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
To subscribe go to <left panel ↓Register or + New or Users >Add New.
Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net , DrRCordero@Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org , CorderoRic@yahoo.com
Abstract: This article describes:
a. a pattern of abuse of power in which unaccountable judges engage risklessly in coordination with each other to grab material gain and increase their convenience, so that their unaccountability allows them to run their judiciary as the safe haven of a racketeering enterprise;
b. the connivance between judges and the politicians who in their own interest put them on the bench and hold them there unaccountable, and how you and the rest of voters can expose it during the 2020 campaign; and
c. how you can contribute to exposing their abuse and connivance by sharing and publishing this information, thereby causing such outrage that you spark a generalized media investigation and a joining of forces that leads to unprecedented citizen hearings and to holding judges and their judiciaries accountable and liable to compensate the victims of their abuse.
For you and others to have a chance of being compensated for judges’ abuse of power, help to inform the national public about it and outrage the public at judges by making this article go viral:
Share and post it to social media, and
distribute its link as widely as possible:
http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_inform_outrage_be_compensated.pdf
A. Sen. E. Warren’s daring denunciation of judges’ self-enrichment
1. Sen. Elizabeth Warren has dare denounce federal judges’ abusive self-enrichment(†>OL2:1020): They fail to recuse themselves from cases where they hold shares in one of the parties before them and resolve that conflict of interests in their favor so as to protect or increase the value of their shares. She has identified their unaccountability as the reason why they abuse their power in order to self-enrich: The unaccountable run no risk.
2. Sen. Warren has “a plan for that too”: She would cause the adoption of legislation to hold judges accountable for their self-enrichment through abuse of power(†>OL2:998).
3. Such abusive self-enrichment by judges involves necessarily their commission of crimes, e.g., concealment of assets, tax evasion, money laundering, fraud, and breach of trust.
† The materials corresponding to the(* †>blue footnote-equivalent references) are found in the professional 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* †
* 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
a. Download the volume files using MS Edge, Firefox, or Chrome; it may happen that Internet Explorer only downloads a blank page.
b. Open the downloaded files using Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available for free at https://acrobat.adobe.com/us/en/acrobat/pdf-reader.html.
c. In each downloaded file, go to the Menu bar >View >Navigation Panels >Bookmarks panel and use its bookmarks, which make navigating to the contents’ numerous(* †>blue references) very easy.
B. The House hearings on sexual harassment by federal judges
4. The House of Representatives Courts Subcommittee held a hearing on “Protecting Federal Judiciary Employees from Sexual Harassment, Discrimination, and Other Workplace Misconduct” on February 13, 2020. The articles thereon by National Law Journal reporter Jacqueline Thomsen, jathomsen@alm.com, are quite revealing and disturbing. She wrote:
Rep. Hank Johnson, the chairman of the courts subcommittee, said in a statement after the hearing that the testimony of Olivia Warren [who clerked in 2017-2018 for, and was sexually harassed by, the late U.S. Judge Stephen Reinhardt of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals] reminded lawmakers “of what we have long known is a problem—that systemic harassment, discrimination, and abuses of power are entrenched in our federal court system”.
5. Federal judges’ entrenchment in power is indisputable: In the last 231 years since the creation of the Federal Judiciary in 1789, the number of their peers impeached and removed is 8!(*>jur:22fn14) Once a judicial candidate is confirmed, he or she can do whatever they want.
a. This includes harassing court and law clerks, who work at judges’ pleasure and can be fired without recourse at anytime (jur:30§1) or depend on the recommendation of the judges for whom they clerk to obtain their first job after law school and their clerkship and are muzzled by an abusive ‘confidentiality agreement’(†>OL2:745).
6. The self-enrichment denounced by Sen. Warren and ‘the entrenched abuse of power’ recognized by Rep. Johnson underlie a pattern of racketeering criminalized under 18 U.S.C. §1961(5).
C. How an article can set off the implementation of the inform and outrage strategy; and the motivator of compensation for the abused suffered
7. Judges rely on their unaccountability to engage also in other forms of abuse of power where they do not act separately as individual rogues, but rather operate in coordination(*>jur:88§§a-c) with each other for their gain and convenience(*>OL:173¶93). These forms show that judges run the Federal Judiciary as a racketeering enterprise(†>OL2:1051).
8. The initial exposure of any of these forms of coordinated abuse –e.g., in an article or news segment appearing nationally– can generate among media outlets competitive, commercial, and reputational pressures to jump on ‘the investigative bandwagon’ aimed to Follow the money!(*>OL:1, 194§E); increase their respective audience and revenue –scandal sells–; and win Pulitzer prizes.
a. This prospect is supported by reliable and repeatable precedent: The complaint of the whistleblower set off the generalized media investigation into the Ukrainian scandal that led to the impeachment and trial of President Trump(OL2:1048§B).
9. By informing parties to lawsuits and the rest of the public about judges’ abuse of power, they can be so outraged that those(*>OL:276§C) who had or have a case before the same judge or must file their case in the same court will heed the rallying cry to join forces to demand compensation for the abused suffered.
10. The prospect of being compensated for the abuse suffered or avoiding suffering it is reasonably calculated to be the most potent motivator for an informed and outraged public to join forces to hold judges accountable and liable for their abuse.
D. Forms of coordinated abuse of power constituting a pattern of racketeering and revealing a judiciary run as a racketeering enterprise
11. Judges’ mandatory annual financial disclosure reports(*>jur:102§a), pro forma filed with, and approved by, other judges. These reports are public documents so that they are filed with false and misleading information to conceal judges’ assets and their unlawful origin(jur:105fn213);
12. Judges’ bankruptcy fraud scheme(†>OL2:614). It involves annually hundreds of thousands of bankruptcy cases -776,674 in the 1oct18-30sep19 fiscal year- and $100s of billions in controversy between creditors and debtors(jur:27§2).
a.This scheme involves not only judges, but also bankruptcy professionals(jur:81fn169), who are insiders of the legal and bankruptcy system, including “attorneys, accountants, appraisers, auctioneers, or other professional persons”, such as warehousers, bankers, bankruptcy form fillers, etc. They work in coordination to prey easily on bankrupts, most of whom cannot afford an attorney, appear without one, and are wiped out!(jur:43fn65)
13. Judges’ failure to read the vast majority of briefs. This is demonstrated by ‘the math of abuse’(†>OL2:608§A) and the analysis of official statistics(OL2:457§D; 847). Judges dump out of their caseloads the corresponding cases and motions by having their clerks fill out dumping forms: unresearched, without any discussion of the facts and the law, let alone any reasoning, and with only one blank for one operative word: “affirmed” or “denied”(OL2:1024¶16).
a. Dumping forms are meaningless even to the parties, never mind anybody else doing research for precedential guidance. They show judges’ contempt for the rule of law and its foundational principle: “Justice should not only be done, but should manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done”(*>jur:44¶83). Justice can only be seen in the doing of the chain:
1) statement of facts
2) >legal question in controversy
3) >applicable law
4) >reasoned application of law to facts
5) >legal conclusion
6) >decision of what party gets what in controversy.
b. Dumping forms only make the parties and everybody else hear abusive judges shout arbitrary, fiat-like orders “because we say so!”(*>jur:43§1)
c. Through the use of dumping forms, judges render wasteful the $1Ks and even $10Ks(†>OL2:760§A) that each party must invest in producing the brief required in support of its case or each motion, as well as the effort and time, which have an economic, compensable value, that even parties not represented by lawyers, i.e., pro ses, must invest in producing their brief themselves. This warrants pro ses and represented parties joining forces to demand compensation, such as:
1) the refund of court filing fees;
2) compensation for the waste of unread briefs;
3) punitive damages for the fraud of judges pretending that their decision on the case or motion in question was based “Upon the papers submitted and the applicable law…”, and
4) guarantees that their briefs will be read and their cases and motions decided in reasoned decisions written by judges –not by clerks lacking judicial power and discretionary leeway– that allow the parties and everybody else ‘to see that justice was done’.
14. Judges’ abuse of pro ses. From the moment a pro se case is filed -hence before any judge or clerk has bothered to ascertain its nature and gravity-, judges(†>OL2:932¶3) apply the official policy of weighting it as only one third of a case(OL2:455§B). This means that judges:
a. are authorized to spend on a pro se case only one third of the effort and time, and court resources that they spend on the average case, weighted as one, of a represented case(†>OL2:420¶6);
b. are expected not to ‘waste’ more than a third;
c. nevertheless require pro ses to pay the same fees and produce the same briefs as they require of represented parties; thereby
d. deny pro ses the equal protection of the law; and
e. deprive them of due process by not notifying them that their cases will be contemptuously dumped and not giving them opportunity to protest.
15. Judges’ abuse of their self-disciplining authority granted them by Congress. They dismiss 100% of complaints against them, which must be filed with them(*>jur:21§a), and deny 100% of petitions to review those dismissals(jur:10-14; †>OL2:548, 748, 918). Thereby judges abusively self-ensure their unaccountability and breach the trust placed on them by We the People through ‘their representatives in Congress assembled’.
a. The 2019 Annual Report of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts(AO; *>jur:21fn10) has just been released. Its Tables 10 and S-22‡ show that although in that fiscal year 1,412 complaints against federal judges were filed under the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act of 1980, 28 U.S.C. §§351-364, 51 more than in the previous fiscal year, the judges took remedial action upon only 2 complaints! This represents only 1 more such action than in the previous year. Not a single judge was reported as having been admonished or censured privately, let alone publicly. Every judge complained-against got off scot free.
‡ https://www.uscourts.gov/statistics/table/s-22/judicial-business/2019/09/30
b. Only 10 special committees were appointed to investigate complaints. If for the sake of comparison, they are apportioned to the 1,412 complaints filed that year, this means that only in 7 tenths of 1 percent of complaints was such a committee appointed; or conversely, that the chief judges of the several circuits, who are the first ones to examine complaints filed in their respective circuits, dismissed 99.3% of complaints out of hand without any investigation by a special investigative committee.
c. By so doing, the chief judges systematically disregarded the injunction issued under §352(a): “The chief judge shall not undertake to make findings of fact about any matter that is reasonably in dispute.” It is beyond reasonable doubt impossible that in 1,402 out of 1,412 complaints there was no “matter reasonably in dispute” that would have required a fair and impartial chief judge to appoint a committee rather than make a biased determination in favor of his or her complained-against peer, colleague, or friend, to justify complaint dismissal. What a complaint-processing sham!
d. Yet, AO and the pertinent committees on such complaints(†>OL2:796) held a public hearing on October 30, 2018, at the instigation of Supreme Court Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr.(OL2:642¶1, 645) precisely for the purpose of amending the rules for processing those complaints so as to render complaining against federal judges more effective(OL2:774-791).
e. However, the facts show that the judges never intended to hold each other accountable at all(†>OL2:791¶3, 694¶12). Instead, they hold fast to their complicit reciprocal complaint dismissal agreement whereby they mutually ensure their survival(OL2:793g).
f. Just as judges had done before amending those rules in 1986, 2000, 2008, and 2015(OL2:1057¶¶11-12), in 2018, they only held another sham hearing(OL2:1058§C). Their conduct exhibits an undeniable pattern of abuse of power in their favor, with gross disregard of the detriment to complainants, left uncompensated and at the mercy of judges with fearsome power of retaliation(*>Lsch:17§C; *>OL:267§4).
16. Judges’ pervasive secrecy. Judges hold all their administrative, policy-making, adjudicative, and disciplinary meetings behind closed doors and refuse to hold press conferences, never mind take questions from a pool of journalists(*>jur:27§e). Their secrecy enables their coordination of abuse. It betrays Justice Brandeis’s dictum “Sunlight is the best disinfectant”(jur:158¶350b)…because being seen transparently out in the open combats the mold of corruption that secrecy breeds in darkness.
17. Judges’ interception of the mail and emails of the public in order to detect and suppress those of their critics(†>OL2:781, 885, 889-913, 929). The exposure of this form of abuse can provoke the most intense(OL2:996§2) scandal as it affects the largest segment of the public and We the People’s most cherished rights, to wit, those that We guaranteed for ourselves under our Constitution’s 1st Amendment: “freedom of speech, of the press, the right of the people peaceably to assemble [on the Internet too], and to petition the Government [of which judges constitute the Third Branch] for a redress of grievances”(*>jur:22fn12b).
E. Politicians-judges connivance v. an informed and outraged We the voting People
18. As admitted by Rep. Johnson(supra ¶1), ‘we, the politicians, have long known…that judges are entrenched and abuse their power’. Politicians cannot be reasonably expected to turn in an effective way against their partners in abuse of power(jur:77§§5-6). Their connivance is shown by Chief Justice Roberts’ disregard of “traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice” at the impeachment trial in the Senate(OL2:1045, 1049¶8).
19. Politicians(*>jur:77§§5-6) recommended, endorsed, nominated, and confirmed judicial candidates to justiceships and judgeships and protect them as ‘our men and women on the bench’ by holding them unaccountable; they too have no regard for the harm to We the People that they leave unprotected.
20. In their courts, judges exonerate each other from complaints. As a result, their abuse of power has no downside, only the upside of gain and convenience. On their own initiative, they are not going to bring about effective judicial reform.
a. Allowing an abusive judge to resign and keep his pension without having to compensate his victims, let alone being tried on criminal charges, is not effective accountability. It is only an instance of their reciprocal exoneration from complaints and granting of pardons in effect; and their unequal protection from the law(jur:88§§a-c) by their political appointers: They are Judges Above the Law.
b. This is shown by former 9th Circuit Chief Judge Alex Kozinski, who simply resigned after decades of harassing court/law clerks and others(†>OL2:645¶1); and by Sen. Warren’s unrealistic proposal for charging with holding judges accountable –only, but no mention of also liable to compensate their victims– the very same politicians and judges who have always held them unaccountable!(OL2:998)
21. By contrast, the People can assert their status as the sovereign source of all political power and masters of all public servants, including judicial public servant. As such, they can force reform that enables them to hold judges and their judiciaries accountable for their performance and liable to compensate the victims of their abuse. That is how judges hold malpractising doctors and their hospitals, lawyers and their law firms, police officers and their departments, pedophilic priests and their churches, etc.: accountable and liable(OL2:1048¶4). Judges should be too, for Everybody is Equal Before the Law.
22. The People are in the strongest position so to hold judges during a presidential campaign, when politicians must appear to be sensitive and responsive to their outrage and demands. To enable them to take advantage of their current position is the objective of the out-of-court inform and outrage strategy(†>OL2:1037): To inform the People about, and so outrage them at, judges’ abuse of power that they are stirred up to force politicians to take a stand on the issue and face the consequences at the polls.
23. This is a reasonably calculated strategy given that the People can be informed(†>OL2:1016§1) about abuse committed even by the Supreme Court justices now and when they were lower court judges(*>jur:65§§1-4). As circuit justices of the circuit to which they are allotted(jur:26fn23a), they learn about the abuse of their former peers and other judges and cover for them. The People can be outraged at justices and judges running the Federal Judiciary, the model for its state counterparts, as a racketeering enterprise(OL2:1014).
a. There is precedent for a justice being forced to resign without even being impeached: Justice Abe Fortas withdrew his name from the nomination to the chief justiceship but still resigned on May 14, 1969, due to the public outrage that his “appearance of impropriety”(*>jur:68fn123a) had provoked(jur:92§d).
F. An article that sparks investigation, unprecedented citizen hearings, a conference, and the insertion of the issue in national politics
24. The publication of one(†>OL2:760, 781, 614) or a series(OL2:719§C) of articles can spark a generalized media investigation into judges’ abuse of power(OL2:876). This is realistically based on the precedent of the MeToo! movement(OL2:1032): It was prompted by the publication by The New York Times and The New Yorker on October 5 and 10, 2017, respectively, of their exposés of Harvey Weinstein’s sexual predation(OL2:1032).
25. The article(s) can go viral by being shared with friends, family, and associates, and posted to social media as widely as possible by:
a. Advocates of Honest Judiciaries;
b. parties to lawsuits;
c. judges(†>OL2:607, 613, 807) and court/law clerks acting either openly or as confidential informants or whistleblowers(OL2:1014);
d. lawyers(OL2:841);
e. professors(OL2:773, 808, 973);
f. students(OL2:971), such as those at law(OL2:982), journalism(*>Lsch:23), business(OL2:1024§C), and Information Technology(OL2:846) schools;
g. journalists(OL2:984, 995); etc.
26. All of them can participate as investigators or their sources. To strengthen their participation, they can call for unprecedented citizen hearings. These hearings can be held at universities and media outlets(OL2:1046¶8, 1056¶4, 1066); conducted by professors, journalists, and other experts; and nationally broadcast life through interactive multimedia so that people can inexpensively from wherever they are testify to abuse committed by judges that they have suffered or witnessed.
27. The findings of the citizen hearings can be presented at the first-ever and national conference on judicial abuse of power exposure and compensation of abusees, held at a top university.
28. The article(s), citizen hearings, and the conference can so inform and outrage the People as to insert the issue of judges’ abuse in our national politics and discourse(†>OL2:938). This will pave the way for eventual effective judicial reform by the People:
a. In the interest of giving themselves ‘government by the rule of law’(*>OL:5fn6), ‘the People giveth power in trust to judges for them to apply the law; and the People taketh it back from them upon being informed that judges have outrageously breached the trust to ‘embezzle’ that power for their own gain and convenience’. The grant of power is transient.
29. Through your participation in implementing the inform and outrage strategy(OL2:1047§A), you can cause one or more justices, even the whole Supreme Court, to resign(OL2:1050§D), or expose “the appearance of impropriety”(*>jur:68fn123a) of so many justices and judges as to reasonably conclude that they have institutionalized their abuse of power through coordination that has made them members of a racketeering enterprise. The ensuing institutional crisis can far surpass the consequences of the Watergate scandal(jur:4¶10-14), for it can bring down, not just a top officer and ‘All his men’, but rather the Judiciary as a branch.
30. Unaccountability allows power to “corrupt absolutely”(*>jur27fn28). Only after full exposure of the nature, extent, and gravity of the racketeering of judges and their judiciaries, can judicial reform that today is deemed inconceivable become unavoidable.
31. If you Dare!(†>OL2:1003) participate, you can earn one or many rewards(*>OL:3§F). Among them are writing a bestseller(jur:4¶13), being played in a blockbuster movie or documentary(OL2:879), winning a Pulitzer that opens the doors to working in a position or for an entity that is more prestigious, and even the loftiest and longest-lasting of all: being recognized by We the People of the World as a historic agent of transformative change, who turned the millennial impossible(OL2:1069§E) of holding judges accountable and liable into a democratic right and a reality here and abroad(OL2:1037§1).
G. Offer of a presentation
32. I offer to present via video conference this article to you and your peers, professors and students, and other guests. I will present the following actions(OL2:978§E) in which you all can participate:
a. sharing this article and posting it to social media widely so that it may go viral and inform the most people about, and outrage them at, the above-described forms of judges’ coordinated abuse of power through which they run their judiciary as a racketeering enterprise;
b. publishing one or a series of my articles;
c. investigating with academic researchers and journalists the forms of judges’ abuse of power;
d. pioneering citizen hearings thereon held at, and by the staff of, universities and media outlets;
e. holding the first-ever and international conference on judges’ abuse of power to present the findings of the citizen hearings and the investigations;
f. sponsoring a tour of presentations nationwide to inform, outrage, and promote the formation of the single issue civic movement for judicial abuse exposure, compensation, and reform;
g. forming the movement’s local chapters of parties joining forces to demand compensation;
h. promoting the offering by law school clinics, lawyers, and law firms of assistance to local chapters and individuals seeking compensation for the harm that judges have caused them;
i. establishing a multidisciplinary academic and business center(jur:119§§1, 5) attached to, and sponsored by, a university, media outlet, think tank, or public interest entity, and dedicated to “Pioneering the news and publishing field of judicial unaccountability reporting”.
33. To decide whether to organize(OL2:945) such presentation you may watch my video together with its supporting slides(†>OL2:958) by means of these links:
http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_judges_abuse_video.mp4
http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_judges_abuse_slides.pdf
34. Thereafter you can share this article‡ and use the contact information below to discuss with me the terms and conditions of the presentation and its scheduling.
‡ http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_inform_outrage_be_compensated.pdf
H. Every meaningful cause needs resources for its advancement; none can be continued, let alone advanced, without money
35. There is easy-to-follow advice for forming(*>OL:276§C) a local chapter of parties with cases before the same judge or in the same court(†>OL2:1071§H). By putting it into practice, you can participate in not only the implementation of the out-of-court inform and outrage strategy(OL2:1037), but also the formation of a national, single issue, apolitical civic movement for judicial abuse exposure, compensation of victims, and reform(OL2:1032).
36. Forming that movement is a key objective of Judicial Discipline Reform(†>OL2:1061§A). It:
a. conducts professional law research and writing, and strategic thinking(†>OL2:924, 941, 953);
b. produced the study* † of judges and their judiciaries(supra ¶3);
c. made a video with supporting slides(supra ¶33);
d. has sent hundreds of thousands of emails, including to hundreds of yahoo- and google- groups, to share its articles on judicial abuse of power exposure, compensation, and reform;
e. runs the website at http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org, which has attracted so many visitors and impressed them so positively that 31,062 and counting have become subscribers as of April 15, 2020(†>OL2:Appendix 3). You can subscribe to the website by going to it and then to <left panel ↓Register or + New or Users >Add New; etc.
37. To implement its strategy(OL2:1001) Judicial Discipline Reform has a program of actions for supporters to participate in(†>OL2:978§E) as well as a business plan to finance them(OL2:1022), which is guided by the principle: Making Money While Doing Justice.
38. The plan envisages the enhancement(*>OL:42) of the website from an informational outlet into:
a. a clearinghouse for complaints(supra ¶15; †>OL2:918) about judges that anybody can upload;
b. a research center for auditing(*>OL:274-280, 304-307) many decisions, complaints, and other writings in search of(*>jur:131§b; OL:255) the most persuasive type of evidence, i.e., patterns(†>OL2:792§A), trends(OL2:455§§B, D), and schemes(OL2:614, 929) of abuse of power.
Put your money
where your outrage at abuse and
passion for justice are.
DONATE
through
PayPal
https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=HBFP5252TB5YJ
or at
the GoFundMe campaign at
https://www.gofundme.com/expose-unaccountable-judges-abuse
- I look forward to hearing from you. Meanwhile, you may share this article with your peers, associates, and guests to the presentation; post it to social media; and distribute its link as widely as possible:
http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_inform_outrage_be_compensated.pdf
Dare trigger history!(†>OL2:1003)…and you may enter it.
† http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates2.pdf
Sincerely,
Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Judicial Discipline Reform
2165 Bruckner Blvd.
Bronx, NY 10472-6505
http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org
tel. +1(718)827-9521
https://www.linkedin.com/in/dr-richard-cordero-esq-0508ba4b
Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net, DrRCordero@Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org, CorderoRic@yahoo.com
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.
* http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf
© 2020 Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq. All rights reserved.
**********************************
You must be logged in to post a comment.