Proposal to the Russian government to investigate the interception by unaccountable wrongdoing judges of the communications of Advocates of Honest Judiciaries -who invoke Candidate Trump’s request to the Russians to look for Sec. Clinton’s missing emails, equal protection of the law, and the principle “The enemy of my enemy is my friend”- whose findings can cause national outrage that inserts the issue of politicians’ condonation of judges’ wrongdoing among the key ones of the 2018 mid-term primaries and elections Express your support to the Russians and/or send them a one-page summary of your judicial complaint


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 email 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 the link to his website:

NOTE ON THIS EMAIL’S 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,


Mr. Denis V. Gonchar
Minister-Counselor and Deputy Chief of Mission
Chargé d’Affaires ad interim
Embassy of the Russian Federation to the U.S.A.
2650 Wisconsin Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20007
tel. (202)298-5700

The Hon. Consul General Igor L. Golubovskiy
Consulate General of the Russian Federation in NY
9 East 91st Street
New York, NY 10128
tel. (212)348-0626

Dear Messrs. Gonchar and Golubovskiy,

This is a proposal for the Russian government to use its Information Technology (IT) prowess to expose how the most powerful American government officers, the life-tenured unaccountable federal judges, who dispose of people’s property and even suspended President Trump’s Muslim travel ban, risklessly:

a. engage in financial wrongdoing(*>jur:102§a, OL:154¶3) using their IT network and/or that of intelligence entities dependent on their grant of their secret requests for secret orders of surveillance under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act(*>OL:20fn5); and

b. silence their critics, the Advocates of Honest Judiciaries, by committing the federal crime(*>OL:20¶¶11, 12) of intercepting their communications(jur:105§b).

Your government could achieve through this exposure what it failed to through its meddling with our presidential election: create a crisis of confidence of the people in the institutions duty-bound to uphold the law and turn public attention inward and away from Russia.

NOTE: The materials corresponding to the (blue text references) 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.

The Advocates would achieve what we have failed to for the last 228 years since the creation of the Federal Judiciary in 1789, during which period only 8 federal judges have been impeached and removed(jur:21§1), as they dismiss 99.8% of complaints against them: to expose the connivance between politicians and their appointed judges.

Politicians hold judges unaccountable to avoid being retaliated against by them, e.g., judges may declare their laws implementing their legislative agenda unconstitutional, as happened with parts of the President’s Muslim travel ban(>OL2:569¶¶13-16; 541 2nd-3rd¶¶).

The exposure could set off a process that attains the Advocates’ objective of judicial reform that empowers We the People to hold judges accountable and liable to compensate the victims of their wrongdoing.

Russia would benefit from an America in domestic turmoil where the People demanded greater public accountability, no Judges Above the Law –even compelling a constitutional convention(OL2:517¶11)–, and concentration of attention and resources on improving the People’s lives, away from policing the world.

By contrast, your government’s ordered reduction of American diplomats in Russia only causes a logistical inconvenience, whereby fewer of them have to do the same or less.

The probable cause to believe that judges are intercepting Advocates’ communications is laid out at >OL2:476, 425, 405§§B-C, 395; *>OL:19fn2; and shown by the current flagrant manifestation:

a. After my article with a realistic strategy for turning the issue of unaccountable judges’ wrongdoing into a key one of the 2018 mid-term elections was posted to my website at, the daily number of new subscribers –not just visitors– to it, who some days had exceeded 110, was blocked in a week to zero on July 29! Up to then, 22,961 visitors had subscribed in less than 2 years.

The ones most interested in silencing me, judges, can reasonably be suspected of having blocked subscriptions to my website or even access to it.

Your exposure of judges’ wrongdoing through the type of IT investigation illustrated below would provoke public outrage more intense than that arising from Edward Snowden’s revelations of the National Security Agency (NSA)’s illegal dragnet collection of only the metadata of phone calls between scores of millions of people, but not the contents of their conversations(>OL2:525§H).

However, committing contents-based interception of communications(OL2:583§3, 526¶56) deprives the People of their birthrights: “freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances”, guaranteed by the 1st Amendment to our Constitution(*>jur:22fn12b).

I respectfully request that you invite me to your office to discuss the details of this proposal.

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


Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Judicial Discipline Reform
New York City,,

Two unique national stories
whose leads provided by the Russians
can launch a Watergate-like generalized media investigation
that ends up toppling, not a president this time,
but rather the Federal Judiciary and
the current form of People-government relation,
for which the Russians can be “rewarded mightily”
by the press,
by P. Trump for discrediting “swamp” politicians and intelligence agencies
investigating his presidential campaign, and
by an American People concerned much more with themselves
than with the Russians’ activity in the rest of the world


Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Judicial Discipline Reform
New York City

  1. These stories illustrate the type of IT investigation proposed by Advocates of Honest Judiciaries to the Russian government in application of the strategic thinking(>OL2:445§B) principle “The enemy of my enemy is my friend”; and the statement by Presidential Nominee Donald Trump on July 27, 2016, at a press conference in Florida: “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing. I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press”.
  2. As President, he has repeatedly defended that statement, which he made in the sole self-interest of embarrassing his opponent, Sec. Clinton. He has not faced any charge of treason for having made it.
  3. We invoke the “equal protection of the laws” clause of the XIV Amendment to the U.S. Constitution(*>jur:22fn12b) as the justification for our statement to the Russians. We make it in the hope that they will initiate the investigation of these two unique national stories, whose findings can set off a Watergate-like(jur:4¶¶10-14) generalized media investigation of judges’ wrongdoing in connivance with the politicians that put them on the bench and hold them there unaccountable. Thereby this issue can get inserted in the 2018 mid-term elections.
  4. The adaptation of these stories to current events can be discussed at a meeting with Russian government representatives, where the underlying strategic thinking(>OL2:445§B) outlined next can be developed.

*NOTE: The materials corresponding to the (blue text references) are found in the study by Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq., 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

A. The P. Obama-J. Sotomayor story and the Follow the money! investigation

5. President Obama’s first Supreme Court nominee was Then-Judge, Now-Justice Sotomayor. She was suspected by The New York Times, The Washington Post, and Politico(*>jur:65fn107a) of concealing assets(*>jur:xxxv-xxxviii), which entails the crimes(*>OL:5fn10) of tax evasion(jur:65fn107c) and money laundering.

6. What did President Obama(jur:77§5), Senator Schumer and Gillibrand(jur:78§6), and judges(jur:105fn213b) know about it but covered it up and lied(*>OL:64§C) about it to the American public by vouching for her honesty because P. Obama wanted to ingratiate himself with those petitioning him to nominate another woman and the first Hispanic to replace Retiring Justice Souter and from whom he expected in exchange support for the passage of the Obamacare bill in Congress; and when did they know it and other wrongs of hers(jur:65§§1-3)?

  1. Exposing the participation of Senators Schumer and Gillibrand in a conspiracy of silence about J. Sotomayor’s concealment of assets

    7. Sen. Schumer (D-NY) is the current Senate Minority Leader; Sen. Gillibrand is the junior Democratic senator for New York. Both recommended that J. Souter be succeeded by Hispanic Sotomayor, who at the time was sitting as a U.S. circuit judge on the Second Circuit Court of Appeals located in NY City, which has a very large Hispanic population, as does the rest of this solidly Democratic state.

    8. After P. Obama nominated her to the opening justiceship, he appointed these two senators to guide her through the confirmation process in the Senate. Both had access to the FBI vetting report and were duty-bound to ascertain her honesty before passing her off to the People as a justice nominee who would honestly say the law and shape its rule nationwide for the next 20, 30, or more years on the Supreme Court.

    2. The consequences of the People learning that they were defrauded by politicians and abused by judges

    9. If now the People were made aware of probable cause to believe that Sen. Schumer and Gillibrand knew about Then-Judge Sotomayor’s concealment of assets(jur:65fn107c), but hid that material information so as to vouch for her honesty because they wanted to advance their personal electoral and partisan interest in catering to Hispanic voters and feminist ones asking for another female justice:

    a. national outrage by a defrauded People would break out;

    b. a clamor would burst for the Senate to censure them and for them to resign;

    c. a battle for the minority leadership would upset the Senate Democrats;

d. an outcry for J. Sotomayor to be investigated and to resign even if only for her “appearance of impropriety”(*>jur:68fn123a, 44fn69) would erupt, just at Justice Abe Fortas had to on May 14, 1969(jur:92§d);

e. the creeping of her investigation upon the other justices and her former district and circuit court peers, whether as principal wrongdoers or as accessories before or after the fact(*>jur:88§§a-c), who created or tolerated the circumstances(*>OL:190¶¶1-7) enabling(*>jur:69fn128) her and other judges’ wrongdoing, would become unstoppable;

f. a flood of motions for recusal, disqualification, annulment, new trial, etc., would sweep through the Federal Judiciary, rushing functional disruption into it;

g. Democrats’ payback refusal to even hold a hearing for P. Trump’s nominee to replace Justice Sotomayor until after the 2020 presidential election would further embitter an already dysfunctional, achieve-nothing Congress -imagine the scenario where Republican Senators John McCain is too ill to vote and Lisa Murkowski and Susan Collins refuse to give the vacant justiceship to Trump’s male nominee-;

h. the insertion of the issue of judges’ wrongdoing among the key ones of the 2018 mid-term primaries and elections would be all but assured, especially if new candidates for the Senate, who never took part in a judicial confirmation, opportunistically portrayed themselves as leaders of those outraged at judges’ wrongdoing; and

i. widespread dissatisfaction with government would create the opportunity for Trump to survive his own chaos and the investigations of Special Counsel Robert Mueller, the Senate, and the House that target his presidential campaign, by him running for reelection as:

1) a traditional leader of the People, who exercise their right to amend their form of government and demand that Congress hold the constitutional convention that the required 2/3 of the states have applied for Congress to convene after Michigan became on April 2, 2014, the 34th state to do so(*>jur:139fn270 >Ln:309), but that politicians ward off as a threat to their privileges within the Establishment; or

2) a maverick, unprecedented leader of the sovereign source of all political power, We the People, whom he leads to convene in order to adopt a new form of government, regardless of Congress, politicians, and the dead hand of the all-male white wealthy delegates who 228 years ago wrote constitutional rules for a world long gone and unrelated(>OL2:516¶8) to the world of the people living today and demanding to command their present and future.

  1. The Follow the money! investigation and its demand for reports that can shatter the People’s trust in a government of conniving politicians and wrongdoing judges

    10. The P. Obama-J. Sotomayor story can be pursued through the Follow the money! investigation(jur:102§a; OL:194§1). It envisages a call on President Trump to order the release unredacted of all FBI vetting reports on Sotomayor as nominee to the district, circuit, and supreme courts; and on her to request that she ask him to release them.

    11. Such call can set a precedent for requesting the release of the reports on the other justices and judges, and for an outraged public to demand their resignation.

  2. The strategic benefit for the Russians

    12. What amount of political and popular attention would be left in America to care about what Russia did or was doing in the rest of the world? The People could “reward mightily” the Russians with indifference or gratitude.

    B. The Federal Judiciary-NSA story and the Follow it wirelessly! investigation

    13. The Federal Judiciary is the only national jurisdiction. It has vast IT expertise and a computer network that handles the filing and retrieval of hundreds of millions of case documents(Lsch:11¶ 9b.ii). The judges of its secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court(OL:20fn5) rubberstamp (OL:5fn7) up to 100% of the NSA’s secret requests for secret orders of surveillance.

    14. To what extent do federal judges, either alone or with the NSA’s quid pro quo assistance:

    a. conceal assets –a crime under 26 U.S.C. §§7201, 7206(OL:5fn10), unlike surveillance– by electronically transferring them between declared and hidden accounts(OL:1; jur:72§b, 105fn213b); and

    b. intercept the communications –also a crime under 18 U.S.C. §2511(OL:20¶¶11-12)– of their critics to prevent them from joining forces and growing their ranks enough to expose the judges’ unaccountability and consequent riskless wrongdoing and compel their compensatory “redress for their victims’ grievances”?

    1. The Follow it wirelessly! investigation and its current model

    15. This story can be pursued through the Follow it wirelessly! investigation(OL:194§2). A statistical analysis(OL:19§Dfn2) of a large number of communications critical of judges and a pattern of email oddities(OL2:395, 405, 425), point to probable cause to believe that they were intercepted.

    16. Law enforcement authorities’ contempt for the law is illustrated by the Department of Justice (DoJ) hacking the computers of Former Reporter Sharyl Attkisson of CBS, the national media network(OL:345§1). She had embarrassed DoJ with her reports on its Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms’ Fast and Furious program for selling even assault weapons and tracking their delivery to Mexican druglords, one of which was used to kill an American border patrol; and the killing at Benghazi, Libya, of the American ambassador and three of his aides.

    17. After noticing odd behavior of her work and office computers, Rep. Attkisson and CBS had three independent IT experts inspect them. They found that her computers had been roamed without authorization, even if no file was damaged or stolen. She is suing DoJ for $35 million.

    2. Starting the investigation with an IT inspection of Dr. Cordero’s computers and website

    18. Similarly, the herein proposed exposure of judges’ wrongdoing can be started by having independent IT experts inspect Dr. Cordero’s computers and website to ascertain whether they have been interfered with and his communications with others intercepted and, if so, who is the likely interferer and interceptor.

C. Letting the Russians know your support for this proposal

19. Write to the Russians in support of this proposal.

20. If you share with them your complaint about judges, do not, do not, do not send them tens of pages of briefs and case documents for them to read in a foreign language, which not even the clerks of judges, let alone judges, read in English. Be reasonable and do your homework: summarize your complaint on one side of one page. The Russians cannot intervene in your case.

21. The purpose is only to encourage them to undertake the proposed investigation of the two unique national stories. If they do and bring their findings to national attention so that judges’ wrongdoing becomes a key issue of the 2018 mid-term elections, you together with we all, the Advocates of Honest Judiciaries, will benefit from it more than from any other effort of ours. By showing your support for this proposal, you too can become one of the People’s nationally recognized Champions of Justice.


August 4, 2017

Director Christopher Wray
FBI Headquarters
35 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20535-0001

Mr. William F. Sweeney, Jr.
Assistant Director in Charge
FBI, 26 Federal Plaza, 23rd Floor
New York, NY 10278-0004

Dear Director Wray and Assistant Director Sweeney,

Kindly find attached hereto a copy of my letter to the Russian ambassador to the United States, currently represented by Mr. Denis V. Gonchar, Chargé d’Affaires ad interim, proposing that his government apply its Information Technology (IT) prowess to ascertain and expose federal judges’ financial wrongdoing1 and their interception of the communications of their critics, the Advocates of Honest Judiciaries, to disrupt the latter’s efforts to expose the judges’ wrongdoing(*>OL:154¶3) and their connivance with the politicians that hold them unaccountable.

If the Russians heed our proposal, they can reap some of the benefits that they sought by meddling with the 2016 presidential election.

We are not colluding. We are giving notice to an authority empowered to investigate judges’ wrongdoing, for in ‘government, not of men and women, but by the rule of law, nobody is above the law’(*>OL:5fn6), not even judges.

Indeed, we have resorted to making that proposal to the Russians because our efforts to cause American authorities to investigate the evidence of judges’ financial wrongdoing –which is quite different from allegations of abuse of discretion or error in applying the law– have met with the authorities’ culpable indifference and condonation. Among those authorities are:

  1. the FBI at its D.C. headquarters and district offices;
  2. the U.S. Attorney General;
  3. the Public Integrity Bureau of the Department of Justice;
  4. the leadership of the U.S. Senate and the House of Representatives;
  5. their committees on the judiciary and on oversight and government reform;
  6. the senator and representative for our respective district;
  7. the Office of the U.S. [Bankruptcy] Trustee;
  8. Presidential Candidate and President Donald Trump, members of his top campaign and White House staff, and Running Mate Mike Pence;
  9. the Supreme Court chief and associate justices;
  10. the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts;
  11. the Judicial Conference of the U.S.;
  12. its Committee on Judicial Conduct and Disability;
  13. federal circuits’ judicial councils;
  14. the chief circuit judges with whom complaints against federal judges must necessarily be filed under the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act of 1980, 28 U.S.C. §351(*>jur:24fn18a); etc.

Since that Act, statistics on complaints against federal judges must under 28 U.S.C. §604(h)(2)(*>jur:26fn23). be submitted annually by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts to Congress. Their analysis show that chief circuit judges dismiss 99.8% of them(*>jur:10-14, 21§1; >OL2:546). Judges have arrogated to themselves the power to abrogate in effect an act of Congress intended to end their secular impunity.

So judges still hold themselves and are held by politicians unaccountable and consequently engage risklessly in wrongdoing.

They do wrong for the convenience of disregarding the strictures of due process and equal protection of the laws(OL2:453-462d).

Worse yet, they commit financial wrongdoing in their crass personal and class interest(jur:24§2, 65§§1-3, 105fn213b), which has nothing to do with “the national security interest”.

After all, who is there to hold life-tenured federal judges in check, who wield more power than the President, let alone the FBI director, over people’s property, liberty, and all the rights and duties that frame their lives? Nobody. As a result, judges have turned the Federal Judiciary into the safe haven for their wrongdoing(*>jur:49§4).

If the Russians, pursuing their own interest, bring their findings of federal judges’ wrongdoing to public attention, an outraged public will give the media a commercial interest in launching their own investigation. That could insert the issue of judges’ wrongdoing into the 2018 mid-term elections.

That will not follow from you acting on your pious words upon becoming director that you want “to work…for the good of the country and the cause of justice”2, given that you will not for a nanosecond consider investigating judges, their harm to country and justice notwithstanding.

We can only hope that you will not instead take the easy way out of investigating us.

But it is not unreasonable to suggest that you at least order the inspection by independent IT experts of my computers and website to determine who, after my posting to my website3 an article with a realistic strategy for exposing judges, has caused the daily number of new subscribers -not merely visitors- to it, who some days had exceeded 110, to drop off in a week to zero on July 29! In less than 2 years, 22,961 visitors had subscribed to my website.

So I respectfully request that you invite me to your office to discuss that suggestion.

Visit my website at, and subscribe for free to its series of articles thus: > + New or Users >Add New

I look forward to hearing from you.

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


.Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Judicial Discipline Reform
New York City,,,,

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.



  1. >jur:27fn30:a) “I will reiterate what I have said many times over the years about the need to compensate judges fairly. In 1989, in testimony before Congress, I described the inadequacy of judicial salaries as “the single greatest problem facing the Judicial Branch today.” Eleven years later, in my 2000 Year-End Report, I said that the need to increase judicial salaries had again become the most pressing issue facing the Judiciary.” Chief Justice William Rehnquist, 2002 Year-end Report on the Federal Judiciary, p.2.; and >CJr:79b) “[Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts] Director Mecham’s June 14 letter to you makes clear that judges who have been leaving the bench in the last several years believe they were treated unfairly… [due to] Congress’s failure to provide regular COLAs [Cost of Living Adjustments]…That sense of inequity erodes the morale of our judges.” Statement on Judicial Compensation by William H. Rehnquist, Chief Justice of the United States, Before the National Commission on the Public Service, July 15, 2002.; and “Congress’s inaction this year vividly illustrates why judges’ salaries have declined in real terms over the past twenty years…I must renew the Judiciary’s modest petition: Simply provide cost-of-living increases that have been unfairly denied!” U.S. Chief Justice John Roberts, Jr., 2008 Year-end Report on the Federal Judiciary, p. 8-9. >2008.

Money!, “the root of all evils”(jur:28fn32), that is “the single greatest problem” in the minds of judges, not access to justice, respect for the rule of law, or their rendering honest services, let alone their avoidance of even the “appearance of impropriety”(jur:68fn123b).

The ‘erosion of their morale’ also washes away their moral inhibitions about doing wrong in the absence of fear of losing by so doing their life-appointment or suffering any other adverse consequence whatsoever.

For federal judges, they are simply going after the money that has been kept from them ‘unfairly’. To correct the cause of their “sense of inequity”, they resort to self-help to get ‘their money’, wielding as their means their unaccountable, ‘absolute power, the kind that corrupts absolutely’(jur:27fn28). Those circumstances enable their financial wrongdoing(jur:190¶¶1-7), which becomes inevitable.

Having engaged(jur:88§§a-c) in criminal activity, such as a bankruptcy fraud scheme(jur:65§§1-3), denying parties due process and equal protection of the laws is merely part of their institutionalized modus operandi(jur:49§4). For “he who does the most, can do the lesser”.

If you had their job security and unaccountable power to allocate money in controversy, would you too abuse it to grab some of that money? If so, what else would you dare do?(jur:3§5)

  1. news



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