end of this term in the summer. This affords a unique opportunity to journalists, including the media outlets for which they work, who want to make a scoop that can lead to their winning a Pulitzer Prize; principled and opportunistic primarying politicians; and people who are interested in the integrity of the judiciary:

a. They can examine the integrity and character of both J. Brown Jackson and former chief judge now Attorney General Merrick Garland in light of the official reports and statistics of their District of Columbia Circuit. There she sat as a trial judge from 2013 to 2021, and has sat as an appellate judge of the Court of Appeals for that Circuit(CADCC) since June 2021; and he served as that Court’s chief judge from 2013 to 2020.

b. It follows that the comments made here referring to J. Brown apply even more forcefully to Now-AG and Then-Judge and even Chief Judge Garland, as they do to Justice Clarence Thomas. Hence, such application is not made explicit in every instance.

A. The official statistics on complaints against judges

2. Those reports and statistics are submitted by the 13 U.S. courts of appeals, including CADCC, and 2 national courts to Congress as a public document in the Annual Report of the Director of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, as required under Title 28 of the U.S. Code [of federal law only] section 604(a)(3-4)), i.e. (28 U.S.C. §604(a)(3-4)). The director is appointed by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court(id., §601).

3. Complaints against judges of a circuit can be filed by any person, including a judge, under the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act of 1980(the Act; id. §§351-364). The complaint statistics have appeared for most of those years in Table S-22 of the Annual Report(id., §604(h)(2)).

4. I have compiled and tabulated them for ease of presentation and analysis. Those statistics show that for decades, federal judges have dismissed 100% of complaints against their peers and denied 100% of petitions to review those dismissals.

a. Indeed, the introduction to Table S-22 for 2021 states the following concerning complaints filed in the 15 reporting courts:

“The number of complaints filed in 2021 was 1,282, an increase of 29 complaints (up 2 percent) from the number filed in 2020.

Fifty-nine percent of the complaints were made against district judges, 25 percent were against circuit judges,…

Chief judges dismissed 1,402 complaints in whole or in part. This total includes complaints that later were terminated with finality by circuit judicial council orders on petitions for review, as well as complaints for which additional review was still possible.

Chief judges terminated 948 complaints with no further review. Circuit judicial councils terminated 480 complaints, including 2 terminated after reports by special committees were issued.”

5. Table S-22 shows the outcome of those complaints:

Complaints with Corrective Action Taken
or Intervening Events                                              0
Censure or Reprimand                                               0
Suspension of Assignments                                       0

Action Against Magistrate Judge                               0
Removal of Bankruptcy Judge                                   0
Requesting of Voluntary Retirement                        0
Certifying Disability of Circuit or District Court     0

 

B. The implications for judges of the statistics on complaints against them

6. It follows indisputably that the outcome of processing complaints against federal judges is predetermined: The chief circuit judge, who by law examines them in the first instance, will dismiss them systematically. The circuit judicial council, composed of district and circuit judges, will deny all petitions for dismissal review out of hand on a 5¢ form bearing the rubberstamped signature of the clerk of court. No reason whatsoever is given. There is no discussion of facts or law. The denial is a fiat.

a. The processing occurs in complete secrecy. It guarantees that the complained-against judges will not be disturbed by any complaint, for they need not have to be notified of it…after all, it will be dumped no matter its nature, frequency, and gravity. But if a judge replies, he can make up any story in his defense and to the detriment of the complainant, who will not be able to check it in rebuttal because she will not be given a copy of the reply without the judge’s consent.
b. The implication of such peremptory dumping of complaints is inescapable: Judges take care of their own to ensure that “Judges are Untouchable”.

7. It is statistically impossible for thousands of complaints over decades involving hundreds of judges to have led to the same outcome but for the implicit or explicit complicit agreement among judges to exonerate each other by abusing the power to self–discipline granted by Congress: ‘Today I exonerate you and tomorrow, when I am or my friends are complained against, you and your friends exonerate us’.

a. It is possible for that complicit agreement to exist and operate only because of the connivance between, on the one hand, the politicians that adopted the Act and ignore the Annual Report on complaints and, on the other hand, the judicial candidates that they recommend, endorse, nominate, and confirm to a judgeship or justiceship, whom must be provided with unequal protection from the law and spared any investigation by law enforcement authorities or congressional committees, lest the judges wield against the politicians their devastating power of retaliation(jur:81§1; Lsch:17§C).

8. Judges wield the most power over people’s property, liberty, and all the rights and duties that frame their lives and shape their identity.  This is especially so of federal judges, who are the only officers in our country to have a lifetime appointment; they have the longest time to hold grudges. When judges dismiss 100%of complaints against their peers and deny 100% of petitions to review those dismissals, they not only protect themselves by covering up their abuse underlying the complaints against them. They also leave complainants uncompensated and unprotected  from the retaliation of all judges.

a. As Then-Judge, Now-Judge Neil Gorsuch put it when visiting with senators before his confirmation hearings: “An attack on one of our brothers and sisters of the robe is an attack on all of us”.(OL2:546; 548) That was the expression of judges’ gang mentality. They do no process complaints impartially in light only of the law and what is right and just. What matters is gang belongingness and self-interest.

9. What is more, judges have left all parties and the rest of the public at the mercy of judges emboldened by the assurance that no matter what they do, their “brothers and sisters of the robe” will cover for them. They reciprocally ensure that they are Judges Above Congress by in effect abrogating its Judicial Conduct and Disability Act. Yet, they give the false impression to the public that a complaint under that Act will be processed fairly and impartially. By misleading the public to its detriment for their own gain and convenience, the judges have committed fraud on the public.

10. That is what they have done as a matter of fact. For proof, there is the series of articles published by the highly regarded The Wall Street Journal beginning on September 28, 2021, under the initial title:

a. “131 Federal Judges Broke the Law by Hearing Cases Where They Had a Financial Interest”. “[Federal] judges failed to recuse themselves from 685 lawsuits from 2010 to 2018 involving firms in which they or their family held shares, a Wall Street Journal investigation found…Alerted to the violations by the Journal, 56 of the judges have directed court clerks to notify parties in 329 lawsuits that they should have recused themselves. That means new judges might be assigned, potentially upending rulings.”

b. Another article in the series was published on November 2, 2021, titled “Hidden Interests – Federal Judge Files Recusal Notices in 138 Cases After WSJ Queries. Rodney Gilstrap initially argued he didn’t violate financial-conflicts law”; [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]. (See the articles referred to here and at Appendix:6§C.22.)

c. Who is going to pay for a new trial or appeal or for disentangling contracts based on void or voidable decisions by law-breaking judges? See paragraph 19 below and a plan for collectively demanding compensation to be implemented by journalists, professors, and students.
C. The implications for justice nominee Brown Jackson and A.G. judge Merrick Garland

11. The above provides reasonable grounds, and even probable cause, to believe that during her long career in the Federal Judiciary -even longer for Then-Judge and Chief Judge Garland-, including nine years on the bench of federal district and circuit courts, Judge Brown acquired actual knowledge of the abuse of power of judges and their complicit agreement on reciprocal exoneration from complaints against them. She satisfies the standard that makes jurors suitable peers of a defendant: ‘a person with common sense reasonably becomes aware and informs herself of the circumstances affecting her and the people close to her emotionally, physically, or socially and forms an opinion of what is right or wrong”.

12. Judge Brown has breached the reporting duty under 18 U.S.C. §3057 -Title 18 contains the federal Criminal Code- on any judge “having reasonable grounds for believing [which is a standard lower than “probable cause to believe” and much lower than “evidence admissible in court ”] that any violation under chapter 9 [on bankruptcy, the classification of over 70% of all cases filed in the Federal Judiciary] of this title [18] or other laws of the United States relating to insolvent debtors, receiverships or reorganization plans has been committed, or that an investigation should be had in connection therewith [which lowers the standard below, and precedes, “having reasonable grounds for believing”].

a. “Probable cause to believe” that a person has committed the offense with which he has been charged is a standard of proof. It need not be satisfied to warrant investigating a person. Before any investigation, it may be satisfied by the facts known up to then, e.g., those surrounding the person’s detention. That explains why it can be applied before conducting discovery. In criminal cases, district attorneys may invoke it to justify the indictment that they present to the arraignment judge. The latter may reject the not guilty plea of the defendant and rely on probable cause to commit him to jail with or without bail. If the defendant cannot post the bail set, he is committed to jail until he can or the case is finally disposed of.

b. Neither willful blindness nor willful ignorance(jur:88§§a-c) prevents knowledge of such breach from being imputed to judges or their clerks.

13. Likewise, Judge Brown has breached her ethical reporting duties under the Code of Conduct for U.S. Judges, Canon 3(B)(6)).

a. Judges have legal and ethical duties to report other judges’ breach of their duties and “improprieties and even the appearance of improprieties”(id., Canon 2).

14. Judges must not perform such reporting pro forma, but rather must pursue it in good faith by exercising due diligence until the reporting achieves its intended purpose of safeguarding their own integrity and that of judicial process, lest the judges end up inured to the commission or cover-up of the breach, condoning it, and becoming chargeable with misprision of felony(18 U.S.C. §4).

15. It follows that by Judge Brown not reporting judges’ abusive self-exoneration from complaints, she has covered it up. Thereby she has contributed to judges’ committing with impunity the abuse underlying the complaints. In fact, she has aggravated their abuse, for people who commit one type of abuse without suffering any adverse consequences are, far from deterred, encouraged by risklessness and the lure of more gains and convenience to grab them by committing ever more types.

a. For both her, as accessory after the last abuse that she knew about but covered up and as accessory before the next abuse that the principals committed in reliance on that cover-up precedent of hers, applying the law, never mind doing so fairly and impartially, has become only an afterthought…’so long as it does not keep me from grabbing ever more or making me run the risk of being treated as a traitor to “my brothers and sisters in the robe”.

b. That is how Judge Rodney Gilstrap broke the law by deciding 138 cases in which he had a financial interest and the judges that heard him brag about it covered him by failing to report him(supra, paragraph 10).

D. The opportunity for journalists and the politicians

1. Conducting journalistic and and calling for congressional investigations

16. Journalists in their investigation and the senators in their written questions before the hearing and their oral ones at the hearing can ask that historic question asked of every witness by Senator Howard Baker, a cochairman of the Senate committee holding hearings on the break-in at the Democratic National Committee at the Watergate building in Washington, DC, on June 17, 1972, by Republican operatives engaged in political espionage in favor of the campaign for the reelection of President Nixon: “What did the President know and when did he know it?”

a. The answers to that question led to the resignation of President Nixon on August 8, 1974, and the incarceration of all his aides.

17. Journalists and politicians can reformulate that question to determine whether J. Brown and A.G. Garland have shown willful ignorance and blindness, bias toward her peers, and culpable l indif­ ference(jur:88§§a­c) toward parties and the rest of the public in disregard of their oath of office(28 U.S.C. §453) that disqualify them from remaining on the bench or at the Justice Department:

a. What did J. Brown and Then-Judge Garland know and when did they know about judges’:

1) implicit or explicit agreement for reciprocal exoneration from complaints against judges, including Then-Judge, Now-Justice Brett Kavanaugh;

2) breaking the law by failing to recuse themselves from cases in which they had a financial interest;

3) bragging in court and out of court, e.g., at the suite of the organizer of a judicial seminar, a country club, restaurants, about the gains and convenience that they had grabbed by breaking the law that way and any other way;

4) concealing assets, evading taxes, money laundering, and filing misleading and false mandatory annual financial disclosure reports under the Ethics in Government Act of 1978(Appendix to 5 U.S.C.) with the all-judge Financial Disclosure Committee of the Judicial Conference(28 U.S.C. §331) in reliance on the Committee examining them only pro forma with the approval of their appointer, none other than the Chief Justice.

18. Many other questions are suggested throughout my three-volume study*†♣ of judges and their judiciaries, the product of my professional law research and writing, and strategic thinking. The study is titled and downloadable thus

Exposing Judges’ Unaccountability and
Consequent Riskless Abuse of Power:
Pioneering the news and publishing field of
judicial unaccountability reporting*†♣

i. Open the downloaded files using Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available for free.

a) Some of my law articles included in that study are also posted to my website Judicial Discipline Reform at http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org.

b) My articles analyze current events and propose concrete, reasonable, and feasible actions that webvisitors can take in their own interest.

c) Those articles have attracted so many visitors and elicited in them such a positive reaction that the number of those who had become subscribers as of April 23, 2022, was 43,835+(Appendix 3).

d) How many law firms, let alone lawyers, do you know who have a website with so many subscribers?

e) You too can subscribe: go to the website <left panel ↓Register;    or    + New  or  Users  >Add New;  or fill out the New User form at https://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/wp-admin/user-new.php .

19. Those questions can be supplemented by one that can have far reaching implications by exposing the politicians-judges’ appointer-appointee connivance as well as for the first time breaking open a window into the complicity of the clerks of the U.S.’s most secretive entity: the Federal Judiciary.

a. What did President Biden know through the secret FBI report vetting Judge Brown and Then-Judge Garland for embarrassing or disqualifying actions and when did he know it?

b. Cf. Justice Thomas’s wife, Virginia “Ginni” Thomas, was exposed by  CBS Newson March 25, 2022, as working with Trump’s chief of staff Mark Meadows, with whom she exchanged 29 emails, and members of Congress to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election and make Trump the president. Justice Thomas was the only justice who voted to allow Trump to keep secret documents sought from him in the official investigation of the House Committee on the January 6 insurrection. One can think of the situation where Justice Thomas screams at his peers what all judges have etched on their forefronts: ‘If you let them take me [or my wife] down, I’ll bring you with me!‘  If so, the domino effect of his retaliatory revelations can cause one or more judges and justices to topple others until the Judiciary crumbles from the inside.

c.i. Cf. The Judiciary’s highest policy-making body, i.e., the Judicial Conference of the U.S., whose presiding officer is the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court,  adopted rules at its March 2022 meeting for:

1) the automatic release of judges’ annual mandatory financial disclosure reports and the screening of conflicts;

2) the certification by judges twice a year of a statement that they do not have conflict of interests, whether financial or otherwise; and

3) the expansion of the lifestreaming audio of proceedings.

c.ii. The wealth of information that may be available for comparison with what judges have reported for the past seven years can prove devastating to the Judiciary, the most secretive branch, the one that holds all its adjudicative, policy–making, administrative, and disciplinary meetings behind closed doors.

a. The Judiciary’s closed doors can be pried open by another source of invaluable information: the justices’ and judges’ current and former law clerks as well as court clerks. Some are disgusted, as are even some judges, by the abuse that is committed in the secrecy of chambers and other venues(OL3:1405§2). They signed up to become Workers of Justice but have been degraded to executors of abuse. Approached discreetly, they can be cultivated as confidential informants. They can become historic figures, as is Deep Throat of Watergate fame(jur106§C).

2. Investigative requests concerning the President, Attorney General M. Garland, and the House of Representatives

20. Journalists, politicians, and the rest of the national public should:

a. demand that President Biden release the FBI report on Judge Brown as well as the reports on all the other judges and justices. That is necessary to establish what presidents and the senators who shepherded judicial nominees through the confirmation process(OL:194§E) knew about them and when they knew it. We the People, the Masters of all public servants, including judicial public servants, are entitled to those reports to be able to hold our servants accountable and liable to compensate the victims of their abuse of power.

21. They should invoke Article III, Section 1, of the Constitution, which provides that:

“The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services, a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.”

a. to argue that the 131 judges who broke the law and others similarly situated have given probable cause to believe that they have not maintained the “good Behaviour” required to “hold their Offices” so that their “Continuance in Office” must be suspended, and they must without “Compensation” be removed from their current cases and not assigned new ones until an investigation, e.g., into their financial reports for false and misleading disclosures, and their relations to other people for any bragging about, or admission of, their grabbing gains and convenience, either clears them or determines that they should permanently not be allowed to “hold their Offices”.

22. They should demand that Attorney General judge Garland recuse himself publicly from any participation in the official investigation by the FBI and the Department of Justice of his former fellow judges and their clerks.

23. They should also petition the House of Representatives to form a committee, to the fullest extent endowed with discovery powers, such as of subpoena, contempt, and search and seizure, to investigate judges’ failure to maintain “good Behaviour” by engaging in a many forms of abuse, such as their:

a. dismissal of 100% of complaints and denial of 100% of petitions to review those dismissals. That is how they cover-up of the abuse of power underlying the complaints;

b. disposition of the majority of cases without ever reading their briefs. Each brief costs $1Ks and even $10Ks to produce through discovery, field investigation, witness-locating, transcription of depositions, printing, copying, binding, serving, filing, arguing orally, etc., and entails compensable waste, breach of contract for judicial service, false advertisement, fraud on the party and the public, etc.

1) such failure can be demonstrated mathematically by dividing the annual number of cases, motions, and applications, by the number of judges in the court, of judges on each panel, of panels in the court, and of working days. The number of daily dispositions will make it apparent that it was materially impossible for the judges to have had time to read the respective briefs, decisions, record, laws, rules, regulations, treatises, journals, field specific and background information, etc., never mind research, draft, deliberate, rewrite,  etc. Note that their time for dispositions was diminished by their non–adjudicative activities, e.g., administrative, policy–making, disciplinary, bar–admitting, guest–receiving activities;

2) yet, more than 93% of appeals to the federal courts of appeals are disposed of in “procedural [e.g., the catchall, expedient ground of “lack of jurisdiction”], unsigned, unpublished, without comment, and by consolidation [throwing together a bunch of cases for disposition in one fell swoop]” decisions issued by caseload-lightening clerks rubberstamping the signature of the clerk of court on a reasonless, non-precedential, ad-hoc, arbitrary fiats contained in a 5¢ in-the-wastebasket-dumping form!(OL2:457§D); and

c. interception of people’s emails and mail to detect and suppress those of their critics. That constitutes a deprivation of the rights most cherished by We the People, namely, those guaranteed under the 1st Amendment to  the Constitution to “freedom of speech, of the press, the right of the people peaceably to assemble [through the Internet and on social media too], and to petition the Government [of which judges are the third branch] for a redress of grievance [by paying compensation].

24. Informing the national public about how the above questions, investigations, and similar ones are warranted by judges’ abuse of power and their official court statistics can so outrage the public as to force Judge Brown to withdraw her name from the justice nomination and resign. That expectation is reasonable on the strength of its precedent: Public outrage at Supreme Court Justice Abe Fortas’s ‘improprieties’, which were not criminal, not even civil offenses, forced him to withdraw his name from the nomination to chief justice and thereafter resign on May 14, 1969(jur:92§d).

25. In fact, an informed public’s outrage can be so intense as to stir up the public to demand that politicians running in the primaries and their supporters:

a. address the issue of judges’ unaccountability and riskless abuse of their unequaled power at every interview, rally, townhall meeting, and in their electoral programs;

b. call for official investigations by the House and the FBI and DoJ;

c. support the abusees’ collective demand for compensation; and

d. reform the system of justice so that judges and their judiciary are held as accountable and liable as they have held pedophilic clergy and their churches because nobody is entitled to arrogate to themselves unequal protection from the law.

3. Asking for copies of complaints and stories of abuse by judges

26. In the same vein, journalists and politicians can ask people to send them a copy of the complaints that they have filed in court or with judicial performance review commissions as well as their stories of judges’ many forms of abuse of power that they have suffered or witnessed.

a. They can invite people to apply the two-phase method for writing in up to 500 words stories that are accurate, significant, and verifiable. Their analysis of those complaints and stories will enable them to detect the most probative type of evidence: patterns of abuse and schemes that can only be the product of coordination among wrongdoers, thus acting knowingly and intentionally;

b. Such analysis will also enrich the existing list of abundant leads(OL:194§E) for launching a generalized media investigation into judges’ and justices’ abuse of power and their cover-up.

27. People can send their story to the following two blocs of email addresses of top journalists -many of whom in their articles and reportage(OL3:1452§1) have already exposed judges’ abuse of power- and professors:

To: [journalists]
[email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],

cc: [professors]
[email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],

4. Holding unprecedented citizens hearings and a conference and forming local chapters of a national movement for transformative judicial reform

28. By writing their story, people can take their first step toward attaining one of their most compelling objectives in their quest for justice: telling it orally to the national public. That is the second step, which they can take at the proposed unprecedented citizens hearings. They are to be organized by journalists and politicians joining forces with professors and students at schools of journalism, law, business, Information Technology, and social sciences; and held at media stations, university auditoriums, and via video conference so that the largest number of people everywhere can attend and testify inexpensively and with minimal disruption to their daily routine.

a. The report on the citizens hearings can be presented at the first-ever conference on judicial unaccountability and abuse of power, broadcast nationally and internationally multimedia and interactively.

b. Only after a thorough investigation and presentation of the nature, extent, and gravity of judges’ unaccountable and abusive exercise of power can there be a discussion of measures to prohibit, prevent, detect, and punish their abuse.

29. Journalists and politicians can also work together to facilitate the formation by people who have cases before the same abusive judge or in the same court of local chapters. Their purpose will be to collectively demand compensation for abusees from judges and their judiciaries.

a. The local chapters are intended to coalesce eventually into a national movement for judicial abuse of power exposure, compensation, and reform.

30. That is how the unprecedented citizens hearings and the conference will open the way for reforming the system of justice through transformative change: the system that enters the process of change will come out transformed into a different entity because reformative measures that today are deemed unthinkable will manifest themselves as unavoidable(OL3:1372¶f) .

E. My offer of a presentation to you and your guests and a pitch of one or a series of my articles

31. The Senate confirmation hearings, the primaries, and the national MeToo!-BLM intolerance of all forms of abuse have coincided to turn the present time into the most propitious to make progress in judicial abuse exposure, compensation, and reform. By taking the above-mentioned and similar concrete, reasonable, and feasible actions that I have proposed, you can advance your own commercial and reputational interests: “Scandal sells” and you can become nationally recognized by a grateful We the People as their Champion of Justice.

32. I offer to present these actions to you and your guests via video conference or in person. To schedule the presentation use my contact information below.

33. To invite people to attend the presentation and send you their complaints and stories you can as widely as possible share this article with all your friends, relatives, workmates, etc., and post it to social media, such as:

Facebook,   YouTube,   LinkedIn,   Instagram,   Google Plus,   Pinterest,   Reddit,   Snapchat,   WhatsApp

Tweet: Tell journalists and politicians your story of judges’ abuse of power to participate in unprecedented citizens hearings and demand compensation and reform; http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_your_story_for_media&citizens_hearings.pdf

34.  Therefore, this pitch can advance your commercial and reputational interests just as it can mine if you publish this or a series of my articles. I have written scores of them and made them available for download and review(OL3:App6§A). In addition, there is a long list of subjects(id., §B) that I have already treated in my study of judges and their judiciaries(paragraph 17.a.5 supra). Of course, I can write on commission, whether articles, briefs, or case evaluations. See also my urban development Offshoot Oases Project.

F. Every meaningful cause needs resources for its advancement;
none can be continued, let alone advanced, without money

35. Lip service advances nothing; but it continues to enable the abusers.
Put your money where your
outrage at abuse and
quest for justice are.

36. Support the professional law research and writing, and strategic thinking at

Judicial Discipline Reform
http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org

37. DONATE by making a deposit or an online transfer through either the Bill Pay feature of your online account or Zelle from your account

to TD Bank account # 43 92 62 52 45, routing # 260 13 673;

or Citi Bank account # 4977 59 2001, routing # 021 000 089.

Dare trigger history!…and you may enter it.

Sincerely,

Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Judicial Discipline Reform
2165 Bruckner Blvd
Bronx, New York City 10472-6506
tel. +1(718)827-9521
[email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

https://www.linkedin.com/in/dr-richard-cordero-esq-0508ba4b

NOTE: Given the interference with Dr. Cordero’s email and e-cloud storage accounts described at *>ggl:1 et seq. and †>OL2:1114§G, when emailing him, copy the above bloc of his email addresses and paste it in the To: line of your email so as to enhance the chances of your email reaching him at least at one of those addresses.
*******************************
Share this:
Share

Like this:
Loading…

FacebookTwitterEmailShare
Posted on March 24, 2022Author Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.Tags abuse of power, Attorney General, compesation, courts, Department of Justice, FBI, judges, justices, Ketanji Brown Jackson, Merrick Garland, Supreme Court, wrongdoingLeave a comment on Journalists and primarying politicians can ask: What did J. K. Brown Jackson, Justice Thomas, and Attorney General M. Garland know about judges’ abuse of power and when did they know it?
Webinar and Workshop on judges’ abuse of power; and for writing your story and promote unprecedented citizens hearings

FacebookTwitterEmailShare
WEBINAR
at the most propitious time for
exposing judges’ abuse of power, financial criminality, and cover-up:
precisely when the confirmation of a justice nominee and
top media outlets’ reports on judges’ wrongdoing
have drawn public attention to everything judicial and
primarying politicians
need to appear responsive to public outrage;
and
WORKSHOP
for learning to write in up to 500 words your story
of judges’ wrongdoing that you have suffered or witnessed,
and promoting the holding by journalists, professors, and students of
unprecedented citizens hearings
where people can tell their stories to the national public and
so inform and outrage the public as to stir it up to take action,
such as collectively demanding compensation
from judges and their judiciaries
by applying judges’ own decisions that have held
churches, universities, and sports organizations
liable for their handling of
sexually abusive priests, pastors, and officers.

By
Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Ph.D., University of Cambridge, England
M.B.A., University of Michigan Business School
D.E.A., La Sorbonne, Paris
Judicial Discipline Reform
New York City
http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org
[email protected] , [email protected] , [email protected]

As of March 10, 2022, the number of subscribers to this website, Judicial Discipline Reform at http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org, was 43,454 and counting. (See Appendix 3.)

You are invited to subscribe. Simply go <left panel ↓Register   or   + New   or   Users   >Add New.

The scores of articles posted here are the product of professional law research and writing, and strategic thinking.

They analyze current events and propose concrete, reasonable, and feasible actions that webvisitors can take in their own interest in:

exposing judicial abuse of power and financial criminality;
collectively demanding compensation; and
setting in motion reform of the justice system ‒as opposed to only the Supreme Court, the narrow target of the Biden Commission‒ through transformative change, i.e., what goes into the process of change comes out transformed into a different entity.
Hence, the articles, far from being entries for a law debating society, have a pragmatic purpose for journalists and their audience, lawyers and their clients, and pro ses. You will benefit from reading them.

The articles are supported by the three-volume study of judges and their judiciaries, titled and downloadable thus:

Exposing Judges’ Unaccountability and
Consequent Riskless Abuse of Power:
Pioneering the news and publishing field of
judicial unaccountability reporting* † ♣

Open the downloaded files using Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available for free.

Volume 1: http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf >all prefixes:page# up to prefix OL:page393
† Volume 2: http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates2.pdf >from page OL2:394-1143

♣ Volume 3: http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL3/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates3.pdf >from OL3:1144-1455+

SLIDES
for

The Webinar
on exposing judges’ unaccountability and
consequent riskless abuse of power and financial criminality

and

The Workshop
on writing in up to 500 words your story of abuse by judges
and prepare to tell it to the national public at
unprecedented citizens hearings;
see hereunder a detailed description of
the two-phase method for writing your story
presented by
Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.,
of
Judicial Discipline Reform
http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org

A. The Webinar
Abuse of power by judges on their turf: their courts
a. Government officials, who appoint judges, will not expose their appointees

b. Attorney General Judge Merrick Garland will not expose other judges

c. expository reports in The Wall Street Journal, Thomson Reuters, Boston Globe, International Consortium of Investigative Journalists, ABC, NBC, The Center for Public Integrity, and The Washington Post.

Out-of-court inform and outrage strategy for exposing judges’ abuse
a. Using your stories to persuade journalists and students and professors

1) they are numerous and have expertise, means, and sources

2) can audit many stories and detect patterns of coordinated abuse

3) can inform the national public of their findings and outrage it

Outraging the national public before the primaries of the mid-term elections
a. hold unprecedented citizens hearings at media stations & universities

b. help organize local chapters for collectively demanding compensation♦

1) apply decisions holding Catholic Church liable for pedophilic priests

Outraged public turning judges’ abuse and criminality into key electoral issue
a. principled and opportunistic politicians pay attention to voters’ concerns

b. politicians can use subpoena and contempt power to investigate judges

B. The story-writing Workshop
5. Two-phase method for writing your story of abuse by judges

a. in up to 500 words

b. a story that is accurate, significant, and verifiable

Phase 1: creative, allows the free flow of dots of information, such as:
a. dots of What!? Who? Where? When? How? Why? What now?

1) names of people and entities: titles and relationships

2) events: eviction, belongings removed, auction announced & held

3) property: location; and before and now ownership and value

4) documents: titles, docket numbers, citations to laws and rules

5) terms, concepts, phrases, causes of action, claims

6) dates: deadlines, statute of limitations, payments, filing, trial

b. start organizing the dots chronologically; ask “then what?”

c. connect the dots by jotting words or phrases describing or explaining

Phase 2: critical, requires checking dots, grammar, logical flow of story
Send your story using the two blocs of email addresses of:
a. the members of the Biden Commission on reforming the Supreme Court

To: [box of your email containing your story] [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],  [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],  [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],  [email protected],  [email protected],  [email protected],

b. journalists; students and professors of journalism, law, business, IT

cc: [box of your email]  [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], <[email protected]>, [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],

c. ask that they hold unprecedented citizens hearings

d. share and post Dr. Cordero’s email/article on these webinars and two-phase story writing method.

C. Advancing a common cause
1. Donating
Every meaningful cause needs resources for its advancement;
none can be continued, let alone advanced, without money.
Support the common cause of advocating honest judiciaries. That is what  Judicial Discipline Reform  has done by engaging in professional law research and writing, and strategic thinking.
That is how it has produced the webinar and
workshop, and their underlying 3-volume study of judges and their judiciaries, which is titled and downloadable thus:
Exposing Judges’ Unaccountability and
Consequent Riskless Abuse of Power:
Pioneering the news and publishing field of
judicial unaccountability reporting* † ♣

♣ Volume 3: http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL3/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates3.pdf >from OL3:1144-1397+.

Open the downloaded files using Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available for free at https://acrobat.adobe.com/us/en/acrobat/pdf-reader.html.

Donate by making a deposit or an online transfer using the Bill Pay feature of your online banking account or through Zelle to:
Citi Bank, routing # 021 000 089, account # 4977 59 2001;
TD Bank, routing # 260 13 673, account # 43 92 62 52 45

2. Investing capital to advance the common cause

There are many activities that can advance the common cause of advocating honest judiciaries by holding judges accountable for their performance and liable to compensate the victims of their abuse and financial criminality. They can be financed also by capital investment in Judicial Discipline Reform, as described in its business plan.
Among those activities are the following, which can help to:a. continue the professional law research and writing, and strategic thinking, which has produced a three-volume study of judges and their judiciaries, titled and downloadable thus:
Exposing Judges’ Unaccountability and
Consequent Riskless Abuse of Power:
Pioneering the news and publishing field of
judicial unaccountability reporting* † ♣

b. develop the website at http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org, whose articles(Appendix 6§A) have attracted countless webvisitors and elicited in them such a positive reaction that 43,448+ have become subscribers as of March 9, 2022(App.3). The website can be developed from an informational platform into:

1) a clearinghouse for complaints against judges uploaded by anybody;

2) a research center for fee-paying clients auditing judges’ decisions and searching many other writings from many sources that through computer-assisted statistical, linguistic, and literary analysis can reveal the most persuasive type of evidence: judges’ patterns, trends, and schemes of abuse of power, e.g.; their interception of people’s emails and mail to detect and suppress those of their critics; and

3) the digital portal of the multidisciplinary academic and business venture leading up to the Institute of Judicial Unaccountability Reporting and Reform Advocacy attached to a university or news network;

c. organize and embark on a tour of webinars and workshops to you and your group of guests, organizations, and students and professors at law, journalism, business, Information Technology, and social sciences schools; media outlets; etc., via video conference or, if in NY City, in person. To assess my capacity to present view my video and follow it on its slides;

d. hold together with academics, journalists, and media outlets the proposed unprecedented citizens hearings, where people will have a chance to tell the national public their stories of judges’ abuse of power and financial criminality;

e. organize the first-ever, and national, multidisciplinary and multimedia conference on judges’ abuse in connivance with politicians, who fearing their power of retaliation allow them to be unaccountable, where the report on the citizens hearings will be presented;

f. publish as a sequel to the hearings report an academics/journalists multidisciplinary Annual Report on Judicial Unaccountability and Consequent Riskless Abuse of Power, which can become the citizens’ version of what judges have fiercely and successfully opposed: an independent inspector general of the judiciary;

g. launch a generalized media investigation into judges and their judiciaries because Scandal sells & wins Pulitzer Prizes;

h. promote the formation of a national, single issue, apolitical, non-denominational civic movement for judicial abuse of power exposure, compensation of abusees, and reform through transformative change(¶77); etc.(¶48).

To explore capital investment opportunities, contact Dr. Cordero.
Dare trigger history!…and you may enter it.

Sincerely,

Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Judicial Discipline Reform
2165 Bruckner Blvd
Bronx, New York City 10472-6506
tel. +1(718)827-9521
[email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

https://www.linkedin.com/in/dr-richard-cordero-esq-0508ba4b

NOTE: Given the interference with Dr. Cordero’s email and e-cloud storage accounts described at *>ggl:1 et seq. and † >OL2:1114§G, when emailing him, copy the above bloc of his email addresses and paste it in the To: line of your email so as to enhance the chances of your email reaching him at least at one of those addresses.

THE WORKSHOP’S
TWO-PHASE METHOD FOR WRITING YOUR STORY

Using your story for demanding that
the Biden Commission on Supreme Court reform
hear your testimony at its “public meetings”; and
asking universities and the media,
such as the news agencies The Wall Street Journal, Thomson Reuters, The Boston Globe, International Consortium of Investigative Journalists,
The Washington Post, TIME, The New Yorker, Propublica, and
The New York Times,
to let the national public hear your story by holding the proposed
unprecedented citizens hearings
http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_method_for_writing_your_story.pdf

By

Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Ph.D., University of Cambridge, England
M.B.A., University of Michigan Business School
D.E.A., La Sorbonne, Paris
Judicial Discipline Reform
New York City
http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org
[email protected] , [email protected] , [email protected]

A. Telling your story at the most opportune time: when people want to hear it
This article lays out a two-phase method for you to write in up to 500 words the story of the abuse of power by judges and guardians that you have suffered or witnessed.
Your effort in writing your story will pay off, for you will be doing so at the most opportune time: when the public, journalists, universities, and even many politicians want to hear about those stories in the context of what will soon dominate the national debate: the Commission nominated by President Biden on April 9, 2021, to study ways of reforming the Supreme Court; and the desire attributed to him and his party “to pack the Supreme Court”, that is, to increase the number of justices from 9 to 15 and reduce their life-appointment to a term of years.
B. Composing an informative and brief story to be read, heard, and investigated
You want to tell the national public your story of judges’ abuse of power and make the public share your outrage at it. You also want your story to be investigated by journalists.
But nobody is going to read the scores, never mind hundreds, of pages generated by your case in court to figure out what your story is all about.
Moreover, at a hearing you will have only 5 minutes to tell your story…a rambling account will not hold the attention of the audience even that long.
In addition, journalists will not investigate a story that is confusing and missing key pieces of information so that it fails to pique their curiosity and makes them feel that it would not interest their own audience.
Therefore, you will benefit from applying the method set forth below for writing an informative and brief story. You will use it to rehearse your oral delivery of it at a hearing.
C. Not a professionally written story, but written after doing your homework
Research your own documents and cite them so that your story is accurate and verifiable.
Write a story that is significant to the audience: You are not writing a diary for your private reading. You are writing a story to be read by others, your audience. Organize it chronologically so that it can be easily followed by people who are totally unfamiliar with you and it.
Highlight the most outrageous events and avoid getting bogged down in details unimportant to the story even if they are important to you. After reading it, your audience should be able to exclaim: ‘The judge in this story did A, B, and C. How outrageous!”
Edit your writing to make it as grammatically correct as you can so that the audience’s attention is concentrated on your story without grammatical mistakes distracting it and reflecting poorly on your degree of education and attention to detail.
Your objectives are clear: Your accurate and verifiable story earns you the respect and trust of your audience. Its significance to them earns you their gratitude. All this may makes you attain your most important objective: your audience’s action in support of your cause.
Your audience’s support will be more likely and stronger if you apply to the writing of your story a principle of strategic thinking: “People never listen so attentively and react so positively as when they listen to avoid harm to themselves and their loved ones.”
Make your audience feel that the abuse by judges that you suffered or witnessed can happen to them too. They can fall prey to the abusers. “No! That is unacceptable. That is outrageous! I must support this victim to end this abuse before it gets me!”
D. You need intermediaries to bring your story to the national public
That must be the reaction of your ultimate audience: the national public. Only that public, informed about, and outraged at, judges’ unaccountability and riskless abuse of power, can force the reform not only of the Supreme Court, but also the lower federal court and even the state courts. Your story alone will not attain that objective, but it must contribute to attaining it.
To tell your story to the national public you need the Biden Commission as well as journalists and universities to become interested in it and let you use their means for publicizing it.
So, it is shortsighted and counterproductive to disparage the media. They are not your enemies. They are your loudspeakers. They do not form a monolithic entity. There are thousands of media outlets and tens of thousands of journalists. Not all of them have the same point of view, means, or standing: The New York Times and The Washington Post do not behave the same way as a new outfit with a handful of journalists trying to breakthrough in the world of digital investigations.
Yet, they share a common interest: their commercial and reputational advancement. In addition, they can pick and choose among the scores of millions of people who have been abused by judges. You need journalists more than they need you. Treat all of them with respect. That is required by ethical considerations, professional standards, and strategic thinking.
E. Advice on story writing tested and applied successfully
I have applied the advice given here to produce my three-volume study of judges and their judiciaries. The study rests on professional law research and writing, and strategic thinking. It is titled and downloadable thus:
Exposing Judges’ Unaccountability and
Consequent Riskless Abuse of Power:
Pioneering the news and publishing field of
judicial unaccountability and abuse reporting* † ♣

♣ Volume 3: http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL3/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates3.pdf >from OL3:1144-1397+ (This article is at OL3:1329.)

This article is also posted to my website Judicial Discipline Reform at http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org. It and similar ones have attracted so many webvisitors and the latter have reacted to them so positively that 43,448+ have become subscribers to it as of March 9, 2022(Appendix 3).
How many law firms, never mind lawyers, do you know who have a website with so many subscribers?
You can join the subscribers thus: go to http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org <left panel ↓Register or + New   or   Users   >Add New.
F. The two-phase writing method
1. In phase one, use your unrestrained creative spirit to draft your story
In the end you want to produce a story that flows smoothly into your audience’s mind and that is accurate, significant, and verifiable. But at the beginning, there is the big bang of story creation: The story bursts out of your mind chaotically onto a computer page (or paper). Anything makes its way out. Nothing is subjected to critical thought controls. If it pops up, jot it down.
Sit at your computer and write on a word processing page whatever word, term, or phrase identifies a person, event, place, document, thing, idea, concept, etc., apparently associated with your story. They are your story’s informational dots. Each opens a crack in your mind and lets other escape.
You are not yet trying to write grammatically correct and complete sentences. You only want to get started telling your story. Blurt anything and everything onto the page.
Let your stream of consciousness bubble out unrestrained by your thinking mind so that it sprinkles dots of your story all over the page. As related words, terms, and phrases flow out of your mind, keep adding them to or between the other dots on the page.
Widen and multiply the cracks in your mind by asking yourself about your story the journalists’ W-questions: What!? Who? Where? When? How? Why? What now?
Keep asking of every word, term, phrase, and sentence concerning an event: “then what happened?…and then what did they say?…and then what did I do?…and then…?” They are alive in your mind. They can hear and answer you. They can even ask you questions.
If informational dots or you ask questions that you cannot answer right away, only jot them down. Do not interrupt the fireworks of dots. Let it rip! Enjoy. Search for answers and evaluate their significance in phase two. Gradually questions will become more complex:
a. What was the name of the opposing party’s attorney?…and her law firm?

b. Did the judge issue an oral order from the bench or did he read one that he had written? Did he cite any law or rule?

c. Why did the judge order me to pay rent because the landlord had fixed the plumbing? I never told him; and the landlord never filed an answer! So how did the judge know? Did she confused me with another tenant? How many times has this landlord or his lawyer appeared before this judge?…Mmm. I’ll have to look into this later on.

When you have about ten informational dots, move them up and down in a rough chronological order of appearance in your story. As you do so, add to them any other words, terms, and phrases that enlarge their meaning, identify them more narrowly, or should be inserted between them.
Keep reading the dots, even aloud. Put them in a jingle, make them rhyme even if they make no sense…and they will come alive!, dancing in your mind and inviting to dance other words, terms, and phrases that are also dots. Let them jump onto the stage of your page.
Something like sentences will begin to appear. Keep ordering them chronologically and inserting more dots between them or enlarging them with details.
Painting by numbers, using stars to draw a constellation, you are connecting the dots into the sketch of a figure. It seems to be telling a story…your story! You can do this. You did it! You are telling your story!
Use a ‘balancing test’ to compare the dots’ weight of outrageousness for the story to make sense and be significant to them: the ones who do not know you or your story. Remove to another page dots that feel of ‘lighter’ significance. You are starting to recognize a hierarchy among the dots. That will help you stay within the 500-word limit. Combine the dots into rough sentences.
HOURS later you will feel that you have told your story from beginning to end. Let it sit for a day. You are not done, not even close: You only wrote your first draft. But you did!
2. In phase two, use your critical judgment to edit your story
Come back to your draft and read it through. Only thereafter start moving around and connecting the sentences in a way that will make sense to a person who does not know anything about it.
Avoid confusing your audience: Use the same word to refer to the same person, idea, event, object, etc. Double check your dates; the names of places, people, and their titles. Make sure who said what to whom. Do not trust your memory. Case and other documents. Research the law to provide citations. Journalists will check them and you must ensure that they can verify them. Be accurate.
Right now you are writing for an audience of journalists. They are knowledgeable, critical, and demanding. But they do not know anything about your story. Do not assume that they can fill in the details that you left out that are necessary for your story to make sense to them.
Try to the best of your ability to tell them a story that persuades them of the outrageousness of unaccountable judges’ riskless abuse of power. But do not be melodramatic; do not exaggerate.
Never make up details. Always make a clear distinction between facts, opinion, and impressions. Admit that you do not know what you do not know. You may be able to tell a lie as to a dot here or there. But journalists look at the whole picture and realize how false dots do not fit in. Lie-ridden mouths are not invited to tell their story. Even if you did not intend to provide false details, as when lying, but your details are incorrect for failure to check them against documents and other sources, you become an unreliable storyteller. You lose credibility. Never compromise it.
Self-editing means revising and rewriting your draft story; and correcting your grammar and the position of paragraphs, sentences, and clauses. It will take longer than drafting it: Dots were connected into a sketch. Now you are painting the sketch with the colors of accuracy, verifiability, and significance that reveal the outrageousness of the abuse of power of the judges in your story.
a. What to omit
Abstain from outbursts intended to elicit pity and appeal for commiseration. Do not appear emotionally fragile, unstable, or hypersensitive. Do not come across as a basket case.
Do not dilute your story’s significance with trivial details and petty grievances. A barrage of charges betrays incapacity to identify what is legally relevant. Do not diminish the credibility of your story with unfounded accusations, speculation, and extravagant claims. Trying to turn your experience into a nightmare does not make for a serious story; you are not scripting a horror movie.
Do not impair your story’s verifiability by making unprovable claims. Fantasy allegations make your story a fairy tale. Let independent investigators reveal what coming from a party –and as such biased toward her side of the story− sounds preposterous. Turn ‘reality that is stranger than fiction’ into a question that becomes a lead for investigative journalists:
a. Did the judge put his kids on food stamps although he earns a judges’ salary?!
b. Did he have his niece hired by the winning party to have her pay his gambling debts?
c. Does he tell his law clerks that if at the end of their clerkship when they search for a job they want him to write them a glowing letter of recommendation, which can earn them a substantial sign-up bonus from the hiring employer, they have to decide the cases assigned to him and write the decisions, which explains why the style of the decisions signed by him is so oddly different every year after the start of the new clerkship?

Also leave out anything on which honest people can reasonably hold different opinions. It falls within the judges’ wide margin of discretion. Your opinion is not entitled to more credibility than the judges’, especially since you are not a lawyer, but rather a biased party, as all parties are.
b. What to include
Focus on the judges’ violation of criminal law, which their fellow judges will not want to appear defending, lest they dirty their own image: e.g.,
a. denial of due process and equal protection of the law;
b. conflict of interests;
c. abuse of public office and confidential information for self-enrichment;
d. bribery;
e. bankruptcy fraud, concealment of assets, tax evasion, and money laundering;
f. interception of people’s mail and emails to detect and suppress those critical of judges; disregard of rules of conduct;
g. cronyism;
h. cover-up;
i. ethnic, racial, socio-economic, gender, or religious bias;
j. physical or sexual abuse;
k. arbitrariness; and
l. what offends the common sense of decency and propriety.

Provide pieces of information, e.g., names and dates, that can be treated as data: They can be scanned into a database to find the most convincing type of evidence: patterns of abuse by judges and their cronies, formed by their recurrence in the stories separately provided by different people.
Let your story sit for a day or two. Come back to it for another phase-two session. You are writing your story to tell it first to journalists; and if it passes muster, they will bring it to the national public. Eventually it will be the basis for your claim for compensation. What you say now binds you later on. Do what it takes to get your story right. It must be accurate, verifiable, and significant.
G. Title, subtitle, and theme of the story
After writing your story, you will recognize a theme running through it. Turn it into the title that expresses the nature of your story and its main takeaway.
In general, the theme of your story and that of the other witnesses is “judges’ unaccountability and consequent riskless abuse of power”. In particular, emphasize, whether in the title and certainly throughout the story, the judges’ three most outrageous acts. “If the most cannot do it, the lesser need not try.” There follow sample titles that summarize their respective story in a sentence:
How a judge failed to recuse himself
from a case where he approved the foreclosure on an apartment building, the eviction of all the tenants, and
its conversion into an office building by a development company
in which he is a shareholder

How a judge once more
declared another wealthy senior citizen incompetent and
appointed as her guardian a person to whom he regularly entrusts guardianships, who squeezed every penny from her, and
then dumped her onto the state welfare system as an indigent

How a bankruptcy judge allowed the same bankruptcy trustee
to hold yet another unannounced auction
where only one and the same bidder showed up,
bought the debtor’s assets for pennies on the dollar,
flipped the assets, and made a killing…
leaving me as the financial corpse

Bonfire of integrity at the penthouse:
Judges attending a judicial conference
boasted about how they cut corners on the law,
use parties’ information to enrich themselves and their partners, and
have clerks fudge documents; and
were overheard by
the apparently invisible waiters and waitresses serving them,
who reported them to their chief circuit judge; and
although the chief deemed their reports complaints,
she dismissed them
without the waiters and waitresses ever being interviewed as part of any investigation

H. Additional information in links embedded in text and as endnotes
It is assumed that you will email your story. Attachments to them are risky because when opened they can release a virus into the recipient’s computer. As a result, some email computers (servers) do not accept for delivery emails with attachments. Do not send them.
Instead, turn a reference to a person, event, place, document, etc., into a linking blue keyword, which holds embedded in it a ‘hidden’, not visible, link to a supporting document: Click on the keyword >in the dropdown menu click on the word Hyperlink >in the box type in the hyperlink >click enter. The keyword should turn blue indicating that it has an embedded link.
Be reasonable: do not mar your story with dozens of blue words. Use your good judgment to identify the documents whose links should be embedded. If readers need more supporting documents, they can ask you for them. Store the linked documents either on your website, DropBox, Google Plus, Academia, or any other cloud storage facility.
If need be, you may provide at the end of your story a “List of links to supporting documents”. Add a brief description of what the corresponding document deals with.
Include in the list the documents of the opposing party and the decisions of the judges in your case. Be fair. Let them ‘talk’ too. Be helpful: spare journalists and other readers the need to search for those documents, which should be at your fingertips because you received them and should have read them. Do not give the impression that you are hiding the other side of the story or that you are so self-centered and small-minded that you think your story only has one side: yours.
I. Sign and date your story
If your address, telephone number, and email address were not stated at the top of your story, state that information at the end of it. Show that you take responsibility for your story.
Moreover, your contact information will facilitate getting in touch with you to ask for any needed clarification or additional information.
Provide the date when you submit your story. That information is useful, in general, to order documents chronologically and, in particular, to establish your story’s currency, i.e., its ‘as of date’.
J. Advocates’ reciprocal revision of their stories, checklist, and chapters of story writers to demand collective compensation
Before submitting your story, share it with the Advocates of Honest Judiciaries to whom I send my articles –see the To: and cc: boxes of my emails and OL2:1140¶28–. Ask that they provide feedback on it just as you offer to do the same if they share with you their story.
A competition for the title of “Protagonist of the Worst Abuse by Judges Ever” or the attitude “My story is more importan that yours cuz it effects more people” does not improve any story. They are egocentric and wasteful of everybody’s effort, goodwill, and time.
Cooperate to identify and rephrase, eliminate, or correct what is inaccurate, insignificant, or unverifiable; ambiguous; inconsistent; contradictory; digressive; repetitive; pretentious; self-aggrandizing; defamatory; a poor word choice; trite; in bad taste; foul language, which is impermissible; misspelled; unidiomatic; wrong syntax (word order); ungrammatical; etc.
All of you can draw up a “Checklist and Evaluation Form for Stories of Abuse of Power by Judges”. It can be used when composing the proposed Annual Report on Judicial Unaccountability and Abuse of Power in America.
Reciprocal revisions will afford you the opportunity to know each other. You and others can form a chapter of Advocates who promote in turn the formation of a national, civic, single issue movement for judicial abuse of power exposure, compensation of victims, and reform.
K. Blocs of email addresses where to send your story
When you are ready to send your story, copy the bloc of email addresses below and paste it in the corresponding box of your email:
To [for the commissioners of the Biden Commission]:  [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],  [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],  [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],  [email protected],  [email protected],  [email protected],

cc [for journalists]:   [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], <[email protected]>, [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],

Post the article to social media, such as: Facebook,   Youtube,   LinkedIn,   Instagram,   Google Plus,   Pinterest,   Reddit,   Snapchat,   WhatsApp, Twitter.
Send this tweet:
Request that the Biden Commission on Supreme Court reform hold public meetings & journalists and universities hold citizens hearings where people can tell their story of judges’ abuse of power; http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_method_for_writing_your_story.pdf

Precede your story with this professional letterhead and introduction (which have 483 words and should give you an idea of the length of your story):
Your name and address,
phone number; email address

The Biden Commission on Supreme Court reform;
Investigative journalists; and
Advocates of Honest Judiciaries

Dear Commissioners, Journalists, and Advocates,

Kindly find below my story of the abuse of power by judges that I have suffered and/or witnessed.

I am sending it to support my request that you hear me and similarly situated abusees at the “public meetings” that the Commission is mandated to hold. You should allow your “meetings” and your report to inform the national public of how justices and judges behave in practice, abusing their power for their gain and convenience because they are unaccountable and their abuse is riskless.

By contrast, if you limit yourself to a mere discussion of the theory of constitutional law on the Supreme Court, you will have allowed yourselves to be manipulated as a pretext for implementing the foregone political decision to “pack the Court”.

I also request that you journalists join forces with journalism, Information Technology, and business academics to expose judicial abuse of power at the unprecedented citizens hearings proposed by Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.

At those hearings, multidisciplinary panels of journalists and academics can take the testimony of abusees. They can do so life at media stations and university auditoriums across the country as well as via video conference to make it inexpensive and convenient for them and the public to attend. This can launch a MeToo!-like trend of public accountability here and abroad.

It is overdue: In the 233 years since the creation of the Federal Judiciary in 1789, the number of federal judges impeached and removed is only 8! For comparison, the number of federal officers on the bench on September 30, 2020, was 2,341. Federal judges need not fear losing their jobs. In practice, they have turned public power entrusted to them into the power of a State above the state.

The “meetings” and the citizens hearings can expose the nature, extent, and gravity of judges’ abuse. On that factual basis, the reform can be undertaken of not only the Supreme Court, where in the October 2019-September 2020 fiscal year only “73 cases were argued and 69 were disposed of in 53 signed opinions”, but also the lower federal courts, which terminated 1,103,337(page 10) in the year to September 30, 2020.

The citizens hearings can be expanded to take the testimony of victims of state judges, who are just as outrageous in their abuse of power.

The hearings can thus lead to a reform that takes from judges the unaccountability that they have arrogated to themselves and gives back to We the People, the Masters of all public servants, what is our birthright: government by the rule of law where the People exercise their right to hold also their judicial public servants accountable for entrusted power and liable to compensate the victims of their abuse.

Therefore, I request the opportunity to be heard also at the citizens hearings.

Date and location:                                   Name:

L. My offer to present this articles
I offer to make a presentation on this article to you and your group of guests followed by a Q&A session. It can take place via video conference and, if in New York City, in person.
To ascertain the quality of my presentation, watch my video and follow it on its slides.
To schedule it and agree on its terms, use my contact information below.
M. Every meaningful cause needs resources for its advancement;
none can be continued, let alone advanced, without money
Put your money
where your outrage at abuse and
passion for justice are.

Donate

to support the professional law research and writing, and
strategic thinking of

Judicial Discipline Reform

by making a deposit or an online transfer using the Bill Pay feature of your online banking account or through Zelle to:

Citi Bank, routing # 021 000 089, account # 4977 59 2001;
TD Bank, routing # 260 13 673, account # 43 92 62 52 45

or by mailing a check to the address below.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely,

Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Judicial Discipline Reform
2165 Bruckner Blvd.
Bronx, NY 10472-6506
tel. (718)827-9521

[email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

https://www.linkedin.com/in/dr-richard-cordero-esq-0508ba4b

Dare trigger history!…and you may enter it.

NOTE: Given the interference with Dr. Cordero’s email and e-cloud storage accounts described at *>ggl:1 et seq. and †>OL2:1114§G, when emailing him, copy the above bloc of his email addresses and paste it in the To: line of your email so as to enhance the chances of your email reaching him at least at one of those addresses.

Share this:
Share

Like this:
Loading…

FacebookTwitterEmailShare
Posted on June 27, 2021Author Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.Leave a comment on Webinar and Workshop on judges’ abuse of power; and for writing your story and promote unprecedented citizens hearings
A call for journalists, media outlets, universities, and the rest of the public to join forces to tell their stories of judges’ abuse of power at UNPRECEDENTED CITIZENS HEARINGS

FacebookTwitterEmailShare
http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_citizens_hearings_outrage_compensation.pdf

By

Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Ph.D., University of Cambridge, England
M.B.A., University of Michigan Business School
D.E.A., La Sorbonne, Paris
Judicial Discipline Reform
New York City
http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org
[email protected] , [email protected] , [email protected]

A. How commissioners compromised by conflict of interests render necessary unprecedented citizens hearings
The formation by President Biden of his Commission to study ways of reforming the Supreme Court was announced on April 9, 2021 (discussed in an article hereabove and also downloadable). The biographical note on each of the 36 commissioners shows that they are former law clerks to judges and justices (herein “judges” includes “justices”, unless the context indicates otherwise), and/or current law professors.
As former law clerks, the commissioners are bound by the confidentiality agreements that they signed with the judges in order to be allowed to clerk for them. While clerking, they did whatever the judges asked them to do because that was the only way of obtaining the one thing that mattered to them more than anything else: a glowing letter of recommendation that would determine whether they could get any of the jobs for which they would apply at the end of their clerkship.
As current law professors, who are employees or officers of their respective law school, they cannot afford to expose by themselves or through the witness of third parties any illegal or unethical acts or improprieties (hereinafter referred to as abuse of power) committed by judges individually or as a class. Doing so would make the professors and their schools run the risk of becoming the target of judges’ power of retaliation.  Wielded by judges with a life-appointment, it is devastating, for it arises from both a very long memory for holding grudges and their position to judge each other, which allows them to execute their implicit or explicit mutual exoneration agreement.
It follows that the commissioners are compromised by a conflict of interests. It prevents them from doing what is indispensable for any study intended to provide the basis for reforming the Supreme Court: the findings of fact of how the justices conduct themselves in the Court and in dealing with lower court judges, as opposed to the theory of constitutional law that describes their job.
Consequently, it is all but certain that the commissioners will not hold public hearings to allow the national public to bear witness to the abuse of power by judges that they have suffered or witnessed.
The commissioners’ interest in protecting themselves and their law schools justifies the proposal for holding unprecedented citizens hearings.
a. They are supported by the findings and arguments presented in my three-volume study* † ♣ of judges and their judiciaries, the product of professional law research and writing, and strategic thinking. The study is titled and downloadable thus:

Exposing Judges’ Unaccountability
and Consequent Riskless Abuse of Power:
Pioneering the news and publishing field of
judicial unaccountability reporting* † ♣

* Volume 1: http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf >all prefixes:page# up to prefix OL:page393

† Volume 2: http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates2.pdf >from OL2:394-1143

♣ Volume 3: http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL3/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates3.pdf >from OL3:1144-latest article

i.  Open the downloaded files using Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available for free.

b. I  have also presented findings and arguments in the articles that I have written and posted to my website Judicial Discipline Reform at http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org. They have attracted so many webvisitors and the latter have reacted to them so positively that 40,242+ have become subscribers to it(Appendix3) as of November 12, 2021.

1) How many law firms, never mind lawyers, do you know who have a website with so many subscribers?

2) You can join the subscribers thus:
go to http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org <left panel ↓Register or
+ New   or   Users   >Add New.

B. Salient features of the unprecedented citizens hearings
The proposed citizens hearings are unprecedented because they will not be the traditional public hearings held in Congress or by another government entity, such as the Biden Commission.
Politicians are the very ones who after recommending, endorsing, nominating, and confirming judicial candidates to judgeships and justiceships, have connivingly protected them as ‘our men and women on the bench’ regardless of their abuse of power. Their sham hearings are pre-determined not to expose judges’ abuse and provoke their retaliation.
a. President Biden and the Democrats in the Senate nominated and confirmed, respectively, Judge Merrick Garland of the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, a former chief judge thereof, to become Attorney General. This fact provides probable cause to belief that they are committed to preventing any exposure of abuse of power by him and his fellow judges that could impair his authority and even lead to his resignation, e.g.:

b. Judge Garland abusively dismissed 100% of complaints filed under the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act of 1980(28 USC §§351-364) by anybody against any judge in his Circuit, as shown by the official statistics of his own Court submitted as a public document to Congress, as required under 28 USC §604(h)(2), in the Annual Report of the Director of the  Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts(§604(a)(3-4)), who is an appointee of the Supreme Court chief justice(§601).

c. Through such systematic dismissal of complaints and abusive abrogation in practice of that Act of Congress, Judge Garland covered up the abuse by his fellow judges complained about. He left complainants without any relief or compensation, and subjected litigants and the rest of the public to the riskless abuse of judges, thus assured of their unaccountability.

d. The chief judges of the other circuits do likewise;  their abuse is condoned by Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr. They grab gain and convenience for themselves risklessly in reliance on their tacit or implicit mutual exoneration agreement.  By so doing, they intentionally inflict injury in fact on the public, for a principle of the law of torts states that “a person is deemed to intend the reasonably expected consequences of their acts and omissions”. They ‘take with notice’ the liability resulting from their conduct…which the class of self-exonerating judges take off their shoulders.

The citizens hearings will also be unprecedented because it will not be the media that will tell the national public how judges abuse their power in fact. Instead, it will be citizens who will at the hearings tell the rest of the public how the most powerful officers in our nation have abused their power at the expense of its citizens.
To that end, the proposed unprecedented citizens hearings will be:
a. organized by journalists, media outlets, and universities;

b. conducted by panels of journalists and multidisciplinary professors and experts in Information Technology; electronic transfer of money; asset concealment; bribery involving credit and debit cards; tax evasion; off-shore tax heavens; money laundering; banking, securities, and bankruptcy fraud; white collar crimes; breach of the oath of office and the implied contractual covenant and official duty of good faith and “traditional notions of fair dealing and substantial justice”; etc.;

c. held onsite but mostly via video conference so that they do not involve expensive travel and room and board away from home;

d. transmitted to the national public live, through multimedia, and interactively so as to allow the receipt of the public’s feedback in real time; and made available on the citizens hearings website for later viewing and through podcasts;

e. focused on taking the testimony of victims of, and witnesses to, judges’ abuse of power, including current and former court/law clerks;

f. broad enough to expose the abuse committed and/or covered up by judges as well as the Supreme Court justices, whether the latter did so as lower court judges and/or are doing so as justices and circuit justices(28 USC §42) allotted to the several circuits for supervisory purposes;

g. affording the opportunity to advertise the formation of local chapters of abusees to jointly demand compensation from judges and their judiciaries for the abuse that they have committed as principals or enabled as accessories and as complicit supervisors; and

h. so outrage-provoking that the public will demand the formation of, and popular representation in, a grand jury-like commission to investigate, with subpoena, contempt, and indictment power, unaccountable judges and what they have turned into ‘their court system’: the State within a state.

C. Outrageous forms of abuse by judges that the citizens hearings will reveal
The stories told by citizens at their hearings will reveal abuse of power of such nature, extent, frequency, and gravity that it can only be the product of coordination among judges for use as their institutionalized modus operandi to run their judiciary as a racketeering enterprise.
Some forms of abuse will reveal that judges:
a. run a bankruptcy fraud scheme together with their “cronies”(*>jur:32§2) in the bankruptcy system;

b. according to none other than Sen. Elizabeth Warren, who dare reveal this form of abuse in her “I have a plan for the Federal Judiciary too”, its judges engage in ‘abusive self-enrichment‘ by failing to recuse themselves from cases in which they have a financial interest and resolving the ensuing conflict of interests in their favor to protect and/or increase the value of their interest. Sen. Warren attributes this abuse to judges’ unaccountability;

c. count a case involving a pro se –a person not represented by a lawyer– as one third of a case(>OL2:455§B) thus giving the case one third of the attention, research, and time that they normally give a case. Thereby judges deny pro ses “Equal Justice Under Law”. Nevertheless, they require pro ses to pay 100% of the cost of gathering facts through discovery, such as by deposing witnesses and consulting experts, researching the law, writing a brief,  printing, binding and filing it in court, serving it on the parties, presenting their case in court, etc.;

d. require parties to file case and motion briefs but fail to read most of them, as shown by “the math of abuse”, which entails the breach of the contract for adjudicatory services; fraud; and compensable waste;

e. dump 93% of appeals(>OL2:457§D) out of the circuit courts through orders in forms filled out by their clerks that are “on procedural grounds [mostly the one-fit-all pretext of ‘lack of jurisdiction’], unsigned, unpublished, without comment, and by consolidation;

f. intercept people’s emails and mail to detect and suppress their critics’, thus depriving We the People of our most cherished rights, namely, those guaranteed under the 1st Amendment to:

“freedom of speech, of the press, the right of the people peaceably to assemble [through the Internet and on social media too], and to petition the Government [of which judges are the third branch] for a redress of grievances [including compensation for abuse]”

g. abuse their congressionally granted self-disciplining authority to ensure their own unaccountability by dismissing 100% of complaints against them and denying 100% of petitions to review their dismissals.

D. Some economic and institutional consequences of the citizens hearings
Judges’ abuse has harmed the parties that have appeared and that are currently appearing in their courts. Their abuse provides the basis for those who have appeared before the same judge or in the same court to form local chapters to jointly demand to be compensated by judges and their judiciaries.
As things stand now, any suit for such compensation will be dismissed summarily by application of the doctrine of judicial immunity that judges have conjured up in abusive self-interest, while holding accountable and liable priests, doctors, lawyers, politicians, police officers, their institutions, and everybody else.
However, the national outrage provoked by the testimony given at the citizens hearings will provide journalists and media outlets a professional and commercial incentive to further investigate judges’ abuse; their findings will exacerbate the outrage. A self-reinforcing cycle will ensue. The issue of compensation will become one at the center of the national debate. Ever more abusees will keep pressing for a resolution favorable to them.
The citizens hearings can become an annual event for the People to monitor the performance of the judges, to whom they have entrusted public power;  and for the organizing journalists and universities to publish The Annual Report on on Judicial Unaccountability and Abuse of Power in America(*>jur:126§3).
Those hearings can shake public trust in the judiciary so profoundly as to stir up the public to demand and force the resignation of judges and justices, who depend on public trust to have their decisions respected and obeyed. Reliable precedent therefor is the resignation of:
a. Justice Abe Fortas on May 14, 1969, for ‘improprieties’ in taking income from an outside source in addition to its judicial salary and benefiting from relations with former clients;

b. Former Ninth Circuit Chief Judge Alex Kozinski on December 18, 2017, to avoid an investigation of sexual harassment assigned to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals by Chief Justice Roberts under pressure from the MeToo! outrage provoked by the publication by The New York Times and The New Yorker on October 5 and 10, 2017, respectively, of their exposés on Harvey Weinstein’s sexual predation; and

c. Circuit Judge Maryanne Trump Barry, the sister of President Donald Trump, on February 11, 2019, upon learning that she and other family members were being investigated for tax evasion in connection with a scheme to avoid inheritance tax through the use of a complex system of shell companies.

E. Citizens hearings leading to a constitutional convention, thus setting in motion transformative change that results in a new form of government
The citizens hearings can be an opportunity for their organizers, witnesses, and the national public to form physical and virtual (on the Internet) groups in the guise of Tea Party local chapters to demand the calling of a constitutional convention.
That is the kind of convention that since April 2, 2014, 34 states, constituting the two thirds of states required by the amending provisions of Article V of the Constitution, have petitioned Congress to convene.
However, the congressional leaders will never convene it because the convention is all but certain to upset the status quo and diminish the power and privilege that they have accumulated over the 232 years since the adoption of the current Constitution in 1789.
The citizens hearings can take on a life of their own: People and local chapters may coalesce into a runaway national civic movement for a new People-government relation. It can transform itself into a constitutional convention that drafts a new constitution…as can a courageous Biden Commission(§A).
Outrage and compensation are the forces that can provide the citizens hearings transformative capacity: They can turn the system of justice that went in into one that comes out as a qualitatively and functionally different system of governance. The tandem of those forces was or is lacking in the chaos of the presidential campaign;  the challenges to the electoral results; and the conflict of interests pervading the Biden Commission and predetermining its final report.
The citizens hearings can set in motion the transformation of the People/government relation that has been in place for centuries.  They can have transformative capacity because the MeToo!, Black Lives Matter, LBTG, and Asian/Pacific Islander movements, and the protests against police brutality and for socio/economic equality have made the mood of the People ripe for it. That popular mood is expressed in the common self-assertive rallying cry:
Enough is enough!
We won’t take any abuse by anybody anymore.

The transformation can consist in a new form of government where the People assert their status as the sovereign source of all political power. As Masters of all their public servants, including their judicial public servants, the People can hold them accountable for the power entrusted to them and liable to compensate the victims of their abuse of it.
The citizens hearings can expose abuse of power to have become such an integral part of judges’ and their judiciaries’ way of doing business that the outrage and demand for compensation can turn reformatory measures that today appear inconceivable into ones whose adoption becomes unavoidable. But everything begins with informing the People thereof.
F. How you can promote the holding of the citizens hearings
This proposal for holding unprecedented citizens hearings is timely. It shows strategic thinking. It can have a practical impact on exposing judges’ abuse of power…but only if it reaches people as opposed to being intercepted on its way to them or if their positive replies to it are intercepted.
Hence, it is in your own interest to distribute this article so widely and repeatedly that it has a chance of overwhelming any interception and going viral.
a. Share it with all your friends, relatives, and colleagues.

b. Post it to social media, such as:

Facebook, Youtube, WhatsApp, LinkedIn, Instagram, Google plus, Pinterest, Reddit, Snapchat, and Twitter:

Send this tweet:

Tell your story of judges’ abuse & ask for compensation at unprecedented citizens hearings; the Biden Commission on SCt reform will not let you do it; invite your audience, the People; http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_citizens_hearings_outrage_compensation.pdf

c. Organize a presentation on this article followed by a Q&A session by me to you, your colleagues, students, and other guests. It can be held via video conference and, if it is here in New York City, in person.

28.  To assess my capacity to make that presentation you may watch my video and follow it on its slides.

To set its terms and scheduling you may get in touch with me using my contact information below.
G. Every meaningful cause needs resources for its advancement; none can be continued, let alone advanced, without money
Lip service advances nothing; but it continues to enable the abusers.
31. Put your money where your outrage at abuse and passion for justice are.

DONATE

to support the professional law research and writing, and

strategic thinking

of

Judicial Discipline Reform

by making a deposit or an online transfer

through the Bill Pay feature of your online account or Zelle,

to Citi Bank, routing # 021 000 089, account # 4977 59 2001;

or TD Bank, routing # 260 13 673, account # 43 92 62 52 45

or
by mailing a check to the address below.

Dare trigger history!…and you may enter it.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely,

Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Judicial Discipline Reform
2165 Bruckner Blvd.
Bronx, NY 10472-6506
tel. (718)827-9521
[email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

https://www.linkedin.com/in/dr-richard-cordero-esq-0508ba4b

NOTE: Given the interference with Dr. Cordero’s email and e-cloud storage accounts described at *>ggl:1 et seq. and †>OL2:1114§G, when emailing him, copy the above bloc of his email addresses and paste it in the To: line of your email so as to enhance the chances of your email reaching him at least at one of those addresses.

Share this:
Share

Like this:
Loading…

FacebookTwitterEmailShare
Posted on May 25, 2021Author Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.Leave a comment on A call for journalists, media outlets, universities, and the rest of the public to join forces to tell their stories of judges’ abuse of power at UNPRECEDENTED CITIZENS HEARINGS
Have P. Biden and Attorney General Judge Garland connived to reduce the commission to reform the court system to reform only the Supreme Court so as to spare judges any investigation into their abuse of power?

FacebookTwitterEmailShare
Candidate Biden had announced the nomination of
a commission to reform the court system;
President Biden has formed a commission
only to enlarge the Supreme Court and limit justices’ terms.

Has Attorney General Judge Merrick Garland prevailed
to reduce the commission’s scope
so as to prevent any investigation into judges’ conduct,
which would have exposed
his unlawful 100% dismissal of complaints against fellow judges and
the consequent cover-up of his and their underlying abuse of power?

Exposing the connivance between
the President and the Federal Judiciary
can bring down, not just a president, but rather a branch:
an unaccountable Judiciary
risklessly running a racketeering enterprise.
Pitching a story with Pulitzer Prize potential
http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-ProPublica_&_media.pdf

By

Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Ph.D., University of Cambridge, England
M.B.A., University of Michigan Business School
D.E.A., La Sorbonne, Paris
Judicial Discipline Reform
New York City
http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org
[email protected] , [email protected] , [email protected]

Mr. Charles Ornstein, Managing Editor
Ms. Tracy Weber, Deputy Managing Editor
ProPublica
tel. (917)512-0222
[email protected]
[email protected],
https://www.propublica.org/people

Dear Mr. Ornstein and Ms. Weber, all other members of the media, and Advocates of Honest Judiciaries,

This is a story pitch.

Your experience, as described in your bionote, has drawn me to pitch the story to both of you in particular: You have investigated national entities, namely, the health care and the pharmaceutical industries. You, Mr. Ornstein, won the Pulitzer Prize for Public Service; and you, Ms. Weber, won the Pulitzer for National Reporting. Combined, you have won an impressive array of other major journalism awards.

You are a team of journalists capable of investigating the national story summarized in the above title. In the process, you can make a name for yourselves and ProPublica, and bring so much needed relief to those who individually can do nothing but continue to be the victims in the story: We the People.
A. An investigation by you that launches a generalized media investigation
1. You “produce accountability journalism on issues of importance to the community”. The issue of accountability is at the top of the public debate here and abroad. That is shown by the movements MeToo!, BLM, against police brutality, for socio-economic equality, and to protect the Asian/Pacific Islander communities.

2. Your investigation can set in motion a generalized media investigation to hold the most powerful public officers accountable, namely, federal judges. A single federal judge can declare any law unconstitutional, although debated, passed, and enacted by 535 members of Congress and a president elected by scores of millions of voters.

3. By declaring laws, and progressively the whole agenda of a party, unconstitutional, federal judges can prevent politicians, even a whole party, from delivering on their campaign promises, dooming them to appear inefficient and incompetent when running for reelection.

a. In fact, federal District Judge James Robart of Seattle, Washington State, suspended nationwide President Trump’s ban on Muslim travel and a panel of three circuit judges –although two would have sufficed– sustained the ban nationwide. Yet, candidate Trump had campaigned in 2016 on issuing that ban and received the votes of more than 62.5 million voters.

4. In addition, federal judges are the only officers to have a life-appointment and the concomitant long memory for holding grudges.

5. As a result, the politicians who recommend, endorse, nominate, and confirm them thereafter fear their devastating power of retaliation:

6. To avoid becoming their retaliatory target, politicians dare not even investigate ‘their men and women on the bench’ regardless of how illegal or unethical their conduct may appear to be. This explains how federal judges are in practice irremovable: In the last 232 years since the creation of the Federal Judiciary in 1789, the number of federal judges impeached and removed is 8!

7. Protected from any investigation and held unaccountable by politicians -and by themselves, as shown below-, federal judges grab gains and convenience(>OL2:455§§B, D) individually and as a judicial class by risklessly abusing their enormous power over people’s property, liberty, and all the rights and duties that frame their lives and shape their identity.

8. Federal judges –who set the example of allowable abuse for their state counterparts– confirm Lord Acton’s statement in his letter to Bishop Mandell Creighton of April 3, 1887:  “Power corrupts, and absolute power [whose essential element is unaccountability] corrupts absolutely”.

9. You, Mr. Ornstein and Ms. Weber, have the experience to start the investigation into federal judges’ riskless abuse of power and thereby set off a generalized media investigation that starts holding them accountable on behalf of the People
B. From a reform of the system of justice to a commission only to enlarge the Supreme Court and limit its justices’ terms

10. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia died on February 13, 2016. President Obama nominated his successor, to wit, Then-Chief Judge Merrick Garland of the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

11. The Republicans argued that the general election in November 2016 was so close that it should be left to the American voters to elect the president who would nominate a justice to a life-appointment office. On that basis, they denied Judge Garland even a hearing. Shortly after taking office, President Trump nominated and the Senate confirmed to the Supreme Court Judge Neil Gorsuch of the Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit.

12. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg died on September 18, 2020. This inevitably posed the question whether the Republicans would be consistent in applying the same principle, and all the more so since the general election of November 3, 2020, was much closer. The Republicans were not. Instead, they nominated and confirmed Then-Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court.

13. This caused the Court to tilt to the right with a decisive 6-3 Republican-leaning majority given that meanwhile President Trump had successfully nominated thereto Judge Brett Kavanaugh of the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to replace Justice Anthony Kennedy.

14. The debate ensued whether if Candidate Biden won the election, he would increase the number of Supreme Court justices –popularly known as ‘packing the Court’– so as to nominate more candidates that would ensure a Democratic-leaning majority.

15. When Candidate Biden was interviewed by CBS newsanchor Norah O’Donnell on October 22, 2020, he was asked whether he would increase the number of justices. Instead of answering that question, he emphatically announced that if he became president, he would nominate a bipartisan commission to study for 180 days, ‘not the number of justices, but rather the reform of the court system’ and report its recommendations.
C. AG Judge Garland’s conflict of interest was resolved to protect his interest in avoiding any investigation into judges
16. After Candidate Biden won the presidential election, he nominated as his attorney general precisely Judge Merrick Garland, whose 7-year term as chief judge had ended on February 11, 2020.

17. Judge Garland’s status as judge and now attorney general has given rise to an insurmountable conflict of interests. This is how it has arisen.

18. The Judicial Conduct and Disability Act of 1980 (the Act; 28 USC §§351-364) allows any person to file a complaint against a federal judge in the court of appeals of the circuit, or the national court, where the judge sits.

19. The official statistics on complaints against federal judges are collected and submitted to Congress(§604(a)(3-4)) as a public document in the Annual Report of the Director of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts. The director is appointed by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court(§601).

20. The complaint is first reviewed by the chief judge, who must not investigate it. But the chief judge can dismiss it by alleging, for example, that the complaint is not within the scope of the Act; or is “directly related to the merits of a decision or procedural ruling” or “frivolous”(§352).

21. To protect their fellow judges, chief judges systematically dismiss 100% of complaints and deny 100% of the petitions to review dismissals.

22. The significance of those statistics becomes apparent upon learning that the Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (known as RICO; 18 USC §§1961-1968) provides that two acts of racketeering committed within 10 years constitute “a pattern of racketeering activity”(§1961(5)). A defendant convicted of having engaged in such a pattern can be imprisoned for 20 years and, depending on the offense, for life.

23. The 100% complaint dismissal and petition denial is a pattern and far much more: It is a policy. As such, it can reasonably be presumed to have been explicitly coordinated among federal judges, including the Supreme Court justices. It is their institutionalized modus operandi.

24. Judges implement that policy by abusing their power to ensure their unaccountability. They do it at the expense of complainants, whom they knowingly deprive of any relief from, or compensation for, the abusive conduct complained about. Federal judges conspire to deprive We the People of the due process right to “equal protection of the law” (U.S. Constitution, 14th and 5th Amendments). They arrogate to themselves the status of “Judges Can Do No Wrong Under Any Law”.

25. So, the official statistics show that P. Trump SCt nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh, P. Obama SCt nominee Chief Judge Garland, and their peers in the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit received during the 1oct06/30sep17 11-year period, 478 complaints against federal judges in their Circuit. Chief Judge Garland and his predecessor dismissed 100% of them.

26. In addition, these chief judges and their peers and colleagues in their Circuit’s judicial council (28 USC§332) denied 100% of the petitions to review those dismissals. They did so –as all other judges do– in the most perfunctory way possible: by having the clerk of court dump review petitions out of court by issuing a form whose only operative word is “denied”, with no discussion of the law or any statement of reasons or facts whatsoever. A denial as arbitrary and contemptuous as a fiat, for ‘kings need not explain; they only order’.

27. By so doing, Chief Judge Garland and his peers and colleagues arrogated to themselves the power to render that Act of Congress useless as a means of complaining against federal judges.

28. He and they have shown bias and partiality toward their fellow judges and their riskless abuse of power for their gain and convenience. Conversely and necessarily, they have shown reckless indifference to the plight of the complainants and the fate of the rest of the People, left at the mercy of unaccountable judges regardless of the nature, extent, and gravity of their abuse. Their systematic dismissal and denial is typical of what their peers and colleagues throughout the Federal Judiciary do.

29. It is obvious that if Attorney General Judge Garland allowed the investigation of complaints against judges by the commission for the reform of the court system that Candidate Biden had announced, never mind a complaint filed with the FBI or the Department of Justice Office of Professional Responsibility, he would end up investigated and incriminated for both his abuse of power in dismissing 100% of complaints against his fellow judges and denying 100% of dismissal review petitions; and covering up the abuse of power underlying the complaints.

30. Such cover-up has made Judge Garland an accessory after the abuse that he learned about but explicitly or implicitly agreed to turn a blind eye to; as well as an accessory before the abuse that the same abuser or other people committed in reliance on the expectation arising from his previous conduct that he would likewise turn a blind eye to it. Of course, he may also be covering up his own abuse as a principal, i.e. the person who actually committed the abuse or ordered its commission.

31. Moreover, his abuse of power as a principal and/or an accessory has made him vulnerable to fellow judges’ “trading up” in plea bargaining, whereby in exchange for leniency they would agree to testify to the abuse of ‘a bigger fish’ than them, that is, AG Judge Garland, or even ‘the biggest fish’, his boss, President Biden. Of this grave risk he is reminded by the menacing warning that all judges have carved on their foreheads: ‘I know about your own abuse. If you let anybody bring me down, I’ll take you with me!‘

32. These facts set the foundation for the investigative question prompted by the White House press release of April 9, 2021, “President Biden to Sign Executive Order Creating the Presidential Commission on the Supreme Court of the United States”

a. Did AG Judge Garland in connivance with President Biden scale down the commission from one to reform the court system to one dealing with only the enlargement of the Supreme Court and the limitation of justices’ terms, not because that was in the interest of justice, let alone of We the People, but rather because they wanted to protect their own interest in not being investigated and ending up at the center of a national scandal exposing federal judges as riskless grabbers of gains and convenience and the Federal Judiciary as a racketeering enterprise?
D. Public outrage’s role in energizing a generalized media investigation into judges and their judiciaries
33. Due to Covid-19, millions of people have lost their jobs or only have precarious ones and suffer every day from lack of food or food insecurity. How outraged would they become if they learned that judges, who individually earn some four times the average national household income, abuse their power to grab yet more gains and convenience?

34. Public outrage can be so intense as to lead to the resignation of one, several, or all the justices. They participated in the abuse as lower court judges and currently cover it up as circuit justices (28 USC §42) allotted with supervisory duties to the several circuits. Many chief circuit judges and fellow judges would also find the call for their resignation by an outraged People too widespread and profound to remain in office.

35. You, Mr. Ornstein and Ms. Weber, can set off such public outrage by conducting a pin-pointed and cost-efficient investigation that in turn sets in motion a generalized media investigation.
E. Leads to investigate abusive judges and their racketeering Judiciary
36. Sen. Elizabeth Warren, a politician knowledgeable about financial matters, dare denounce in her “I have a plan for the Federal Judiciary too” how federal judges fail to recuse themselves from cases in which they own stock in a company that is a party to the case before them in order to resolve the ensuing conflict of interests in their favor by protecting or increasing their stock’s value. Sen. Warren refers to such practice throughout the Federal Judiciary as judges’ abusive self-enrichment. She attributes it to their unaccountability.

a. Such self-enrichment necessarily entails their commission of the crimes of concealment of assets, tax evasion, money laundering, fraud, and breach of contract for judicial services, of public trust, and of the oath of office. But it is riskless for judges. So they become predators, always prowling for the next prey.

37. Thomson Reuters conducted a nationwide investigation into state judges and published the first of its three-part report “The Teflon Robe”, which found “hardwired judicial corruption”, on June 30, 2020.

38. Boston Globe, the main newspaper in Massachusetts and a reputable one, published on September 30, 2018, its report “Inside our secret courts”, in whose “private criminal hearings [conducted even by clerks with no law degree], who you are –and who you know– may be just as important as right and wrong”.

39. The FBI has vetted thousands of judicial candidates and produced reports on them kept secret up to now. To vet them it exercised its power of subpoena, search and seizure, and contempt, which the media lack. Its reports are bound to contain embarrassing and incriminating information about the unethical and illegal conduct in which judicial candidates engaged before taking the bench and even thereafter given that they have felt protected by their peers and colleagues, who abuse their power to cover up their fellow judges’ abuse. After all, people were acceptable as judicial candidates because they had shown that they understood how the power game is played and were playing it.

a. You can call into question President Biden’s honesty, good faith, and commitment to transparency by demanding that he release the FBI’s secret vetting reports on judicial candidates.

b. It is reasonable to expect that progressively many other journalists and media outlets will join you in such demand as they realize that they must not fail to jump on the investigative bandwagon that you have set rolling.

40. I have collected an abundance of leads to start the investigation into, generally, judges and their judiciaries(OL:194§E) and, particularly, AG Judge Garland, and Supreme Court justices.

a. I am willing and able to participate in the investigation. For proof, there is my three-volume study* † ♣ based on professional law research and writing, and strategic thinking, thus titled:

Exposing Judges’ Unaccountability and
Consequent Riskless Abuse of Power:
Pioneering the news and publishing field of
judicial unaccountability reporting* † ♣

* Volume 1: http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf >all prefixes:page# up to prefix OL:page393

† Volume 2: http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates2.pdf >from OL2:394-1143

♣ Volume 3: http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL3/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates3.pdf >from OL3:1144-latest article
i. Open the downloaded files using Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available for free.

b. Supported by that study are the articles that I have written and posted to my website Judicial Discipline Reform at http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org. They have attracted so many webvisitors and the latter have reacted to them so positively that 38,574+ [as of May 24, 2021] have become subscribers to it(Appendix 3). How many law firms, never mind lawyers, do you know who have a website with so many subscribers?

1) You can join the subscribers thus:
go to http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org <left panel ↓Register
or
+ New   or   Users   >Add New.

c. You can publish one or a series of my articles(>Appendix 6) bound to outrage parties to cases as well as the rest of the People, such as:

1) the mathematical demonstration that judges do not read the overwhelming majority of briefs. The outrage that this will provoke can lead to the formation of local chapters of parties to collectively demand that the same judge before whom they have appeared or those of the same court in which they filed their cases compensate them for the waste of money in producing their briefs –which can cost a party $1Ks and even $10Ks to produce– and for the fraud inflicted on them.

2) judges’ interception of the emails and mail of people to detect and suppress those of their critics. This can constitute one of the most outrageous abuses because it infringes on Americans’ most cherished rights, namely, those under the U.S. Constitution, First Amendment, guaranteeing their “freedom of speech, of the press, the right of the people peaceably to assemble [through the Internet and on social media too], and to petition the Government [of which judges are the third branch] for a redress of grievances [including compensation for waste and fraud]”;

3) judges’ bankruptcy fraud scheme. The gains that they grab through this scheme they must necessarily cover up. To that end, they pretend to comply with their duty to file annual financial disclosure reports under the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 (5 USC, Appendix). They do so by including false and misleading data in their reports. The latter are filed with a reviewing committee composed of other fellow judges, who are also subject to the same filing duty. Hence, the reviewers have every interest in being as indulgent with the filers as they want the filers and their friends to be eventually with them. Judges’ reports have been collected by, and are downloadable from, JudicialWatch.org.
F. Unprecedented citizens hearings for the People to reform the system of justice
41. We can join forces in promoting unprecedented citizens hearings on unaccountable judges’ riskless abuse of power. For the first time ever, hearings on a public issue will be organized by media stations and universities throughout the country.

a. These citizens hearings will afford the opportunity for victims of, and witnesses to, judges’ abuse of power to tell their story to the national public; and do so mostly through interactive video conference to reduce travel expenses; reach the largest life audience possible; and receive their feedback in real time.

b. They will have their stories taken down by, and answer the questions of, multidisciplinary panels of journalists, professors, and experts.

c. The leading panelists will draw up a report to be presented at the first-ever conference on judges’ unaccountability and abuse of power, which will be broadcast nationally and internationally.

d. The citizens hearings are intended to be the unbiased and uncompromising means of exposing judicial abuse of power; spark the formation of local chapters of victims; and impart the unstoppable momentum for We the People to reform, not only the court system, but rather the system of justice here and abroad.

G. My offer of a presentation to you and your group of colleagues

42. I offer to pitch this story to you and a group of your colleagues at a presentation via video conference or, if here in New York City, in person.

43. To assess my capacity to make such presentation, watch my video and follow it on its slides.

44. To set its terms and schedule it you may use my contact information below

45. To consult with others on this pitch and/or interest potential guests in attending my presentation you may widely share this article and post it to social media, such as:
Facebook
Youtube
WhatsApp
LinkedIn
Instagram
Google plus
Pinterest
Reddit
Snapchat
Twitter: Did P Biden drop his announced commission to reform the court system, limiting it to the Supreme Court, at the urging of AG Judge Garland trying to prevent any investigation into himself & fellow judges; http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-ProPublica_&_media.pdf
H. Every meaningful cause needs resources for its advancement; none can be continued, let alone advanced, without money
Put your money
where your outrage at abuse and
passion for justice are.

DONATE
to
Judicial Discipline Reform

by making a deposit or an online transfer to Citi Bank,
routing number 021 000 089, account 4977 59 2001

through Paypal
https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=HBFP5252TB5YJ

or by mailing a check to the address below.

Dare trigger history!…and you may enter it.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely,
Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Judicial Discipline Reform
2165 Bruckner Blvd.
Bronx, NY 10472-6506
tel. (718)827-9521
[email protected] , [email protected] , [email protected]

https://www.linkedin.com/in/dr-richard-cordero-esq-0508ba4b

NOTE: Given the interference with Dr. Cordero’s email and e-cloud storage accounts described at *>ggl:1 et seq. and †>OL2:1114§G, when emailing him, copy the above bloc of his email addresses and paste it in the To: line of your email so as to enhance the chances of your email reaching him at least at one of those addresses.
**********************************
Share this:
Share

Like this:
Loading…

FacebookTwitterEmailShare
Posted on May 24, 2021Author Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.Leave a comment on Have P. Biden and Attorney General Judge Garland connived to reduce the commission to reform the court system to reform only the Supreme Court so as to spare judges any investigation into their abuse of power?
Will Associated Press and/or any other journalists and media outlets dare expose judges’ criminality, rendered riskless by their abusive 100% dismissal of complaints against them?

FacebookTwitterEmailShare
http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-JudgeRPratt.pdf

By

Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Ph.D., University of Cambridge, England
M.B.A., University of Michigan Business School
D.E.A., La Sorbonne, Paris
Judicial Discipline Reform
New York City
http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org
[email protected] , [email protected] , [email protected]

U.S. Senior District Judge Robert W. Pratt
U.S. District for the Southern District of Iowa
123 East Walnut Street, Suite 300
Des Moines, IA 50309
https://www.iasd.uscourts.gov/content/senior-district-judge-robert-w-pratt
https://www.iasd.uscourts.gov/contact

Mr. Michael Messina
Judicial Assistant
tel. (515)284-6254
[Human Resources: 515-284-6392]

Mr. Ryan Foley, reporter; and
Mr. Ron Nixon, international investigations editor
Associated Press
tel. +1(202) 281-8604; +1(202) 641-9000
https://www.ap.org/contact-us/contact-newsroom
[email protected]

All other journalists and media outlets

Dear Judge Pratt, Mr. Foley, Mr. Messina, Mr. Nixon, journalists, media outlets, and Advocates of Honest Judiciaries,

You, Judge Pratt, made your views on the pardons granted by President Trump in December 2020 known to Associated Press (AP) reporter Ryan J. Foley, who wrote the article referring to you and titled “Federal judge in Iowa ridicules Trump’s pardons”, published on December 30.
2. AP reporter Foley explained that “Pratt made the remarks when asked for comment on pardons granted to two former top aides for Ron Paul’s 2012 presidential campaign, who were convicted in a corruption scheme related to the Iowa caucuses”.

3. AP Foley quoted you as saying, “It’s not surprising that a criminal like Trump pardons other criminals”.

4. This is an appeal for you to be consistent and honest by applying to yourself and your fellow judges that very same principle to expose judges’ pardons of each other. Doing that requires more integrity and therefore is riskier than being flippant in ‘ridiculing Trump’s pardons’. However, you can do that on the solid basis of the facts discussed hereunder, which are known to you given that you have dealt as an insider of the judicial class for the more than your 20 years on the bench.

5. By exposing judges’ reciprocal pardons, you can set off in the administration of justice, not only by the Federal Judiciary, but also by its state counterparts, transformative change: what goes into the process of change comes out transformed into a different system of justice, one where judges are held accountable for their conduct and liable to compensate their victims.

6. If you can muster the necessary consistency, honesty, and integrity, you can exit the judiciary into retirement, not as yet another judge among thousands. Rather, you can bring down, not merely a top official and all his aides, as occurred in the Watergate scandal, which forced President Nixon to resign and sent all his White House men to prison in 1974, but a whole branch of government that judges, rendered unaccountable through reciprocal pardons, risklessly run, as shown below, as a criminal enterprise.

7. That is how instead of ridicule as a hypocrite, you can earn praise as the main character of the bestseller and protagonist of the blockbuster movie/documentary ‘All the judges’ exposer’.

A. Federal judges pardon each other by dismissing 100% of complaints against them
8. The Annual Report of the Director of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts (AO; 28 USCode §§601-613; here with bookmarks added to facilitate navigation) is submitted to Congress and made available to the public (§604(a)(3, 4)), e.g., on AO’s website. The Director is appointed by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and can be removed by him and the other members of the Judicial Conference of the U.S., which includes, among others, all the chief judges of the 13 federal circuits and two national courts (§331). They are imputed with knowledge and approval of the Annual Report.

9. The 2019 Report is the latest version available, covering the fiscal year October 1, 2018-September 30, 2019. If the norm holds, the 2020 Report will be published in March 2021.

10. The Report contains the official statistics of the U.S. courts, titled Judicial Business [year]; e.g., Judicial Business 2019.

11. Some of AO’s official statistics (§604(h)(2)) deal with the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act of 1980, (the Act; §§351-364).

12. The Act entrusts federal judges with the exclusive authority to self-discipline. This means that any complaint against a federal judge must be filed with the respective chief judge, whose decision is reviewable only by the circuit’s judicial council, composed of the chief and circuit and district judges. They are not independent and unbiased. By definition, the chief judges and the judges on the judicial councils are the peers, colleagues, and friends of the complained-against judges.

13. In fact, their own official statistics contained in the Annual Report show that federal judges abuse their self-disciplining authority year after year by dismissing 100% of complaints against their fellow judges and denying 100% of petitions to review those dismissals.

14. These are the pardons that federal judges grant each other. They are not only the product of unprincipled friendship or of the gang mentality(>OL2:569¶¶13-16) that causes judges to conceive of themselves as ‘we against, and regardless of, the rest of the world’. These pardons are the means by which judges bribe and extort each other: ‘Today I pardon you and tomorrow you do likewise by dismissing any complaint against me or my friends…or else!’

B. Federal judges pardon each other preemptively, sparing each other any conviction

15. When judges pardon their fellow judges by dismissing 100% of the complaints against them, their effect is as that when “a criminal like Trump pardons other criminals”. However, the nature of their pardons is significantly more harmful to the administration of justice, for it entails evading its administration:

16. When Trump pardons anybody, there has already been a conviction. The pardonee underwent an adversarial confrontation with The People, represented by the prosecutor, in open court before, in most cases, a jury acceptable to the prosecutor too. This in turn occurs only after discovery of evidence, whose production the prosecutor has power of subpoena, search and seizure, and contempt to compel. And this takes place after the defendant receives a complaint to which he must answer by filing a response as a public document, which he must serve on the prosecutor.

17. That is essentially the same procedure followed in a civil case, which is started by the plaintiff filing a complaint and serving it on the defendant, who must also answer her through a written response; both are public documents. The plaintiff has the right to obtain discovery by compelling the production of evidence. At trial, she can call the defendant and cross-examine witnesses

18. By contrast, judges pardon each other before there was ever a conviction because they simply dismiss the complaint and do not allow the complainant any discovery. Worse yet, the complaint is not made public by the chief judge who receives it, who need not transmit it to the complained-against judge at all. This is what the Act provides:

§352. Review of complaint by chief judge

(a) EXPEDITIOUS REVIEW; LIMITED INQUIRY.—The chief judge shall expeditiously review any complaint received under section 351(a) or identified under section 351(b). In determining what action to take, the chief judge may conduct a limited inquiry for the purpose of determining—

(1) whether appropriate corrective action has been or can be taken without the necessity for a formal investigation; and

(2) whether the facts stated in the complaint are either plainly untrue or are incapable of being established through investigation.

19. For this purpose, the chief judge may request the judge whose conduct is complained of to file a written response to the complaint. Such response shall not be made available to the complainant unless authorized by the judge filing the response.

a. Imagine Trump’s pardonees filing a response that they do not authorize the court to make available to the prosecutor. Would you trust it to be truthful and complete?

20. The chief judge or his or her designee may also communicate orally or in writing with the complainant, the judge whose conduct is complained of, and any other person who may have knowledge of the matter, and may review any transcripts or other relevant documents. The chief judge shall not undertake to make findings of fact about any matter that is reasonably in dispute.

(b) ACTION BY CHIEF JUDGE FOLLOWING REVIEW.—After expeditiously reviewing a complaint under subsection (a), the chief judge, by written order stating his or her reasons, may—

(1) dismiss the complaint—

If the chief judge does not dismiss the complaint, §352(a)(1) provides that the “chief judge shall promptly (1) appoint himself or herself and equal numbers of circuit and district judges of the circuit to a special committee to investigate the facts and allegations contained in the complaint [but not those made by the complained-against judge so as not to cast doubt on the word of a fellow judge]”.

21. The committee must file a report with the circuit’s judicial council; but has no authority to send the complainant a copy. The council can dismiss that report without serving a copy of it on the complainant. It may do anything and nothing else without giving notice to the complainant.

22. Actually, the complainant can only have a review of the chief judge’s order disposing of the complaint. To that end, the complainant must file a petition with the judicial council. Section 352(c) provides that “The denial of a petition for review of the chief judge’s order shall be final and conclusive and shall not be judicially reviewable on appeal or otherwise”.

23. So why would chief judges bother to transmit complaints to complained-against judges, appoint special committees, or pay any attention to their reports, given that they know that complained-against judges need not even respond to complaints?

24. If they do, they may tell ‘a bunch of lies and nonsense’ because their responses will not be transmitted to complainants, who will consequently not have the opportunity that any plaintiff has, namely, to scrutinize and challenge a defendant’s response, whether in the plaintiff brief known as the reply or in the courtroom.

25. In fact, years go by without a single special committee being appointed to investigate any complaint. It is the norm for judicial council members not to read petitions to review chief judges’ complaint dismissals.

26. The councils deny 100% of review petitions by the clerk of court rubberstamping a 5¢ form that dumps the complaint out of court without giving any reason. Its only operative word is “denied”. Criminals’ gang mentality is never to incriminate one of their own, for a violation of their conspiracy of silence is deemed treason and punished with treatment as a pariah or worse.

27. Complainants are limited to filing a complaint that launches from the outside the secret procedure of a star chamber, which they cannot enter. They are not allowed to compel the production of evidence, let alone call the judge to the stand and cross-examine her witnesses, to rebut what protects all fellow judges, the presumption of impunity, and dispute what it confers: unaccountability.

28. It follows that complainants are deprived of what all other plaintiffs and prosecutors are entitled to: the administration of justice through an adversarial proceeding that takes place in public because “Justice should not only be done, but should manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done” (Ex parte McCarthy, [1924] 1 K. B. 256, 259 (1923). Cf. “Justice must satisfy the appearance of justice”, Aetna Life Ins. v. Lavoie et al., 475 U.S. 813; 106 S. Ct. 1580; 89 L. Ed. 2d 823 (1986)).

29. Complainants are denied due process of law while judges are afforded undue protection from process(28 USC §358(a)). Thereby judges place themselves beyond prosecution. As a matter of fact, they become Judges Above the Law.

30. Unlike Trump’s pardonees, complained-about judges remain with their reputation unblemished given that the complaint is kept secret. There is no register of judges who have ever been complained-against, the equivalent of the sex offender register.

a. Their names are as unknown as were those of the pedophilic priests that the Catholic Church transferred from diocese to diocese without ever warning churchgoers and the rest of the public that there were brought into their midst predators that would again abuse their power and trust and harm them too.

31. Judges have had no qualms about finding pedophilic priests and their complicit Church liable to compensate their victims. What an outrageous double standard applied in flagrant self-interest by hypocrites! By so doing, judges have breached their oath of office (28 USC §453) to “do equal right to the poor [in ties to them] and to the rich [in power to reciprocally dismiss complaints].

32. With their silence before and after dismissals of complaints and denials of review petitions, and about the underlying conduct complained-about, judges provide accessorial aid to their fellow ‘priests’ even if they, just as Then-Judge Amy Coney Barrett, have never dismissed or denied any, for they too have a legal (18 U.S.C. §3057) and ethical (Code of Conduct for Judges, Canon 3B(6)) duty to speak up to denounce their brethren and sisters so as to safeguard the integrity of the Judiciary and of judicial process.

33. If “a criminal like Trump [and the] other criminals” had the sole authority to process complaints against any of them, would they dispose of those complaints in any way different from that in which judges dismiss 100% of complaints against themselves and deny 100% of review petitions?

C. Sources of evidence of judges’ criminality
34. Through their preemptive reciprocal pardoning, federal judges ensure that they wear “The Teflon Robe”. That is the title of an informative and outrage-provoking 3-part report that beginning on June 30, 2020, was published by Thomson Reuters, a major news agency, with more than 2,500 reporters and over 600 photo journalists. On the strength of its manpower and concomitant financial resources, it conducted a nationwide investigation of judges. It found “hardwired judicial corruption”.

35. “Hardwired” are also judges’ pardons of each other upon complaint filing, for they have become part of their institutionalized modus operandi. They are integral to their interpersonal relations and provide the insurance upon which they rely to risklessly commit crimes.

36. In the same vein, Boston Globe, the main newspaper in Massachusetts and a reputable one, published on September 30, 2018, its report “Inside our secret courts”, in whose “private criminal hearings [conducted even by clerks with no law degree], who you are –and who you know– may be just as important as right and wrong”.

37. Evidence of federal judges’ criminality is also discussed briefly in the blurbs hereunder; in more detail in a general article thereon; and in even greater detail in the specific articles that form part of my three-volume study of judges and their judiciaries.

38. Based on professional law research and writing, and strategic thinking, the study* † ♣ is titled and downloadable thus:

Exposing Judges’ Unaccountability
and Consequent Riskless Abuse of Power:
Pioneering the news and publishing field of
judicial unaccountability reporting* † ♣

* Volume 1: http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf >all prefixes:page# up to prefix OL:page393

† Volume 2: http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates2.pdf >from OL2:394-1143

♣ Volume 3: http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL3/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates3.pdf >from OL3:1144-latest article

Open the downloaded files using Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available for free.

39. Some of those articles have been posted to my website:

Judicial Discipline Reform
at
http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org

40. They have attracted so many webvisitors and elicited from them such a positive reaction that 38,561 [as of May 23, 2021] and counting (>Appendix 3) have become subscribers.

41. You can subscribe for free to its articles, such as this one, thus:

go to http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org <left panel ↓Register   or
+ New   or   Users   >Add New.

D. Examples of judges’ criminality
1. Abusive self-enrichment
42. Under their ‘Teflon Robe’, federal judges hide their own criminality. The latter finds a revealing example in a daring denunciation by a person as knowledgeable about financial matters as former presidential frontrunner Sen. Elizabeth Warren, who is still a member of the Senate.

43. In her “I have a plan for the Federal Judiciary too”, she stated that federal judges fail to recuse themselves from cases in which they own stock in one of the companies that is a party to the case before them in order to resolve the ensuing conflict of interests in their favor so as to protect or increase the value of their stock. Sen. Warren refers to such practice throughout the Federal Judiciary as its judges’ abusive self-enrichment. She attributes it to federal judges’ unaccountability.

44. To engage in such self-enrichment, federal judges necessarily commit the crimes of fraud on parties; concealment of assets; tax evasion; money laundering; fraud on, or collusion with, banks through misrepresentation of funds’ provenance; and breach of contract for judicial services, of the oath of office, and of public trust.

2. Fraudulent filing and approval of financial disclosure reports
45. To conceal assets and evade taxes, federal judges file fraudulent annual financial disclosure reports required under the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 (5 U.S. Code, Appendix).

46. While their reports are public documents, they are filed pro forma (*>jur:65fn107c, d; jur:65§§1-3) with, and approved as a matter of course by, not an independent reviewing body, but rather other judges, who are their peers, colleagues, and friends; and depend for their survival on reciprocal approval of their own reports since they too commit and cover up crimes as principals and accessories.

47. The unaccountability resulting from the fraudulent dealing with those reports removes the moral reins on greed and allows it to run amok throughout the Federal Judiciary.

3. Judges’ bankruptcy fraud scheme
48. People who go bankrupt by definition do not have enough money to meet their needs. The vast majority of them cannot afford a lawyer and must appear without one (pro se) in court. They are overwhelmed by the mindboggling complexities of bankruptcy law and procedure.

49. As a result, they fall prey to judges’ bankruptcy fraud scheme. Its spread to Covid-caused bankruptcies will allow judges and their cronies in the bankruptcy industry to take advantage of people’s financial and emotional distress, thereby harming them even more grievously.

4. Interception of emails and mail
50. Judges intercept people’s emails and mail to detect and suppress those of their critics. This is a crime under 18 U.S.C. [Federal Criminal Code] §2511. Their interception is enabled by the Federal Judiciary’s nationwide computer network, vast expertise, and devastating power to retaliate against even the largest recalcitrant mass communication entities.

51. This judges’ crime is likely to set off the most intense national outrage because it affects directly the largest number of We the People and deprives us of our most cherished rights, to wit, those guaranteed by the 1st Amendment of :

“freedom of speech, the press, and assembly [on the Internet or by letter] to petition the government [of which judges constitute the third branch] for a redress of grievances [which includes compensation, similar to the more than $2.5 billion that the Catholic Church has had to pay to the victims of its pedophilic priests and its covering up of their crimes]”.

52. The exposure of judges’ interception can provoke the gravest institutional and national crisis, for which of the other two branches will dare exercise constitutional checks and balances to hold the Federal Judiciary and its judges accountable? Only an informed and outraged People can so disregard their rulings and shame them as to deprive them of any moral standing and force them to resign.

5. Failure to read the overwhelming majority of briefs
53. The official statistics of the federal courts show that federal judges dump 93% (>OL2:457§D) of appeals to the circuit courts through orders that are “on procedural grounds [mostly the one-fit-all pretext of ‘lack of jurisdiction’], unsigned, unpublished, without comment, and by consolidation”.

54. “The math of abuse” demonstrates judges’ failure to read most briefs. Yet, judges advertise that upon a party filing a brief, which costs $Ks and even $10Ks to produce, and paying the filing fee of $505, they will provide the service of determining the appeal by applying the law to the facts of the case. Instead, they have their clerks dispose of the corresponding case or motion by rubberstamping a 5¢ dumping form that neither discusses the facts nor applies to them the law. It contains only an unresearched, unreasoned, arbitrary, and fiat-like order.

55. This constitutes fraud in the advertising inducement and in the performance; breach of a service contract; intentional causation of emotional distress; and compensable intentional waste. The call for parties to jointly demand that they be compensated for such waste and fraud will attract a large segment of the national public.

6. Sham hearings on the Rules for Processing Complaints
56. To implement the Act, the judges adopted the Rules for Processing Judicial Conduct and Disability Complaints. Initially, they adopted rules in each circuit; thereafter, they adopted and amended nationally applicable ones in 1986, 2000, 2008, 2015, and 2018.

57. The Rules have changed nothing, for the judges have kept dismissing 100% of complaints against them.

58. On each occasion, they have held a public hearing on the proposed new rules to pretend compliance with that requirement (28 USC §358(b)), but they held it in bad faith, for they had no intention of applying the new rules to hold each other accountable. The judges’ public hearings on the rules have been a sham.

59. Their sham constitutes fraud on the public that has caused foreseeable and thus intentional injury:

a. The judges have made witnesses write and submit comments; prepare to deliver them orally; and spend, just as the audience have had to, on travel to a single place in the nation and on room and board to attend the hearing.

b. They have frustrated the reliance interest that they created in witnesses, the audience, and subsequent complainants, all of whom reasonably expected that the judges would apply the new rules fairly and impartially.

60. The judges have caused these members of the public compensable injury in fact.

E. Proposed plan of concrete, reasonable, and feasible actions for exposing judges’ crimes
61. You, Judge Pratt and reporter Foley, can take the lead in exposing judges’ “bad Behaviour”, to which the Constitution refers in Article III, Section 1, as the basis for terminating judges’ holding office. Their “bad Behaviour” includes their crimes as well as abuse of power, unethical behavior, and their failure to abide by the injunction of Canon 2 of their Code of Conduct, which requires judges to “avoid impropriety and even the appearance of impropriety”.

62. You should undertake that exposure to be consistent with your views and values, as reported by Mr. Foley: “[Pratt] said those who abuse positions of public trust for personal gain must face severe consequences, in order to deter misconduct and promote public confidence. Otherwise, he warned, “political corruption will slowly corrode the foundations of our democracy until it collapses under its own weight”.

63. For the sake of your integrity and that of our democracy, you can proceed alone or together; with fellow judges, journalists, or me; whether openly and notoriously or as a discreet informant, to:

64. publish in a national newspaper or magazine the equivalent of the famous open letter I accuse! of French writer Emile Zola to the President of the French Republic to expose the military’s anti-Semitic conspiracy against Jewish Lt. Alfred Dreyfus, except that yours would be addressed to President elect Joe Biden as he prepares to establish the commission for the reform of the judicial system that he announced in an interview with CBS newsanchor Norah O’Donnell on October 22, 2020.

a. Your letter can be the first step in transformative change, just as the exposés by reporters Jodi Kantor and Megan Twohey of The New York Times and journalist Ronan Farrow writing for The New Yorker informed the public on October 5 and 10, 2017, respectively, about Harvey Weinstein’s sexual abuse, and thereby set off within a week here and abroad the MeToo! movement, which has transformed society.

b. That constitutes a reliable and repeatable precedent for the reasonable expectation that your I accuse! letter can lunch a national and international movement for judicial abuse of power exposure, compensation of victims, and reform through transformative change;

65. present your letter at a press conference;

66. ask that President Trump and President elect Biden release the secret FBI vetting reports on judicial candidates and nominees, which are apt to contain incriminating information about them and others, obtained in part by the FBI exercising powers that the media lack, e.g., of subpoena, search and seizure, contempt;

67.  approach national publishers to request that they publish one or a series of my articles (App:6) exposing unaccountable judges risklessly running the Federal Judiciary as a criminal enterprise;

68. ask that AP, Reuters, Boston Globe, and other media join forces to investigate with me judges’ “bad Behaviour”, which they can start and conduct cost-effectively by using the abundance of leads that I have gathered (*>OL:194§E);

69. endeavor to hold unprecedented citizens hearings on judges’ “bad Behaviour”, to be conducted by multidisciplinary panels of journalists, professors, and experts; at media stations and university auditoriums; where the victims of, and witnesses to, judges’ “bad Behaviour” can tell their story to the national public; and do so mostly through interactive video conference to reduce travel expenses; reach the largest life audience possible; and receive their feedback in real time;

70. encourage the formation of local chapters of parties who have appeared before the same ‘badly behaving’ judge or in the same court that covers up for them, to demand collectively compensation for the abuse and waste that they have suffered;

71. promote the holding of the first-ever, and national conference on judges’ “bad Behaviour”, where the report of the citizens hearings will be presented;

72. advocate the calling of the constitutional convention that since April 2, 2014, Congress has been petitioned to convene by 34 states, a number that satisfies the amending provisions of Article V of the Constitution. A runaway convention may fashion a new constitution that enables We the People, the Masters of all public servants, to hold our judicial public servants accountable and liable to compensate their victims.

73. foster the development of the website of Judicial Discipline Reform, as proposed in my business plan, to turn it from an informational platform into:

a. a clearinghouse for complaints against judges uploaded by anybody;

b. a research center for fee-paying clients auditing judges’ decisions and searching many other writings from many sources that through computer-assisted statistical, linguistic, and literary analysis can reveal the most persuasive type of evidence: judges’ patterns, trends, and schemes of “bad Behaviour”; and

c. the digital portal of a multidisciplinary academic and business venture, which should be the precursor to the creation within a top university or think tank of the institute of judicial unaccountability reporting and reform advocacy.

F. My offer to present this article and its proposals
74. I offer to make a presentation of this article and its proposals to you and your guests followed by a Q&A session. To set its terms and scheduling you may get in touch with me using my contact information below.

75. The presentation can take place via video conference on short notice. In fact, there is already an agenda, to which can be added the elements particular to this article.

76. To decide whether to organize the presentation you may watch my video and follow it on its slides.

77. To consult with others on this article and/or interest people in attending the presentation you may widely share this article and post it to social media, such as:

Facebook, Youtube, WhatsApp, LinkedIn, Instagram,

Google plus, Pinterest, Reddit, Snapchat, and

Twitter:    An appeal to US Judge Robert Pratt & Associated Press Ryan Foley to dare expose judges’ criminality, not only P. Trump’s; and hold unprecedented citizens hearings for victims of their crimes to tell their story; https://judicial-discipline-reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-JudgeRPratt.pdf

G. Every meaningful cause needs resources for its advancement;
none can be continued, let alone advanced, without money
Put your money
where your outrage at abuse and
passion for justice are.

Donate to

Judicial Discipline Reform

by making a deposit or an online transfer to
Citi Bank, routing number 021 000 089, account 4977 59 2001;

through Paypal
https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=HBFP5252TB5YJ

or

by mailing a check to the address below.
I look forward to hearing from you.
Dare trigger history!…and you may enter it.

Sincerely,

Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Judicial Discipline Reform
2165 Bruckner Blvd
Bronx, New York City 10472-6506
tel. +1(718)827-9521
[email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

https://www.linkedin.com/in/dr-richard-cordero-esq-0508ba4b

 

[Author]

Posts