Joining forces to effectively inform the public about, and outrage it at, judges’ wrongdoing, which is enabled by their secrecy and probably by their interception of the communications among their critics, the Advocates of Honest Judiciaries


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,

This article may be shared and posted as widely as possible non-commercially, in its entirety, without any addition, deletion, or modification, with credit to its author, Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq., and indication of this website:

NOTE ON FORMATTING: If in spite of all the effort to circumvent the glitch in software or interference with communications that creates “joinedwords” in Dr. Cordero’s emails(>ol2:426§C), this email has them or any other formatting oddity, kindly overlook them and send a note to,

A. Pervasive secrecy infects the Federal Judiciary with wrongdoing

1.  Secrecy pervades the Federal Judiciary: It holds all its adjudicative, administrative, policy-making, and disciplinary meetings behind closed doors, and holds no press conferences(*>jur:27§e). Secrecy spares judges of scrutiny and allays their inhibitions about disregarding due process and equal protection requirements, and abusing their power for their own benefit. It constitutes a circumstance enabling(*>OL:190¶¶1-7) them to commit wrongdoing as their institutionalized way of doing business(jur:49§4).

2.  Secrecy also enables judges to engage in coordinated wrongdoing, such as would be required to intercept the communications of Advocates of Honest Judiciaries(§B infra). If your boss could hide under the same level of secrecy, would you reasonably fear that he or she would do wrong ever more gravely, even if thereby he or she harmed you?

NOTE: The materials corresponding to the (blue text references) herein are found in my study of judges and their judiciaries, titled and downloadable thus:

Exposing Judges’ Unaccountability and
Consequent Riskless Wrongdoing:
Pioneering the news and publishing field of
judicial unaccountability reporting*

* Volume 1: >all prefixes:page number up to ol:393

Volume 2: >from ol2:394

NOTE: Each of these volumes is too big to be emailed. Accordingly, they take minutes to download, which requires patience. However, if by clicking on either of those links nothing downloads, then copy one link at a time, paste it in the search box of your browser, press “enter”, and wait for the volume to download.

B. Is there interception of our emails? How to find out

3.  In Volume II(>OL2:567) and not downloadable separately as well as hereunder is the article on joining forces to seize the opportunity presented by Trump’s chaos to implement nationally the inform and outrage strategy(§C infra) for judicial wrongdoing exposure and reform advocacy. That article also accompanied this one in my latest email.

a. Such seizing is the opposite of prosecuting separately a personal, local case, which is ineffective for the prosecuting party and brings no progress in exposing judges’ wrongdoing, let alone reforming their judiciaries.

4.  My emails elicit reply emails. I make every effort to acknowledge receipt of emails sent to me, although I cannot afford the effort and time to comment individually on each email that I receive. However, that intended two-way exchange of emails raises a troubling question:

5.  How is it possible that readers who take the time to contact me to show their appreciation for my articles and make the effort to share with me their ideas, and to whom I gratefully write back, hardly ever contact me again?

6.  That does not make sense at all. It constitutes conduct inconsistent with precedent. It need not be their conduct that is to blame. Rather…

7.  Is there a third party intercepting our communications, in general, and those among Advocates of Honest Judiciaries, in particular, with the purpose of foreclosing our forming an effective team for judicial wrongdoing exposure and reform advocacy? See the statistical study pointing to probable cause to believe that there is(*>OL:19fn2 >‡>ws:58§7, cf. >ws:51§C).

1.  IT experts can investigate whether judges misuse their networks to intercept their critics’ communications

8.  Experts in information technology (IT), including Advocates with advanced IT knowledge and appropriate hard- and software, can find out whether there is interception and, if so, whether it can be traced back to those who have the greatest interest in preventing our exercise to their detriment of our 1st Amendment “freedom of speech, of the press, the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances”(*>jur:130fn268), namely, judges.

9.  IT experts(*>OL:346¶131; OL2:396§3) can investigate whether the interception is conducted by the judiciary, particularly the Federal Judiciary, misusing its national and advanced computer network. The latter is composed of each federal court computer system and runs the huge document filing and retrieving system PACER, the acronym for Public Access to Court Electronic Records;

2.  A quid pro quo for, and financial benefits from, interception

10.  The Judiciary can intercept communications either alone or with the assistance of any of the surveillance agencies in exchange for its federal judges’ approving up to 100% of the agencies’ secret requests for secret orders of secret surveillance(*>OL:5fn7).

11.  The Judiciary can also misuse its and the surveillance agencies’ networks for the transfer for judges’ benefit of assets between disclosed and hidden financial accounts(*>jur:65§§1-3; 102§§a,b; 105fn213b).

12.  If interception under judges’ auspices of Advocates’ communications were taking placed and revealed, public outrage would be profound and national, and that not only because it is a crime under 18 U.S.C. §2511(*>OL:5a/fn13) and would be committed precisely by the public officers sworn to uphold the law.

3.  Contents-based interception as opposed to only collection of metadata

13. Such interception would also be outrageous because aimed at preventing our communications due to their judge-criticizing contents, thus involving judges in denying our constitutional rights and abusing their power in self-interest.

14.  Contents-based interception is qualitatively very different from an intelligence and surveillance agency, such as the National Security Agency (NSA), collecting ‘metadata’, which would involve only the recording of the email addresses used and the time and place of the communications, without reading the emails, never mind preventing their delivery.

15.  Contents-based interception of Advocates’ communications cannot be explained away as action by a third party “in the interest of national security”, for there is no evidence whatsoever that our criticism of judges’ wrongdoing endangers “national security”.

16.  It follows that the revelation of interception by judges or at their behest(>OL2:525§H) would provoke national outrage graver than that arising from Edward Snowden revealing that NSA was conducting dragnet collection of metadata of millions of people’s phone calls, e.g., phone numbers and time and duration of calls, but without listening to their conversations.

17.  If IT experts determined that there is such unconstitutional and power-abusive self-interested interception by judges of communications among the public, in general, and their critics therein, in particular, they would make a national name for themselves.

18.  In the process, the IT experts would significantly advance our inform and outrage strategy by providing either evidence that judges engage in wrongdoing, probable cause to believe that they do, or “the appearance of their impropriety”(*>jur68fn123a).

C.  Implementing the inform and outrage strategy by joining in sharing and posting the article; and precedent for its success

19.  Our strategy for exposing judges’ unaccountability and consequent riskless wrongdoing seeks to inform the public about, and so to outrage it at, judges’ wrongdoing(>OL2:449§B, 461§1) as to cause the public to insert that issue in the national debate and the 2018 primaries and general election campaigns, and make that issue a decisive one for voters as well as politicians.

20.  We all can participate in implementing that strategy if we disseminate this article and the one below while seizing the opportunity that Trump’s chaos opens for exposing judges’ wrongdoing. Share these articles with your friends and relatives and post it on social media as widely as possible. We need Advocates to Take action!

1. Precedent for succeeding in stripping judges of their secrecy and holding them accountable

21. Our joint and well-organized effort can be effective: Judges and politicians can stop some of us by denying our rights and intercepting our communications, but they cannot stop all of us, much less do so simultaneously.

22.  There is precedent for success. Think of the model offered by the Tea Party. In fewer than 10 years, its grassroots members spread their message and managed to dominate national politics. They were disciplined enough to concentrate all their efforts on one single issue with national appeal: taxes. That is what Tea stands for: Taxed Enough Already.

23.  Even millennial impossibles have been overcome by people who would not cease taking action until the “impossibles” were replaced by opposite realities: For thousands of years:

a.  only landed white men could vote;

b.  only the sons of the rich could get educated;

c.  only the wealthy had access to medical treatment;

d.  women could neither vote nor hold office;

e.  African-Americans and other ethnic groups were enslaved;

f.  employees were held in virtual enslavement by abusive employers wielding power of arbitrary firings from their business;

g.  a landlord could evict tenants from his home into the street for any and no reason; etc.

24.  Changing those ‘facts of life’ constituted millennial impossibles. But they gave way to the realities of today because some people kept taking action against the injustice of privilege and the abuse of the powerful.

25.  We too can take action jointly to change the millennial unaccountability and secrecy of judges by asserting our status as We the People, the masters of all public servants, and our right to hold judicial public servants accountable for discharging the duty for which we hired them, namely, to apply the law to us and themselves fairly and impartially.

26.  In “government of, by, and for the people”(*>jur:82fn172), No Wrongdoer is beyond accountability in a safe haven Above The Law.

D. Massive dissemination can lead to nationally televised hearings that boost the exposure of judges’ wrongdoing

27.  Cicadas are grasshopper-like insects that ensure their survival by overwhelming number of them making a shrill creaking noise at mating time.

28.  We too can survive judges’ interception of our communications and make attention-grabbing noise by massively disseminating this article, the one below, and my other ones, all of which surpass any personal, local case by dealing with wrongdoing of national scope.

29.  Our massive dissemination can marry conviction and action. The offspring is national outrage that causes the public to insert the judicial unaccountability and wrongdoing issue in the national debate and the mid-term elections.

30.  Dissemination can be boosted by becoming a member of yahoo- and googlegroups(§E infra): One email sent to a group of which one is a member is automatically distributed to all its members.

1.  Nationally televised hearings on judicial’ wrongdoing

31.  The massive dissemination of these articles through sharing, emailing to groups, and posting on social media can pave the way for the most powerful means  of communication: nationally televised public hearings on judicial wrongdoing. They can expose before a national public judicial wrongdoing’s nature(*>jur:5§3), routineness(*>jur:28§3), gravity(*>OL:154¶3), and the harm in fact that it inflicts on litigants and the rest of the public whom judges abusively and for their own benefit(*>OL:173¶93) deprive of their property, their liberty, and the rights and duties that frame their lives.

 a. Congressional hearings

32.  Such hearings can be held by Congress, like the one held by the Senate to hear the testimony of Former FBI Director James Comey on June 8. It has been estimated that some 20 million people followed it live; to them must be added all those who have since watched on demand its recording.

b.  Media hearings

33.  But there is also an unprecedented type of hearings that we call for: nationally televised hearings organized by a board of national media outlets in the public interest as well as in their own competitive and commercial interest. They can be held across the country by panels of prominent investigative journalists, legal affairs reporters, newscasts anchors, publishers, and members of schools of journalism, law, information technology, and business, including students elected by their classmates and dutybound to report back to them.

34.  These media hearings can generate the critical mass of outrage needed for judicial reform. They can serve the purpose of “…Pioneering the news and publishing field of judicial unaccountability reporting”(¶2 supra). Thereby they can have a continuing effect, so to speak, a ‘successor’ over time.

35.  Moreover, the media hearings can become a mechanism for a measure of direct democracy that bypasses a dysfunctional, partisan, and discredited Congress. They can not only take the pulse of the country, but also give a voice to its people to express how they want their representatives, that is, their public servants with legislative duties, to work for them rather than for their own partisan benefit and their permanence in power.

36.  Indeed, the nationally televised public hearings can enable We the People to assert our status as the source of all political power, entitled to tell our legislative servants what and how to legislate on our behalf.

c. Hearing findings as the basis for judicial reform

37.  The findings of the congressional and media hearing will provide the factual basis necessary to convince the public and politicians that since judges are held unaccountable by themselves and politicians(>OL2:567§B), only judicial reform of a scope that today would appear unrealistic, and millennially has been held “impossible”, can ensure that judges apply and abide by the rule of law, e.g.:

a.  Judicial reform through the establishment of citizen boards of judicial accountability that publicly receive and process complaints against judges; and to that end, exercise power of subpoena, search & seizure, contempt, and indictment; and hold judges liable to compensate the victims of their wrongdoing(*>jur:158§§6-8).

E. Maximizing the joint effort to inform and outrage the public by emailing my articles to yahoo- and googlegroups

38. Group membership and distribution are multipliers of the effort of Advocates of Honest Judiciaries and other email senders to reach as many people as possible. A list of yahoo- and googlegroups to which we can email this article and the one below on the opportunity opened by Trump’s chaos for judicial wrongdoing exposure is at >OL2:433. A group of Advocates can take charge of dividing the list among themselves to email the article more easily and faster. To become a member follow these simple instructions:

a.  Place only seven group addresses at a time and only in the To: line of your email; otherwise, your email will not be distributed. These measures take into account restrictions adopted by group programs to ward off spam to their groups.

b.  A reply from each group will inform you that your email to it was not delivered because you are not a member. Scroll down and copy the email address intended for membership requests, which has this format: [or -owner] –or googlegroups, as the case may be- and replace with it the address in the To: line.

c.  Likewise, replace the text in the Subject: line with ‘Membership request’.

d.  Another reply email from that group will let you know whether your request for membership in it was granted and, if so, that you can start emailing that group. You must replace the address in the To: line with the normal address for emailing the group, e.g.,

e.  Every email sent to the group will be distributed to you too. Receiving them is the price to pay for having your emails to the group distributed to all its members. But to find out whether anybody replied to your email, simply copy part of the subject line used in the outgoing email and paste it in the search box of your email client, i.e., the email program from which you sent your email.

f.  If you receive replies to my articles, please forward them to me.

F. Division of labor to obtain the rosters of attorneys and invite them to join in the strategy and the dissemination

39.  I appreciate a reader’s suggestion about contacting the attorneys on the official state and bar association attorney rosters to invite them to join in implementing the strategy for judicial wrongdoing exposure and reform advocacy, and disseminating the article.

a.  Attorneys are indispensable to taking on successfully unaccountable judges, whether in their own turf, the courts, where they disregard the rules and the law as they want(*>jur:xxxv-xxxviii), or outside it.

b.  Pro ses can do an enormous amount of necessary work, but they cannot improvise themselves as lawyers, much less match their legal knowledge with the judges’.

c.  To beat judges at their own game, we need the best and the brightest of attorneys; otherwise, we will not be taken seriously, making rookie legal mistakes one after the other.

40.  Division of labor is a basic operational principle of any organization. Hence, I would appreciate it if a reader would access those rosters -to the extent that they are available at all-, harvest the attorneys’ email addresses listed therein, and send them to me. Perhaps the reader could take the leadership in forming a group of Advocates that volunteer to do that work with you.

41.  Good ideas are costless and welcome; but taking action is, though harder, always more effective.

G. Sunshine can disinfect the Judiciary of its wrongdoing and wither impossibles

42.  Justice Brandeis said, “Sunshine is the best disinfectant”. Its light must be shone on the Judiciary to disinfect it of its secrecy and the wrongdoing that breeds in it. When it enlightens people with outrageous information, they can be heated up to turn millennial impossibles into opposite realities.

43.  Only the largest number of informed and outraged people, We the People, can force the holding of nationally televised public hearings by politicians, lest they be voted out of, or not into, office; and by the media, lest they miss the opportunity to attract a bigger audience, sell pricier ads, and take advantage of Trump’s chaos.

44.  Hence the need to implement the inform and outrage strategy for judicial wrongdoing exposure and reform, and overcome any interception of our communications by massively disseminating my articles, which deal with a national problem, not a personal, local case, through yahoo- and googlegroups, and social media, and by sharing them with friends, family, and attorneys.

45.  By joining the effort to inform the public and outrage it into action, you too can become nationally recognized by a grateful People as their Champions of Justice.

Visit the website at, and subscribe to its articles series thus:
> + New or Users >Add New

Dare trigger history!(*>jur:7§5)…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., 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.


Published by

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; 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 Dare trigger history!(* >jur:7§5)…and you may enter it. *

Leave a Reply