Author: Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.

This is the most opportune time to take advantage of
two test cases that reflect
the national mood against abuse of power and
the pushback of big law, Harvard, and the media,
to lead to the creation of
a new powerhouse in American governance
strong enough to do what individuals are unable to:
hold power abusers accountable and liable to compensation.

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
tel. (718)827-9521
Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net, DrRCordero@Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org, Corderoric@yahoo.com

To subscribe to articles similar to the one hereunder:
a. go to   + New or Users >Add New; or
b. fill out the New User form at https://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/wp-admin/user-new.php.

Joseph W. Belluck, Esq., Chair
NYS Commission on Judicial Conduct
c/o: Belluck Law, LLP, 546 5^th Ave, 5^th Floor
New York, NY 10036
     jbelluck@bellucklaw.com
tel. (877)412-7449; (646)783-1210

Taa Grays, Esq., Vice Chair
NYS Commission on Judicial Conduct
c/o: MetLife Legal Affairs
New York, NY 10166-0024
tel. (646)386-4800; fax (518)299-1757

Chief Judge Rowan Wilson, Associate Judges
and Chief Administrative Judge Joseph Zayas,
NYS Court of Appeals
20 Eagle Street
Albany, NY 12207
tel. (518)455-7700

Ms. Kay-Ann Porter Campbell
Inspector General
Office of Court Administration
25 Beaver Street, New York, NY 10004
tel. (646)386-3500; fax (212)514-7158

Dear Mr. Belluck, the other commissioners, Chief Judge Wilson and associate judges, Ms. Campbell, and Advocates of Honest Judiciaries,^‡

^‡ http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/IAB/25-5-27DrRCordero-Commission_Judicial_Conduct.pdf

A. Pattern of preposterous pretense and unresponsiveness to avoid investigating judges and exposing their cover-up by prosecutors, police, judges, and the NYS Commission on Judicial Conduct

1. I am in receipt of the latest of 11 letters(pages 3-4^‡) from the Commission on Judicial Conduct(CJC). They bear different “Re: File No.” and dates although they concern the same complaint. Thereby the CJC;

a. pretends that the letters are not related;

b. conceals the date when its continuous cover-up started; and

c. gives the false impression that I did not file my complaint with reasonable promptness although I did file it with the CJC and other authorities contemporaneously with the triggering events, as shown below and at ♠.

♠ http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/IAB/DrRCordero-Commission_Judicial_Conduct.pdf

1. I was a grand juror at the Bronx County Supreme Court Criminal Term, 265 E. 161st St., Bronx, NY 10451; tel. (718)618-3700. On May 23 and 24, 2022, I saw ADA Burim Namani, his supervisor, ADA Diana Jetta, and five NYPD officers and detectives present an indictment of two men for murder that had allegedly occurred on or around May 24, 2021.

a. The evidence presented did not include any photos or footage of the victim; the street crime scene; police, ambulance, medical examiner, or CSI cars, or incident or autopsy report.

b. Only one witness was examined. He testified that the alleged victim was his friend but that he was not with his friend at the time of his alleged murder and did not see it happen.

c. The footage presented was from neighboring restaurants and bodegas, had no sound, and only showed normal indoors and sidewalk business or pedestrian scenes.

d. The presenters relied on the known grand jurors’ indifference and uncritical judgment that lead to their voting indictments based even on insufficient and false evidence. This attitude has given rise to the saying, “A prosecutor can have a grand jury indict a ham sandwich”.

1. When I asked questions pointing up those facts, the ADAs referred me to Grand Jury Judge Laurence Busching, who summarily discharged me from the grand jury on May 25, 2022.

2. I stated these facts in a May 26, 2022 eight-page 4,743 words sworn statement -available upon request- and mailed it to Administrative Judge Alvin Yearwood. His secretaries, Dana and Stephanie, acknowledged receipt of my statement when I called their office.

3. However, Judge Yearwood would not take my calls to discuss my statement. He was remiss in his supervisory duty by referring it to Judge Busching, who foreseeably held himself unaccountable: Without any discussion or regard for the harm to the fabricated indictees or me, he dismissed it on the inconsequential fact that the grand jury term had expire.(3A1^‡)

page 3

1. Since May 28, 2022, I have mailed the complaint to three Court of Appeals chief judges; each of the associate judges; the NYC and NYS administrative judges as well as three NYPD commissioners; three chiefs of the Internal Affairs Bureau; NYC Mayor Eric Adams, who is a former NYPD captain; the respective inspectors general; council members; public advocates and defenders; et al.♠

a. I have emailed my complaint daily to more than 30 officers, as shown by each email’s “To:” and “cc:” boxes, so that as of May 27, 2025, I had sent them well over 15,000 emails.

b. See my complaints to the NYPD’s Internal Affairs Bureau, which has disregarded them:

1. On September 23, 2022, CJC received my complaint against Judges Busching and Yearwood.(3B1‡) The NYS Unified Court System(UCS) identifies both on its website as UCS members(2‡).

Grand Jury Judge Laurence Busching

Administrative Judge Alvin Yearwood

1. Yet, beginning with the letter by CJC Senior Administrative Assistant Lee Kiklier of November 3, 2022(3B1^‡), subsequently reaffirmed by Clerk Celia Zahner and Administrative Assistant Debra Douglas, CJC has informed me that it dismissed my complaint on the preposterous pretense that:

“Although the law requires the Commission to review all complaints, please note that the Commission’s jurisdiction is limited to judges in the New York State Unified Court System, which does not appear to apply to your complaint.”

1. I have not received a single response addressing the complaint’s merits. That identical no-response for years from so many people duty-bound to enforce the law and administer justice is not coincidental.

2. Rather, it furnishes probable cause to believe that prosecutors, judges, NYPD, IAB, the Mayor, and CJC are involved in a cover up of the fabricators of, and accessories to, indictments fabricated with insufficient and false evidence. They pursue in coordination through a pattern of corrupt enterprise and racketeering acts the common purpose of lending mutual assistance in evading any investigation.

3. This cover-up harms me and the thousands of fabricated indictees who have been and still are incarcerated before and after trial, and financially, emotionally, and reputationally devastated.

a. “About Belluck Law” states: “We are motivated by justice and driven by compassion.”

b. But CJC Chair Belluck and the rest of CJC have proved that to be a mere slogan. The teachings of the Bible in John 3:16-18 and James 2:14-26 denounce the chasm between those words and their conduct: “Love without acts is dead”.

1. In its 11th letter to me(4↓C4), CJC informs me that “it reviews all complaints and decides whether to inquire into them”.

page 4

1. Therefore, I respectfully request that:

a. just as a suspect can testify before a grand jury, I, who was discharged from one arbitrarily and capriciously in violation of my rights, be allowed at CJC’s next meeting to testify on behalf of fabricated indictees and myself. I offer to make a preliminary presentation to you and your guests in person, if here in NY City; otherwise, via video conference; and

b. a public investigation by an impartial party be conducted before the commissioners rubberstamp with no “review” the denial of due process to the indictees and me and its cover-up, and manifest again their lovelessness toward us.

Dare shout “I accuse!”
You may trigger history and enter it as
a Champion of Justice.

B. The most opportune time to expose the coordinated fabrication of indictments and its cover-up: when Luigi Mangione is tried

1. The public has become familiar with a descriptive triptych of words used by Luigi Mangione after he killed United Healthcare CEO Brian Thompson on December 4, 2024, in a street of Manhattan, NY City: the healthcare insurers’ abusive claims evasive tactics, to wit, “delay, deny, defend”.

2. Mangione expressed through that triptych and his violent, criminal act his frustration with United: His mother had died because her illness had gone untreated as a result of United delaying and denying her claim for insurance coverage of her treatment.

a. In fact, it has been stated that United Healthcare, the largest healthcare insurer in the U.S., denies an estimated one third of the claims of its insureds.

1. The public reaction to Mangione’s act has been, not of condemnation, but rather of approval. He has been hailed as a folk hero because his experience with United is representative of that of scores of millions of people across the country: They too have been abused by their insurers’ claim evasive “delay, deny, defend” tactics.

21.  The public and the media are likely to pay attention because I will begin by informing them that precisely in that court, I am prosecuting a case akin to Mangione’s, for it is intended to expose how Medicare and its healthcare insurers wear down their insureds with “delay, deny, defend” tactics, namely:

Cordero
v.
Secretary of Health and Human Services, Medicare, EmblemHealth [healthcare insurer], Maximus Federal Services [reviewer of insurance claims denials], et al. [including many of the top officers of the Medicare Appeals Council and the Office of Medicare Hearings and Appeals (OMHA)];
docket no. 24-cv-09778-JAV;
filed in U.S. District Court, SDNY,
on 16 December 2024^◊

a. See my motion in this case for having the decision of the district judge reviewed by her fellow district judges. It has a solid foundation in Cornell Law Professor Maggie Gardner’s article District Court en bancs. I furnish additional foundation and explain how you can use it to your advantage.

1. I will also invite journalists and the public to visit my website at http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org. There I post some of my articles, similar to this one, the product of my professional law and business research and writing, and strategic thinking. They have attracted so many webvisitors and impressed them so positively that as of 6 June 2025, the number of visitors who had become subscribers was 56,750. I invite you now to visit my website and evaluate its articles.

2. You are welcome to review my three-volume study of abuse of power, titled and downloadable:

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

1. What is more, I encourage everybody now and will continue to do so during the trial to promote and participate in unprecedented citizens hearings. They are to:

a. be held at university auditoriums and media stations;

b. have professors, journalists, lawyers, experts, and graduate students as their moderators;

c. afford people wherever they are the opportunity to tell in person and through video conference the story of the abuse that they have suffered or witnessed;

d. present their findings in the first Annual Report on Abuse of Power in America at the first-ever national conference on abuse of power simultaneously held at several university and media venues before live and Internet audiences; and subsequently through a tour of presentations(§G) at universities, media stations, public interest entities, etc.;

e. prompt the creation of the Institute for Advocacy of Public Accountability, attached to a preeminent school or news network; and

f. launch the implementation of the plan of action to develop a Me-Too!-like national movement for abuse of power exposure, accountability, and compensation intended to turn academe and the media into a new joint powerhouse of American governance that holds private and public officers and entities accountable and liable to compensation.

1. This plan is realistic given the Trump administration’s executive orders and the vigorous pushback by Harvard, big law firms, and a growing segment of the public. To them must be added principled and opportunistic politicians up for reelection or vying to be elected and facing with trepidation or great expectation the inexorably approaching primaries and mid-term elections.

2. Do you feel confident that the Trump administration will never resort to fabricated indictments to incarcerate you if you say or do what it does not like? More than 267 cases have been filed against the administration’s disregard of due process and lack of legislative authority in its detentions and deportations; tariffs; habeas corpus restrictions; right to counsel conditions; citizenship birthright stripping; Social Security and Medicare cuts; termination of government employees and programs; restrictions on university funding, foreign student enrollment, and visa processing; foreign travel bans; etc.

3. Do you trust your healthcare insurer not to engage in “delay, deny, defend” tactics to evade claims on it made by you or those that you care about if any of you fall sick or become the victim of an accident?

4. The systematic violation of the rule of law; the interest of the media in the subject; and the public mood make this a most opportune time to expose through this concrete, realistic, and strategic plan the pattern of racketeering and corrupt enterprise acts of fabricating indictments based on insufficient and false evidence, and evading healthcare claims through “delay, deny, defend” tactics.

C. Action requested 

1. Take advantage of this opportunity to protect and assert your and the pub-lic’s rights:

a. distribute this article as widely as you can; e.g.,

1) send it and its link^‡ to those on your emailing list;

2) post it to social media;

3) if you receive it in an email, click “Reply All” and “Send”;

b. request a presentation by me in person or via video conference to you and your guests; etc.

1. I look forward to hearing from you. If you do not receive an acknowledgment of receipt from me within two days, please call me at (718)827-9521. On the interception of emails see OL3:1735¶¶1, 9.

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 of power 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 shout “I accuse!”
You may trigger history and even enter it as
a Champion of Justice.

Sincerely,

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

Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net, DrRCordero@Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org, Corderoric@yahoo.com

Giving practical application to
Cornell Law Professor Maggie Gardner’s article
District Court en bancs;
inviting lawyers targeted by Trump executive orders to join in
an amicus curiae brief to support
a motion for en banc review in
the U.S. District Court, Southern District of NY;
and
proposing UNPRECEDENTED CITIZENS HEARINGS
that can turn universities, the media, and law firms into
a new powerhouse of American governance

Professor Maggie Gardner
Cornell Law School
Ithaka, NY 14853-4901
tel. (607)255-5346;
mgardner@cornell.edu, gj13@cornell.edu,
lyc8@cornell.edu,liz.flint@cornell.edu

Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP,
Perkins Coie LLP,
Susman Godfrey LLP,
Jenner & Block LLP,
Harvard,
lawyers, law firms, and universities targeted by Trump administration executive orders,
and
Advocates of Honest Judiciaries,

Dear Professor Gardner, Wilmer Cutler, Perkins Coie, Susman Godfrey, Jenner & Block, Harvard, lawyers, law firms, universities, and Advocates,‡

1. This is a proposal to join forces to apply Professor Gardner’s article District Court en bancs[1] in a case pending in the U.S. District Court, SDNY, concerning healthcare insurers and other medical services and equipment providers’ plotting and committing with the complicity of Medicare abusive insurance claims evasive “delay, deny, defend” tactics:

Cordero v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, Medicare,
EmblemHealth [healthcare insurer],
Maximus Federal Services [reviewer of insurance claims denials],
et al. [including many of the top officers of
the Medicare Appeals Council and
the Office of Medicare Hearings and Appeals (OMHA)];
docket no. 24-cv-9778-JAV;
filed in U.S. District Court, SDNY,
on 16 December 2024. [2]

1. I cited you, Prof. Gardner, and your article in my April 11 motion[3], which requests en banc review. With your amicus curiae[4] support of it, you can capitalize on the enormous research and writing effort that you must have invested in your article.

2. Wilmer Cutler[5], Perkins Coie[6], Susman Godfrey[7], Jenner & Block[8], Harvard[9], and the lawyers, law firms, universities, and Advocates challenging the Trump administration are invited to join in one amicus brief or write their own amicus to benefit from the greater use of district court en bancs.

3. Indeed, my motion was addressed to SDNY Chief Judge Laura Taylor Swain to request that she convene her district court en banc to resolve the conflict between an order of hers in my case and a subsequent one of the currently assigned judge, i.e., J. Annette A. Vargas; and decide other issues of public interest in these turbulent judicial times, e.g., whether:

a. a decision of a district court en banc, convened on a party’s or the judges’ motion, can more effectively persuade the public and a court of appeals than a decision of a single judge. If so, it would better resist arbitrary and capricious attacks by the current administration;

b. access to justice can become ‘speedier and more inexpensive’ in line with the purpose for the FRCP set forth in Rule 1[10] through review by a district court en banc compared with an appeal to an appeals court;

c. the sovereign and judicial immunity doctrines violate Articles II §4 and III §1; and Amendments XIV §1 and V of the Constitution, which provide for holding all officers of the United States, including those of the Executive branch and all judges, accountable so that against those officers We the People can secure “the equal protection of the laws” instead of being at the mercy of officers who arrogate to themselves an unconstitutionally superior place: Above the Law;

d. district court en bancs are mechanisms for judges to police themselves so that they can deter, detect, and correct their fellow judges’ abuse of discretion/power or incompetence;

e. characterizing mine as a test case in defense of civil rights and in the public interest, se it will benefit the 67.3 million[11] old, sick, and disabled insureds of Medicare, and the additional millions of non-Medicare insureds, the overwhelming majority of all of whom lack the physical and emotional stamina and knowledge of the law needed to defend their rights individually, e.g., through four levels of administrative appeals and climb to the fifth level of judicial review in a federal district court, never mind appealing to a circuit court;

f. such characterization will induce law, journalism, and IT/AI professionals as well as professors and students to use my case to expose providers of healthcare insurance, other services, and equipment who commit “delay, deny, defend” tactics, and those who cover for them.

1. It is in the same SDNY district court that federal criminal charges seeking the death penalty have been brought against Luigi Mangione for allegedly murdering UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson in NYC last December 4. Given the overwhelming public support for Mr. Mangione and the public outrage at those tactics, it is reasonable to expect that his trial will attract the national and international media.

2. As a result, this is the most opportune time to ask law firms, universities, and the media to investigate how district court en bancs can launch the reform of the judiciary by providing a speedier, affordable, and meaningful level of judicial review of cases, such as healthcare cases, where time is of the essence but insurers have an interest in dragging out the case until the insured is dead or too weak to press their claim anymore.

3. Courts of appeals do not provide that kind of review because they can dispose of appeals perfunctorily in reliance on the fact that the Supreme Court grants barely 1.5% of certiorari petitions.[ ] Such unaccountability allows riskless abuse of power by healthcare insurers and providers, among others, and an individual judge presiding over a case.

4. We can contribute to the wider use of district court en bancs by making presentations thereon at law, journalism, and IT/AI schools, beginning with our local ones and our alma maters, as well as many other public interest entities.

5. At those presentations, we will propose concrete actions that the audience can undertake to expose the abusers, such as press releases, the publication of articles, press conferences, interviews, podcasts, townhall meetings, rallies; etc.

6. Moreover, we will propose UNPRECEDENTED CITIZENS HEARINGS.

a. The citizens hearings will be held by media outlets and universities at their stations and auditoriums during the first semester of an academic year[ ].

b. They will afford people the opportunity to tell their story[ ] of the abuse of power that they have suffered or witnessed.

c. They will allow people throughout the country to tell and listen to the stories in person and online.

d. The more stories are told and heard, the more people will be informed about the abuse of power and become outraged. Ever more will scream, “That happened to Me-Too!” They will be driven to ask to be allowed to tell their stories to vent that fire that is burning in their soul: the constant cry for justice and compensation[2 >SDNY:156§L]. Nothing oppresses the soul more harshly and persistently than the feeling of having been or being abused. The informed and outraged people will thus energize another self-reinforcing cycle of citizens hearings.

e. During the second academic semester[ ], the findings of the hearings will be established and the preparation undertaken for their presentation near the end of the semester at the first-ever national conference on abuse of power. It will be held simultaneously at several interconnected universities and news media networks.

f. At that conference, the findings of the citizens hearings will be presented in speeches, panel discussions, and the first edition of the Annual Report on Unaccountability and Abuse of Power in America.

g. The citizens hearings will be a rich source of materials for the proposed multidisciplinary summer internships of students.

h. There will also be offered semester-long multidisciplinary clinics for academic credit. Students will learn, among other things:

1) administrative law;

2) agency and social data gathering;

3) news gathering and reporting;

4) public relations and image managing;

5) the application of IT/AI to audit massive amounts of writings, speeches, and footage to detect patterns of unlawful meeting of the minds and coordinated abusive conduct;

6) legislative drafting;

7) lobbying;

8) development and leadership of a national, nonpartisan Me-Too!-like civic movement for civil rights, accountability, liability, and reform;

9) the setting up of a new type of practice for handling a flood of motions to vacate decisions, remand for a new trial, and obtain compensation, and staging a supporting campaign of mass communication and demonstrations. This practice can be lucrative and build national name recognition for the practitioners;

10) working as a team inside an institution and among institutions in one or several states under the guidance of an editor or a lead attorney; etc.

i. In addition, the students will learn to do what abusees cannot do individually: prepare and initiate non-class aggregate actions and class actions, and multidistrict litigation in the public interest of exposing the nature, extent, and gravity of abuse of power by a big multistate entity[ ] and collectively demanding compensation.

j. Students will gain unique hands-on experience that will impress job recruiters or enable them to open multidisciplinary boutiques upon graduation. Their success can build up the reputation of their schools and increase admission applications and enrollment of better qualified applicants.

k. The citizens hearings’ findings of abuse of power coordinated and committed as institutionalized modus operandi should sufficiently inform and outrage the public to compel politicians, lest they be primaried or voted out of, or not into, office, to legislate transparency, accountability, and liability for, e.g., the healthcare industry.

l. The unprecedented citizens hearings have the potential for becoming a rallying point for abusees and reformers. They can set in motion the joint development of academe and the media as a powerhouse that can hold accountable and liable private and public entities so big that We the People separated into millions of individuals cannot fight.[16]

m. The citizens hearings can lead to the creation of the Institute of Unaccountability Reporting and Reform Advocacy, to be attached to a preeminent university or news network, and engaged in research, publishing, classroom and public education, consulting, litigation, lobbying, etc.

1. This proposal is realistic: multistate law firms from several states have represented Harvard; hundreds of universities as well as professors have added their names and efforts to challenge Trump administration executive orders; on April 5 over 1,200 demonstrations in all 50 states were reportedly held in communities across the country to protest Trump administration actions[ ] and more have been held every Saturday since then[ ]; etc.

2. In the same vein, my website at Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org has become a rallying point. There I post some of my law and business articles, the product of my professional research and writing, and strategic thinking. They have attracted so many webvisitors and impress them so favorably that as of 1 May 2025, the number of subscribers was 55,507+.

3. Some of my articles have been added to my three-volume study of abuse of power, titled and downloadable thus:

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

1. I offer to make a presentation to you and your guests via video conference or, if my expenses and fee are paid, in person on the reformative potential of district court en bancs and their interplay with unprecedented citizens hearings. Thus, I look forward to your call to schedule it.

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 of power 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
other payment facility, such as 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 shout “I accuse!”
You may trigger history and even enter it…as
a Champion of Justice.

[1] District Court en bancs, Professor Maggie Gardner, vol 90 Fordham Law Review 1541 (2022); https://fordhamlawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/Gardner_March.pdf

[2] Complaint at http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/ALJ/24-12-15DrRCordero-v-Medicare_EmblemHealth_et_al.pdf >SDNY:111

[3] Id. >SDNY:251

[4] The SDNY Local Rules, https://www.nysd.uscourts.gov/rules, do not provide for amicus briefs. But some guidance can be derived from its rules on motions:

Rule 6(b). On all civil motions…

(1) the moving papers must be served by the moving party on all other parties that have appeared in the action,

(2) any opposing or response papers must be served within 14 days after service of the moving papers, [my motion was e-filed and emailed on Friday, 11 April] and

(3) any reply papers must be served within seven days after service of the answering papers. In computing periods of days, refer to Fed. R. Civ. P. 6. [FRCP]

This tends to indicate that at any time after 14 +7 days after my filing on April 11= Thursday, May 2, the District Court, SDNY, could decide my motion. If an amicus brief reached it after that date, the amicus might not be taken into consideration in deciding my motion to convene the district court en banc. This means that time is of the essence.

Consider Local Rule 7.1. Form and Length of Briefs, Motions, and Other Papers:

(b)(1) all text must be 12-point type or larger, except for text in footnotes which may be 10-point type;

      (2) all documents must have at least one-inch margins on all sides;

       (3) all text must be double-spaced, except for headings, text in footnotes, or block quotations, which may be single-spaced.

(c) Length of Memoranda of Law. If filed by an attorney or pre-pared with a computer, briefs in support of and in response to a motion (except for motions for reconsideration) may not exceed 8,750 words, and reply briefs may not exceed 3,500 words.

In the same vein is “Local Rule 6.3. Motions for Reconsideration…if filed by an attorney or prepared with a computer, briefs in support of and in response to a motion may not exceed 3,500 words”. FRAP “Rule 29. Brief of an Amicus Curiae”, http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/docs/28us c_Civ_App_Evi_Rules.pdf, appears too technical to be imported wholesale into a jurisdiction that has no formal en banc mechanism.

On the contrary, at this early stage of the proposed regular use of en bancs, district courts should be encouraged to liberally and imaginatively use them to attain the purpose set by FRCP 1 when ‘district courts construe, administer, and employ FRCP’: “to secure the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action and proceeding”. See my motion[3] >SDNY:260§D. Why review by a district court en banc is the proper course of action.

In conclusion, you could write an amicus brief of no more than 3,500 words and file it as soon as possible to give practical application to your article and support my motion for CJ Swain and/or the other judges in her court to convene en banc to review and grant my requested relief as they treat this as a test case in the public interest.

[5] Wilmer Cutler; https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/doc1/045111284993

[6] Perkins Coie; https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.278290/gov .uscourts.dcd.278290.1.0.pdf

[7] Susman Godfrey; https://www.susmangodfrey.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/Complaint-4.11.25.pdf

[8] Jenner & Block; https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/doc1/045111284768

[9] Harvard; https://www.harvard.edu/research-funding/wp-content/uploads/sites/16/2025/04/Harvard-Funding-Freeze-Order-Complaint.pdf

[10] http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/docs/28usc_Civ_App_Evi_Rules.pdf

[11] https://www.forbes.com/advisor/health-insurance/medicare/medicare-statistics/

[12] 2024 Year End Report on the Federal Judiciary by Supreme Court Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr.; https://www.supremecourt.gov/publicinfo/year-end/2024year-endreport.pdf >page 10

[13] Cf. Syllabus of DeLano Case Course; http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/DCC/DrRCordero_DeLano_Case_Course.pdf >DCC:23

[14] http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_method_for_writing_your_story.pdf

[15] Syllabus for preparing the conference; endnote 13 >DCC:31

[16] Blurbs and abstracts of articles on abuse of power: an abusive big commercial entity; http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL3/DrRCordero-blurbs&abstracts_of_cases&articles.pdf >¶¶8, 16

[17] Photos: See demonstrators around the country rally in ‘Hands Off!’ protests: The Picture Show; NPR staff; https://www.npr.org/sections/the-picture-show/2025/04/05/g-s1-58479/photos-see-hands-off-protests-trump-musk

[18] https://www.bing.com/images/search?q=were+demonstrations+held+against+ trump+and+his+policies+on+april+26&qpvt=were+demonstrations+held+against+Trump+and+his+policies+on+April+26&form=IGRE&first=1

Giving practical application to
Cornell Law Professor Maggie Gardner’s article
District Court en bancs;
inviting lawyers targeted by Trump executive orders to join in
an amicus curiae brief to support
a motion for en banc review in U.S. District Court, SDNY; and
proposing UNPRECEDENTED CITIZENS HEARINGS
that can turn universities, the media, and law firms into
a new powerhouse of American governance
http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL3/DrRCordero_v_exec_orders&for_citizens_hearings.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
tel. (718)827-9521
Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net, DrRCordero@Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org, Corderoric@yahoo.com

To subscribe to articles similar to the one hereunder:
a. go to   + New or Users >Add New; or
b. fill out the New User form at https://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/wp-admin/user-new.php.

Professor Maggie Gardner
Cornell Law School
Ithaka, NY 14853-4901
tel. (607)255-5346;
mgardner@cornell.edu, gj13@cornell.edu,
lyc8@cornell.edu,liz.flint@cornell.edu

Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP,
Perkins Coie LLP,
Susman Godfrey LLP,
Jenner & Block LLP,
Harvard,
lawyers, law firms, and universities targeted by Trump administration executive orders,
and
Advocates of Honest Judiciaries,

Dear Professor Gardner, Wilmer Cutler, Perkins Coie, Susman Godfrey, Jenner & Block, Harvard, lawyers, law firms, universities, and Advocates,‡

1_This is a proposal to join forces to apply Professor Gardner’s article District Court en bancs[1] in a case pending in the U.S. District Court, SDNY, concerning healthcare insurers and other medical services and equipment providers’ plotting and committing with the complicity of Medicare abusive insurance claims evasive “delay, deny, defend” tactics:

Cordero
v.
Secretary of Health and Human Services, Medicare,
EmblemHealth [healthcare insurer],
Maximus Federal Services [reviewer of insurance claims denials],
et al. [including many of the top officers of
the Medicare Appeals Council and
the Office of Medicare Hearings and Appeals (OMHA)];
docket no. 24-cv-9778-JAV;
filed in U.S. District Court, SDNY,
on 16 December 2024. [2 >SDNY:111]

2_I cited you, Prof. Gardner, and your article in my April 11 motion[3 >SDNY:251], which requests en banc review. With your amicus curiae[4 infra] support of it, you can capitalize on the enormous research and writing effort that you must have invested in your article.

3_Wilmer Cutler[5], Perkins Coie[6], Susman Godfrey[7], Jenner & Block[8], Harvard[9], and the lawyers, law firms, universities, and Advocates challenging the Trump administration are invited to join in one amicus brief or write their own amicus to benefit from the greater use of district court en bancs.

4_Indeed, my motion was addressed to SDNY Chief Judge Laura Taylor Swain to request that she convene her district court en banc to resolve the conflict between an order of hers in my case and a subsequent one of the currently assigned judge, i.e., J. Annette A. Vargas; and decide other issues of public interest in these turbulent judicial times, e.g., whether:

a. a decision of a district court en banc, convened on a party’s or the judges’ motion, can more effectively persuade the public and a court of appeals than a decision of a single judge. If so, it would better resist arbitrary and capricious attacks by the current administration;

b. access to justice can become ‘speedier and more inexpensive’ in line with the purpose for the FRCP set forth in Rule 1[10] through review by a district court en banc compared with an appeal to an appeals court;

c. the sovereign and judicial immunity doctrines violate Articles II §4 and III §1; and Amendments XIV §1 and V of the Constitution, which provide for holding all officers of the United States, including those of the Executive branch and all judges, accountable so that against those officers We the People can secure “the equal protection of the laws” instead of being at the mercy of officers who arrogate to themselves an unconstitutionally superior place: Above the Law;

d. district court en bancs are mechanisms for judges to police themselves so that they can deter, detect, and correct their fellow judges’ abuse of discretion/power or incompetence;

e. characterizing mine as a test case in defense of civil rights and in the public interest, se it will benefit the 67.3 million[11] old, sick, and disabled insureds of Medicare, and the additional millions of non-Medicare insureds, the overwhelming majority of all of whom lack the physical and emotional stamina and knowledge of the law needed to defend their rights individually, e.g., through four levels of administrative appeals and climb to the fifth level of judicial review in a federal district court, never mind appealing to a circuit court;

f. such characterization will induce law, journalism, and IT/AI professionals as well as professors and students to use my case to expose providers of healthcare insurance, other services, and equipment who commit “delay, deny, defend” tactics, and those who cover for them.

5_It is in the same SDNY district court that federal criminal charges seeking the death penalty have been brought against Luigi Mangione for allegedly murdering UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson in NYC last December 4. Given the overwhelming public support for Mr. Mangione and the public outrage at those tactics, it is reasonable to expect that his trial will attract the national and international media.

6_As a result, this is the most opportune time to ask law firms, universities, and the media to investigate how district court en bancs can launch the reform of the judiciary by providing a speedier, affordable, and meaningful level of judicial review of cases, such as healthcare cases, where time is of the essence but insurers have an interest in dragging out the case until the insured is dead or too weak to press their claim anymore.

7_Courts of appeals do not provide that kind of review because they can dispose of appeals perfunctorily in reliance on the fact that the Supreme Court grants barely 1.5% of certiorari petitions.[12] Such unaccountability allows riskless abuse of power by healthcare insurers and providers, among others, and an individual judge presiding over a case.

8_We can contribute to the wider use of district court en bancs by making presentations thereon at law, journalism, and IT/AI schools, beginning with our local ones and our alma maters, as well as many other public interest entities.

9_At those presentations, we will propose concrete actions that the audience can undertake to expose the abusers, such as press releases, the publication of articles, press conferences, interviews, podcasts, townhall meetings, rallies; etc.

10_Moreover, we will propose unprecedented citizens hearings.

a. The citizens hearings will be held by media outlets and universities at their stations and auditoriums during the first semester of an academic year[13 >DCC:23].

b. They will afford people the opportunity to tell their story[14] of the abuse of power that they have suffered or witnessed.

c. They will allow people throughout the country to tell and listen to the stories in person and online.

d. The more stories are told and heard, the more people will be informed about the abuse of power and become outraged. Ever more will scream, “That happened to Me-Too!” They will be driven to ask to be allowed to tell their stories to vent that fire that is burning in their soul: the constant cry for justice and compensation[2 >SDNY:156§L]. Nothing oppresses the soul more harshly and persistently than the feeling of having been or being abused. The informed and outraged people will thus energize another self-reinforcing cycle of citizens hearings.

e. During the second academic semester[15 >DCC:31], the findings of the hearings will be established and the preparation undertaken for their presentation near the end of the semester at the first-ever national conference on abuse of power. It will be held simultaneously at several interconnected universities and news media networks.

f. At that conference, the findings of the citizens hearings will be presented in speeches, panel discussions, and the first edition of the Annual Report on Unaccountability and Abuse of Power in America.

g. The citizens hearings will be a rich source of materials for the proposed multidisciplinary summer internships of students.

h. There will also be offered semester-long multidisciplinary clinics for academic credit. Students will learn, among other things:

1) administrative law;

2) agency and social data gathering;

3) news gathering and reporting;

4) public relations and image managing;

5) the application of IT/AI to audit massive amounts of writings, speeches, and footage to detect patterns of unlawful meeting of the minds and coordinated abusive conduct;

6) representing clients before agencies and arguing motions;

7) developing journalistic sources;

8) auditing with IT/AI and detecting deep fakes;

9) legislative drafting;

10) lobbying legislative bodies;

11) strategizing and implementing a campaign of mass communication and demonstrations to develop and lead a national, nonpartisan Me-Too!-like civic movement for civil rights, accountability, liability, and reform;

12) the setting up of a new type of practice for handling a flood of motions to vacate decisions, remand for a new trial, and obtain compensation. This practice can be lucrative and build national name recognition for the practitioners;

13) working as a team inside an institution and among institutions in one or several states under the guidance of an editor or a lead attorney; etc.

i. In addition, the students will learn to do what abusees cannot do individually: prepare and initiate non-class aggregate actions and class actions, and multidistrict litigation in the public interest of exposing the nature, extent, and gravity of abuse of power by a big multistate entity[16 >¶¶8, 16] and collectively demanding compensation.

j. Students will gain unique hands-on experience that will impress job recruiters or enable them to open multidisciplinary boutiques upon graduation.

k. The success of the students and, of course, their professors can build up the reputation of their schools and increase admission applications and enrollment of better qualified applicants.

l. The citizens hearings’ findings of abuse of power coordinated and committed as institutionalized modus operandi should sufficiently inform and outrage the public to compel opportunistic and principled politicians, lest they be primaried or voted out of, or not into, office, to legislate transparency, accountability, and liability for, e.g., the healthcare industry.

m. The unprecedented citizens hearings have the potential for becoming a rallying point for abusees and reformers. They can set in motion the joint development of academe and the media as a powerhouse that holds accountable and liable private and public entities so big that We the People separated into millions of individuals cannot fight.[16 >¶¶7, 15; 8, 16]

n. The citizens hearings can lead to the creation of the Institute of Unaccountability Reporting and Reform Advocacy, to be attached to a preeminent university or news network, and engaged in research, publishing, classroom and public education, consulting, litigation, lobbying, etc.

11_This proposal is realistic:

a. multistate law firms from several states have represented Harvard;

b. hundreds of universities as well as professors have added their names and efforts to challenge Trump administration executive orders;

c. on April 5 over 1,200 demonstrations in all 50 states were reportedly held in communities across the country to protest Trump administration actions[17] and more have been held every Saturday since then[18]; etc.

12_In the same vein, my website at Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org has become a rallying point. There I post some of my law and business articles, the product of my professional research and writing, and strategic thinking. They have attracted so many webvisitors and impress them so favorably that as of 30 April 2025, the number of subscribers was 55,289+.

13_Some of my articles have been added to my three-volume study of abuse of power, titled and downloadable thus:

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

14_I offer to make a presentation to you and your guests via video conference or, if my expenses and fee are paid, in person outside NY City on the reformative potential of district court en bancs and their interplay with unprecedented citizens hearings. Thus, I look forward to your call to schedule it.

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 of power 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
other payment facility, such as 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 shout “I accuse!”
You may trigger history and even enter it…as
a Champion of Justice.

[1] District Court en bancs, Professor Maggie Gardner, vol 90 Fordham Law Review 1541 (2022); https://fordhamlawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/Gardner_March.pdf

[2] Complaint at http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/ALJ/24-12-15DrRCordero-v-Medicare_EmblemHealth_et_al.pdf >SDNY:111

[3] Id. >SDNY:251

[4] The SDNY Local Rules, https://www.nysd.uscourts.gov/rules, do not provide for amicus briefs. But some guidance can be derived from its rules on motions:

Rule 6(b). On all civil motions…

(1) the moving papers must be served by the moving party on all other parties that have appeared in the action,

(2) any opposing or response papers must be served within 14 days after service of the moving papers, [my motion was e-filed and emailed on Friday, 11 April] and

(3) any reply papers must be served within seven days after service of the answering papers. In computing periods of days, refer to Fed. R. Civ. P. 6. [FRCP]

This tends to indicate that at any time after 14 +7 days after my filing on April 11= Thursday, May 2, the District Court, SDNY, could decide my motion. If an amicus brief reached it after that date, the amicus might not be taken into consideration in deciding my motion to convene the district court en banc. This means that time is of the essence.

Consider Local Rule 7.1. Form and Length of Briefs, Motions, and Other Papers:

(b)(1) all text must be 12-point type or larger, except for text in footnotes which may be 10-point type;

     (2) all documents must have at least one-inch margins on all sides;

      (3) all text must be double-spaced, except for headings, text in footnotes, or block quotations, which may be single-spaced.

(c) Length of Memoranda of Law. If filed by an attorney or pre-pared with a computer, briefs in support of and in response to a motion (except for motions for reconsideration) may not exceed 8,750 words, and reply briefs may not exceed 3,500 words.

In the same vein is “Local Rule 6.3. Motions for Reconsideration…if filed by an attorney or prepared with a computer, briefs in support of and in response to a motion may not exceed 3,500 words”. FRAP “Rule 29. Brief of an Amicus Curiae”, http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/docs/28us c_Civ_App_Evi_Rules.pdf, appears too technical to be imported wholesale into a jurisdiction that has no formal en banc mechanism.

On the contrary, at this early stage of the proposed regular use of en bancs, district courts should be encouraged to liberally and imaginatively use them to attain the purpose set by FRCP 1 when ‘district courts construe, administer, and employ FRCP’: “to secure the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action and proceeding”. See my motion[3 >SDNY:260§D]. Why review by a district court en banc is the proper course of action.

In conclusion, you could write an amicus brief of no more than 3,500 words and file it as soon as possible to give practical application to your article and support my motion for CJ Swain and/or the other judges in her court to convene en banc to review and grant my requested relief as they treat this as a test case in the public interest.

[5] Wilmer Cutler; https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/doc1/045111284993

[6] Perkins Coie; https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.278290/gov .uscourts.dcd.278290.1.0.pdf

[7] Susman Godfrey; https://www.susmangodfrey.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/Complaint-4.11.25.pdf

[8] Jenner & Block; https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/doc1/045111284768

[9] Harvard; https://www.harvard.edu/research-funding/wp-content/uploads/sites/16/2025/04/Harvard-Funding-Freeze-Order-Complaint.pdf

[10] http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/docs/28usc_Civ_App_Evi_Rules.pdf

[11] https://www.forbes.com/advisor/health-insurance/medicare/medicare-statistics/

[12] 2024 Year End Report on the Federal Judiciary by Supreme Court Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr.; https://www.supremecourt.gov/publicinfo/year-end/2024year-endreport.pdf >page 10

[13] Cf. Syllabus of DeLano Case Course; http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/DCC/DrRCordero_DeLano_Case_Course.pdf >DCC:23

[14] http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_method_for_writing_your_story.pdf

[15] Syllabus for preparing the conference; endnote 13 >DCC:31

[16] Blurbs and abstracts of articles on abuse of power: an abusive big commercial entity; http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL3/DrRCordero-blurbs&abstracts_of_cases&articles.pdf >¶¶7, 15; ¶¶8, 16

[17] Photos: See demonstrators around the country rally in ‘Hands Off!’ protests: The Picture Show; NPR staff; https://www.npr.org/sections/the-picture-show/2025/04/05/g-s1-58479/photos-see-hands-off-protests-trump-musk

[18] https://www.bing.com/images/search?q=were+demonstrations+held+against+ trump+and+his+policies+on+april+26&qpvt=were+demonstrations+held+against+Trump+and+his+policies+on+April+26&form=IGRE&first=1

            http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL3/DrRCordero-blurbs_abstracts_class_action_cases.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
Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net, DrRCordero@Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org, Corderoric@yahoo.com

To subscribe to articles similar to the one hereunder:
a. go to   + New or Users >Add New; or
b. fill out the New User form at https://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/wp-admin/user-new.php.

Dear lawyers, journalists, professors, experts, students, and Advocates of Honest Judiciaries,

1. This is a proposal to prosecute cases jointly as class actions on behalf of sizable segments of the national public, doing so in our personal as well as the public interest. These cases are described in the below short blurbs and the longer abstracts of the detailed articles to which they make reference.

2. The cases are of interest to all of you because they involve abuse of power by public officers. The proposed publication of the articles, their presentation at press conferences, and their prosecution as class actions are intended to expose the abuse to hold the abusers accountable, demand collective compensation for the abusees, and launch transformative judicial reform of the system of justice.

3. This proposal for professionals to form a team as needed to prosecute each case and for abusees to join the respective class action is realistic, for it recognizes the substantial amount of effort, time, and money required for its implementation. In this vein, it is pertinent to consider that:

a. ‘Scandal sells’ and can win Pulitzer prizes. Indeed, ProPublica won this year’s Pulitzer for Public Service for its investigative work that in a series of articles exposed corruption between justices of the U.S. Supreme Court and ‘friends of the justices’.

b. Martin Luther King said in effect that ‘abuse tolerated of someone leads to abuse inflicted on everyone’.

c. Successful class actions with counts under RICO -Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act; 18 U.S.C. §§1961 to 1968- and their state counterparts -e.g., NY Enterprise Corruption– can lead to settlements of $10s of millions, the award of compensatory and punitive damages, treble damages, attorneys’ fees, a significant reputational enhancement, a bestseller, a blockbuster movie, a tour of presentations, an influx of new clients, etc.

 T4. The blurbs and the abstracts contain links to articles that I already wrote and you all can review. My articles have proved their appeal for the public: I have posted some of them to my website, Judicial Discipline Reform, at http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org. They have attracted so many webvisitors and elicited such a positive reaction that as of 7 November 2024, the number of visitors who had become subscribers was 52,566+.

a. How many law firms, let alone individual lawyers, do you know that have a website with so many subscribers?

 55. I have written many other articles(§A) cum chapters of my three-volume study of judges and their judiciaries^* † ♣. They are the product of my professional law research and writing, and strategic thinking so that they propose action that lawyers and lay people can take severally and jointly. The study is titled thus:

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

6.6. The site, the study, and the articles support the several proposals for a journalistic, business, and academic joint venture, including:

a. the serial publication of the key articles of my cases, which I can edit as requested, simultaneously with the further investigation of the cases, which will be facilitated by the many leads that I have gathered, e.g., OL:194§E and the articles referred to in the blurbs and abstracts;

b. the creation of a new form of journalism: representative journalism. It will enable you to leverage your knowledge of the main players in the class action bar and other fields to put together ad hoc teams of lawyers, journalists, multidisciplinary experts, and media and academic entities that have the necessary investigative and financial resources and expertise to:

1) represent the abusees -e.g., those in my cases- in class actions with civil RICO counts against big unaccountable abusive entities;

2) lobby on their behalf in Congress, and state and local lawmaking bodies for official investigations, legislation, and law enforcement;

3) challenge the Establishment in the name of millions of people who individually lack the means of defending their rights, but whose strength in numbers representative journalism turns into a force to be reckoned with: a new powerhouse of American governance;

4) grow the readership, revenue, and reputation of representative journalists and their team members who engage in concrete actions guided by the principle “Making Money While Doing Justice”;

c. the development of my site from a news and analytical platform into a commercial undertaking that functions as a watchdog to advance the public interest.

1) Already attracted to my website, the subscribers to it constitute the initial client base of the site developed to run as do so many others that apply the TV and radio business model: You give viewers and listeners appealing programming or your basic goods and services for free, and charge a fee for premium ones and for carrying the advertisement of sellers of related goods and services, such as books, webinars, conferences, transportation and hotel accommodations, trial services, brief formatting, printing, and serving, etc.

d. the holding by academe and the media of unprecedented citizens hearings:

1) to be moderated by journalists and professors at university auditoriums and broadcasting stations;

2) to allow people to tell in person or via video conference accessible to the national public their stories of the abuse by public entities that they have suffered or witnessed;

3) to present the moderators’ report on the citizens hearings at the first national conference on public officers’ unaccountability and riskless abuse of power;

4) to turn the report into the first edition of the Annual Report of Abuse of Power in America;

e. the creation of the Institute of Judicial Unaccountability Reporting and Reform Advocacy, to be:

1) attached to a preeminent university or a national media network; and

2) run as a for-profit research, publishing, teaching, and public interest litigating and lobbying entity; etc.

 7. I offer to present to you and your guests this proposal in person if in New York City, and anywhere else if my expenses and fee are paid; otherwise, via video conference. Please call me at 1(718)827-9521 to make appropriate arrangements.

Dare shout “I accuse!”
You may trigger history and even enter it as
a Champion of Justice.

Sincerely,

Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Judicial Discipline Reform
2165 Bruckner Blvd.
Bronx, NY 10472-6506
tel. (718)827-9521
Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net, DrRCordero@Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org, Corderoric@yahoo.com

A. Blurbs of cases for joint prosecution by a team of lawyers, journalists, multidisciplinary experts, et al.

.8. (cf. ¶16↓) Federal judges intercept people’s emails and mail to detect and suppress those of their critics, as shown by a statistical analysis.

9. (cf. ¶17↓) Indictments fabricated on false and insufficient evidence by prosecutors and police officers, and covered up by criminal term judges, administrative judges, and the judges of the NY State Court of Appeals, which is the highest court in NY.

10. (cf. ¶18↓) The Math of Abuse is a mathematical demonstration that judges do not read most briefs. It can cause a flood of actions for breach of contract, false advertisement, fraud, dereliction of duty, remand for new trial, null and void case disposition by clerks not vested with judicial power, which is not assignable; demand for refund of filing fees and compensation for causing wasteful litigation expenses; etc.

11.  (cf. ¶19↓) Judges in the Federal Judiciary systematically dismiss 100% of the complaints filed against fellow judges. Thereby they abuse the self-disciplinary authority that Congress has granted them. By exonerating each other, they ensure their own impunity and elevate themselves to a position that nobody is entitled to occupy in “government by the rule of law”: Judges Above the Law.

1. (cf. ¶20↓) The Follow the Money! And Follow the Wire! investigations(jur:102§a; OL:194§E) will apply forensic research techniques, e.g., Fraud and Forensic Accounting, big data search, and AI, to discover assets that judges have grabbed, concealed, evaded taxes on, and handled through money laundering(OL:1).

2. (cf. ¶21↓) Judges’ bankruptcy fraud scheme deals with $100s of bl. annually. It is covered up by the circuit judges who appoint the bankruptcy judges in their circuit for a 14-year term(28 U.S.C. §152) and can reappoint them if the bankruptcy judges share and make “cronies”(jur:32§§2-6) pay-to-play.

14. (cf. ¶22↓) Medicare works to maintain in, and increase, its network of thousands of medical services and equipment providers. Together they abuse many of its 67 million insureds, who appeal, if at all, their decisions pro se, for they are sick and cannot afford lawyers. They have little chance of prevailing against the battery of lawyers of Medicare and its providers. The recovery can be huge.

15. (cf. ¶23↓) Walgreens had $139.5 bl. in revenue in 2020 and 277,000 employees in 2021. Its purchase-incentivizing program is Cash Rewards, a bait and switch scam. A class action can hold it liable. It can also serve as a test case for suing other giant companies that abuse dwarf clients one at a time.

B. Abstracts: a more detailed presentation of the cases for joint prosecution

1. Federal judges intercept people’s emails and mail to detect and suppress those of their critics, as shown by a statistical analysis. They have the technical expertise and equipment infrastructure to run a national IT network that allows filing, storing, and retrieving hundreds of millions of briefs, motions, records, petitions, applications, orders, decisions, reports, statistics, dockets, schedules, and emails to and from their case management and electronic case filing system (CM/ECF) administered by PACER (Public Access to Court Electronic Records).

a. The judges wield devastating decisional and retaliatory power over Internet-controlling companies(Lsch:17§C), which they can refrain from wielding if the companies assist them in their interception(OL:5fn7).

b. The U.S. Postal Service’s “Informed Delivery” service shows that the technology to intercept mail is in use(OL3:1304¶20). Register to be emailed every morning a photo of the front side of your mail for that day. Amazing computing power is needed to identify your mail since “The Postal Service processed and delivered an average of 318 million mail pieces daily”.

c. All public power belongs to We the People in a democracy. No abuse of it will outrage us more than the exposure of judges’ violation of our most cherished constitutional freedoms, i.e., of speech, press, and assembly -on social media too-. Informing the public of such violation will provoke Snowden/NSA–like national outrage.

d. Exposing such interception will provoke a constitutional crisis -which branch will prosecute the judiciary?-; launch a flood of lawsuits by abusees demanding compensation; may lead to a constitutional convention; etc.

1.  Fabricated indictments. As a lawyer and grand juror, I had the knowledge and was in a position to realize that the assistant district attorney and his supervisor(ADAs) had no evidence supporting their charge of murder brought against two defendants, and neither did the police officers who testified against them.

a. When I questioned what they were doing, the ADAs referred me to the grand jury judge, who discharged me from the jury peremptorily.

b. I have mailed complaint letters -see Exhibits 1-4– to the county and state administrative judges; the Judicial Conduct Commission; the NYPD commissioners and their Internal Affairs Bureau chiefs; each of the judges of NYS Court of Appeals; the indicted NYC Mayor and his probed aides; public advocates; city council members; et al. All of them have covered for their colleagues.

c. Lawyers can jointly defend thousands of ‘fabricated indictees‘ by impugning their indictments; and win punitive damages. Scandal sells.

1. The Math of Abuse. This is a mathematical demonstration that the vast majority of case and motion briefs filed in the courts are not read by the judges. It is based on official statistics of the NY Supreme Court Appellate Division and those in the Annual Report of the Director of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, which is required to be filed with Congress as a public document (28 U.S.C. §§604(a)(3-4); (h)(2)).

a. Judges dispose of the brief-related cases and motions by having their clerks rubberstamp reasonless, unresearched, fiat-like 5¢ dumping forms. Their blanks are filled out with case-identifying data; and their boilerplate does not contain findings of facts or arguments of law.

b. The forms’ only operative words are “affirmed”, if the case was a decision appealed from; or “denied”, if slapped on a substantive motion, e.g., one that argues the rights and duties of a party, the basis of a charge, or the admissibility of evidence, as opposed to a procedural motion, for instance, one concerning the extension of a deadline or the substitution of an attorney. The status remains given that no judges’ action was needed, only clerks’ complicit obedience.

c. Filled out dumping forms are not judicial decisions, but rather arbitrary, capricious, and ad hoc fiats to dump off cases in judges’ caseload that based on a list of judges’ criteria their clerks must dispose of as ‘deadweight’.

d. Many dumping-form fiats can be found on courts’ websites, courts’ research rooms, some ‘Miscellaneous’ reporters -printed collections of decisions-, and legal notice newspapers, e.g., New York Law Journal.

e. Dumping-form fiats are such an abuse of power that judges may even conceal them under the “Not for publication” rubberstamp. Consequently, they may not be entered into the public record by either the clerk of court or the county clerk. The parties may have:

1) received a copy by mail;

2) been informed thereof when they called to ask about the status of their cases; or

3) found it after they were told by a clerk to come to the court’s in-take room to look for the decision in their case in the chest of drawers full of decisions waiting to be entered.

f. “Not for publication” rubberstamping and dumping-form fiats are means of judges not making public pro-forma decisions of which they are ashamed due to their perfunctoriness or to their having made them in their self-interest of preserving or increasing the value of their shares in one of the parties before them.

g. A contract for service is formed when a party pays the advertised brief filing fee to have its case or motion decided judicially, i.e., based on the brief and the application of the law. This requires that the brief be read by a judge, who were vetted publicly for their competence and honesty. Clerks were not; hence, judicial decisional authority cannot be delegated to them.

h. By instead issuing a dumping-form fiat, judges commit bait and switch false advertisement, breach of contract, dereliction of duty, and fraud on the public.

i. An informed and outraged group or class of parties so injured in fact can generate enough public pressure to force judges to recognize that those pro-forma decisions have the appearance of a conflict of interests; declare them null and void; call for a new trial; and recuse themselves from the cases. Cf. The Wall Street Journal’s serial article:

1) beginning on 28 September 2021, with “131 Federal Judges Broke the Law by Hearing Cases Where They Had a Financial Interest”; and

2) followed on 2 November 2021, by “Hidden Interests – Federal Judge Files Recusal Notices in 138 Cases After WSJ Queries. Rodney Gilstrap initially argued he didn’t violate financial-conflicts law” (App6:30entry449 or thereunder).

1. Federal judges’ systematic dismissal of complaints against their fellow federal judges. They abuse the congressional grant 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 of their own and denying 100% of petitions to review those dismissals.

a. Judges have institutionalized the implicit or explicit complicit agreement for mutual assured protection through their 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 abuse’s nature, extent, gravity, or harm.’

b. Judges’ reciprocal exoneration corrupts judicial integrity as judges look after each other rather than to administer fair and impartial justice in accordance to law.

c. Judges have defrauded the public by pretending that they will process complaints fairly and impartially while in fact they dismiss the complaints to cover for each other as an integral part of their interpersonal relationship. By covering for the abuse that was committed, they have encouraged more abuse. That is how they have become accessories after and before the fact.

1. The Follow the Money! and Follow the Wire! investigations. These investigations apply forensic research techniques, e.g., Fraud and Forensic Accounting(FFA), big data search, and AI(jur:102§a; OL:194§E), to discover assets that judges have grabbed, concealed, evaded taxes on, handled through money laundering(OL:1); etc.

a. Justice Thomas was shown to have received more than $4 million in gifts from billionaires with business before the Supreme Court. He has failed to declare those gifts in his annual financial disclosure report mandated under the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 (5 U.S. Code, Appendix). He refuses to recuse himself from cases related to them.

b. The other eight justices, let alone lower court judges, abstain from exhibiting the moral courage necessary to criticize him, let alone demand that he resign.

1) Their reciprocal cover-up through silence is explained by the capacity that each justice has to bring down all the other justices and many judges as accessories before and after the fact, and for willful ignorance and blindness, culpable indifference, dereliction of duty to safeguard the integrity of the judicial system, obstruction of justice,  their own abuse of power, about which they may even have boasted(jur:88§§a-e), etc.

c. The justices and judges tacitly shout at each other, “If you help them take me down, I’ll bring you with me!” As a result of their complicit silence, they are beholden to each other. Their reciprocal cover-up is their institutionalized modus operandi. Their silence and cover-ups are the pervasive means of controlling and corrupting the judicial system. See the analysis of the official statistics(OL2:455§§B, D) and hereunder.

d. Judges’ abuse of power and cover-ups can be prosecuted under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO; 18 U.S.C. §1961 (U.S. Code of federal criminal law) and its version in the law of the several states; cf. NY Enterprise Corruption Law.

1.  Judges’ bankruptcy fraud scheme. Bankruptcy judges are appointed to a term of 14 years (28 U.S.C. §152) by the circuit judges of the circuit where they will sit, who can reappoint them if the bankruptcy judges share and make “cronies”(jur:32§§2-6) pay-to-play.

a. Those circuit judges will decide any appeal from the decisions of their bankruptcy judges. Appointers loath to reverse the decisions of their appointees, which incriminates them as having appointed an incompetent or corrupt judicial candidate. Rather, appointers cover up for, and do not appreciate lawyers who attack, their appointees.

 b. The majority of bankrupt parties are individuals, as opposed to companies. Almost all of them appear pro se, for they lack the money to mount costly and time-consuming appeals. They also lack knowledge of the intricacies of bankruptcy law. Thus, appeals from bankruptcy judges’ decisions are extremely rare. What the bankruptcy judge says, goes.

c. In most of the 90 bankruptcy courts across the country -all of which are federal- there is only one, two, or three bankruptcy judges. As a result, bankruptcy lawyers, whom companies must retain to represent them, hardly ever challenge their decisions, whereby they would risk the retaliation of the judge presiding over their case as well as that in solidarity of his/her fellow judges when they preside over their cases and teach them the lesson: ‘Don’t you ever mess with any of us!‘

d. Moreover, a bankruptcy judge can have a bankruptcy trustee removed from all the trustee’s thousands of cases by filing a complaint against him in one single case(28 CFR (Code of Federal Regulations) Part 58.6(a)(4)). Obviously, the trustee has every interest in never even appearing to challenge or otherwise displeasing the judge, and in showing his gratitude for every day that the judge allows him to keep his job.

e. A bankruptcy trustee wields enormous power in his dealings with the debtor: He recommends to the judge what assets to exempt from distribution to the creditors and the dollar percentage to which debts must be paid. Appreciation for a recommended lower percentage may be shown with a kickback, as may be the judge’s approval of the recommendation.

f. In 2005, Congress found an “absence of effective oversight”, and in 1979, “cronyism”, in the bankruptcy system.(jur:32§§2-6) The result was and still is the unaccountability of the system cronies, e.g., circuit and bankruptcy judges, the bankruptcy trustees, and the service providers that they hire, such as accountants, appraisers, warehousers, and lawyers. They take care of, and cover for, each other, thus evolving into a tight-knit racketeering enterprise.

g. Held unaccountable by the bankruptcy judges, the cronies are free to run risklessly an abusive bankruptcy petition mill. Thereby money becomes accessible by approving for processing every petition for protection from creditors regardless of its merits under bankruptcy law. After all, only if petitions are in the system can the cronies grab the money through their bankruptcy fraud scheme.

h. Consequently, bankruptcy judges exercise unaccountable power over $100s of billions every year. Their ‘absolute power’ over so much money degenerates into ‘absolute corruption’(jur:27fn28). Their unaccountability enables them to run risklessly their bankruptcy fraud scheme and makes its workings understandable.

i. These are some of the mechanisms that provide motive, means, and opportunity for abuse of power in the bankruptcy courts and their running of a bankruptcy fraud scheme. The scheme has millions of victims, namely, the debtors and creditors in one-off cases, who are unlikely to be among the cronies. The latter are repeat players and thus, the beneficiaries.

j. An investigation must determine whether bankruptcy and circuit judges abuse the Federal Judiciary’s national IT network to illegally transfer, conceal from individuals and the IRS, and launder onshore and offshore money that they have grabbed through the scheme(OL:1).

k. A group of lawyers, journalists, multidisciplinary experts, professors, and students can join forces to work as a team to expose the schemers. The team members can shake to the core not only the bankruptcy system, but also the rest of the judicial system that appoints and covers for bankruptcy judges, and abets and benefits from their bankruptcy fraud scheme. In the process, the team can earn a lot of money and make a name for themselves.

1. Medicare administers a budget of $900+ billion for the benefit of its more than 67 million insureds. It has thousands of HMOs, other health insurance entities, and medical services and equipment providers in its network.

a. Medicare has an interest in attracting to, and maintaining in its, network the largest number of medical services providers, which makes joining and remaining in Medicare more appealing for potential and current insureds.

b. But it is also in its interest to pay the fewest claims by, or on behalf of, the insureds. Those entities that receive a lump sum of money from Medicare to manage in line with certain guidelines, also have an interest in paying the fewest claims.

c. For their part, providers have an interest in receiving not just what Medicare pays according to its schedules, although they agreed contractually to accept as full payment the amount set forth in the schedules. So, the providers bill the insureds for the balance unpaid by Medicare, never mind that such balance billing is legally prohibited.

d. However, if Medicare were too strict in enforcing the balance billing prohibition, it would run the risk of providers quitting its network or even not joining it. As result, it looks the other way and lets its network providers balance bill its insureds.

e. After all, the insureds can hardly do anything about it. They are sick and burdened with medical bills. Hence, they cannot afford a lawyer. But they do not know the law, which means that they cannot represent themselves effectively pro se. It follows that they end up being abused by both Medicare and its providers.

f. The recovery for holding Medicare and its providers accountable and liable for their abuse of insureds can be huge. A successful class action or perhaps only informing the public about, and outraging it at, the abusers, can force transformative change in not only Medicare, but also the rest of the national health care system.

1. 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.

a. It is a misnomer, for rewards are not earned by paying in cash and cannot be redeemed for cash despite the statement on its false advertisement: “Save time. Redeem your rewards instantly at checkout”. But at checkout you cannot pay the total of the purchase with your Cash Rewards. You can only apply one single “tier” of $1, $3, $5, $10, or $20 that is equal to or less than the total purchase cost. The balance must be paid with your money. Your rewards, though earned, are not yours, for they expire.

b. Cash Rewards are a bait and switch scam. Walgreens has shown its propensity for abuse: For its involvement in the opioid epidemic, ‘It will pay $4.95 billion, plus more than $750 million in fees for attorneys and costs’.

c. This is a test case for going after big businesses that make substantial gains by defrauding millions of customers of small amounts that do not justify the cost of individual prosecution.

C. Potential impact of the key articles published by a national media outlet

1. The key articles of the above blurbs and abstracts have the potential for opening the floodgates for tens of thousands of motions by individual lawyers or better yet, by our teams:

a. to vacate decisions perfunctorily and fraudulently issued by judges’ clerks on a 5¢ ‘dumping form’, whose blanks are filled out with case-identifying data; whose boilerplate does not discuss either the facts or the law of the case; and whose only operative words are either “affirmed”, to rubberstamp a lower court decision; or “denied”, if slapped on a substantive as opposed to a procedural motion, e.g., one that argues the rights and duties of a party, the basis of a charge, or the admissibility of evidence.

b. to remand for a new trial or to enter judgment against the party in which the judge had an interest if that party knew or through due diligence could have known of the judge’s interest.

c. to be compensated by judges and their judiciaries for the waste of effort, time, and money involved in writing a brief -an appellate brief can cost between $20,000 and $100,000- and the foreseeable and thus intentional frustration of the reasonable expectation that the brief would be used as the source of facts and law for judges to administer justice although the judges knew that they would not read them;

d. to recuse themselves for engaging in a pattern of abuse of power coordinated fraud on the public; dereliction of duty; intentional infliction of emotional and financial distress; etc;

e. to unscramble all the transactions and events based on the now vacated decisions so as to place the parties in the position in which they would be if those decisions had never been issued or to compensate the losing party; etc.

1. These motions will give rise to a new and high-stakes law practice: judicial accountability and liability practice. Students who learn in a law clinic to argue them may develop an expertise that they can market to recruiters or from their boutique law firm after graduation.

2. We will present our proposal for unprecedented citizens hearings. They will be held at university auditoriums and media stations; monitored by journalists, professors, students, and other qualified members of the audience; and intended to give abusees the opportunity to tell the national public present in the hearing venue and virtually there through the Internet their stories of the abuse of power by judges that they have suffered or witnessed. The report on the hearings will be presented at the first national conference on unaccountable abuse of power and in the first Annual Report on Unaccountable and Riskless Abuse of Power.

Dare shout “I accuse!”
You may trigger history and even enter it
as a Champion of Justice.

Sincerely,

Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Judicial Discipline Reform
2165 Bruckner Blvd.
Bronx, NY 10472-6506
tel. (718)827-9521
Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net, DrRCordero@Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org, Corderoric@yahoo.com

A call
for their investigations to extend to
the indictment fabricators
and
for the fabricated indictees
to join forces as a class
to expose them and demand collective compensation.

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
Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net, DrRCordero@Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org, Corderoric@yahoo.com

To subscribe to articles similar to the one hereunder:

a. go to   + New or Users >Add New; or
b. fill out the New User form at https://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/wp-admin/user-new.php.

Mr. Damian Williams
United States Attorney for SDNY
Att: Civilian Crime Reports Unit
Investigators of the NYPD and the NYC Mayor and aides
26 Federal Plaza, 37^th Floor
New York, NY 10278

Dear Mr. Williams and Investigators,^‡

^‡ http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL3/DrRCordero-FBI_SDNY.pdf

1. Thanks to your investigation into the corruption of NYPD Commissioner Edward Caban and other public officers, he has resigned. Your findings strengthen the credibility of the evidence of his corruption that I am submitting herewith for you to investigate further, to wit, his cover-up of the fabrication of indictments based on false and insufficient evidence by police officers, prosecutors, and judges at the Supreme Court Criminal Term of Bronx County, where he served while rising through the NYPD ranks.

1. I am a lawyer and was a grand juror in that Court. I had the knowledge and was in a position to realize that the prosecutors and police officers had no evidence for charging two persons with murder:

a. They presented no footage of the crime or photos of the victim or the street crime scene, or incident, arrest, or autopsy report. The footage of the restaurants flanking the street did not show a crowd of onlookers or vehicles of the police, the medical examiner, or crime scene investigators.

b. The indictment was sought in reliance on grand jurors’ indifference and uncritical judgment: ‘an ADA can indict a ham sandwich’. Fabricated indictments are used to support baseless charges because the more guilty pleas and convictions, the greater the chances of reelection and promotion.

c. When I asked critical questions, the presenting and the supervising ADAs referred me to the grand jury judge. He discharged me on the spot even though neither those ADAs nor anybody else showed up to accuse me of anything.

d. I described these events in a 4,743-word, 8-page sworn statement and submitted it to the administrative judge of the Bronx criminal court. 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. These judges acted arbitrarily and capriciously in dereliction of duty.

e. I filed a complaint in hardcopy -and have certificates of mailing or delivery- with Commissioners Caban and his predecessor; two Internal Affairs Bureau chiefs; three chief judges and each of the associate judges of the NYS Court of Appeals^♦ (CA); the NYS and NYC administrative judges; NYC Mayor Eric Adams and his aides; public advocates and defenders; council members; et al., who have not replied.

f. I have emailed them my complaint daily for months: more than 10,000 emails from my accounts with four different email service providers. I have made countless phone calls to them. To no avail; they have not responded or requested a copy of my sworn statement.[i]

1. The FBI should investigate both to begin the eradication of systemic corruption[ii] and to free and compensate current and past ‘fabricated indictees’. There can be tens of thousands of them, and in future more people can fall victim to what is an established pattern of abuse of power institutionalized as modus operandi.

2. The fabricators have sent their indictees to prison, where they may still be; devastated their lives financially by causing them to post bail or retain a lawyer; or denigrated their reputation by attaching to them a criminal record, which may have led to their losing their jobs or being evicted.[iii]

3. The FBI should investigate this complaint for their and its own sake: After it disregarded the complaints against sexual predator Dr. Larry Nassar, 90 U.S. Olympic and other gymnasts joined in a class action to sue it for $1 billion+ for dereliction of duty and the malfeasance of agents who covered up such disregard. To settle the suit it cost the FBI $138.7 million.

4. So, I respectfully request that you ask me in to discuss this evidence by October 1. If the U.S. Attorney’s Office and the FBI disregard again evidence of abuse of many people, I will post it to my site and call for action against it.[iv]

Dare shout “I accuse!” You may trigger history and even enter it.

NOTE:  I offer to make a presentation on this call. It can be in person, if here in New York City; and if my expenses and fees are paid, anywhere else; otherwise, via video conference.

Sincerely,

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

Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net, DrRCordero@Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org, Corderoric@yahoo.com

ENDNOTES

[1] Each of those officers had an individual duty to safeguard the integrity of the justice system. It is statistically impossible for that statistical population in a country as polarized as ours to have independently from each other decided not to respond. Cf. the jury pool from which jurors are selected is made up so that it has a statistical chance of representing the whole population’s spectrum of opinions on any subject. The chance of two unrelated persons having the same DNA is so statistically insignificant as to be deemed ‘beyond a reasonable possibility’.

a. The Commission on Judicial Conduct dare allege repeatedly in writing(Exh.4) to me, a lawyer, that it lacked jurisdiction to investigate the complained-about judges of the Bronx County Supreme Court Criminal term because they were not members of the NYS Unified Court System! To what greater degree of blatant dishonesty does the Commission go when making allegations to laypeople?

b. The identical reaction of former NYPD Commissioner Edward Caban, other NYPD officers, prosecutors and judges points to their complicit coordination, whether in fact or in effect, to cover-up the felonious fabrication of indictments involving deprivation of liberty and property; denial of civil rights under color of law; fraud; etc.

c. These public officers are at the top level of systemic corruption in the NY justice system, condoned or coordinated by the Court of Appeals (CA). Its judges were formerly judges of lower courts, where the fabrication of indictments and other acts of corruption were committed, which they knew and should have known had they proceeded with due diligence in the interest of justice. If those CA judges now allowed, never mind called for, the investigation of their former fellow judges, prosecutors, and police officers, they risk becoming the target of the warning that all of them scream to each other: ‘If you let them take me down, I bring you with me!’

d. Only outsiders, such as the U.S. Attorney’s Office and the FBI, can conduct the likes of Operation Graylord in Chicago in the 1980’s but without the participation of any NY agency whatsoever.

[2] There is more evidence that former NYPD Commissioner Caban must have known and condoned corruption and dereliction of duty in the Bronx.

a. For more than 8 years, the 43^rd Precinct in the Bronx has tolerated drag races at around 2:00 a.m. on Bruckner Express Way, from under the bridge on Castle Hill Avenue toward the bridge on White Plains Road, zip code 10472. The racers rev up the motors of their cars and motorcycles to the applause and cheers of the many spectators that come to see and hear them. They park their vehicles and mill on the Express Way to stop the traffic and clear the ‘racetrack’. The drivers that are detained honk their horns angrily. The noise jolts the whole neighborhood. It is physically impossible for police officers never to have heard them or the calls of neighbors disturbed by 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and even 6 races in one night at least once a week and on occasion 3 times in a week. These races are very dangerous for the racers, the spectators, and the drivers in the opposite direction.

1) Do police look the other way because of any benefit that they receive from the auto repair and chop shops thus promoting their work of souping up cars and motorcycles?

b.i. Fireworks are illegal. Yet, the police allow them to be exploded around zip code 10472 for even months after the 4^th of July.

1) Who has the money needed to buy such a large supply?

2) Is it stashed safely to prevent an explosion in this neighborhood of mostly apartment buildings?

b.ii. They are exploded by kids, who become ever more careless. Their explosive powder can be used to make bombs.

1) Do the police, who inevitably hear the fireworks’ explosions and see their lights in the sky, receive a benefit from allowing them?

b.iii. For leads to investigate a. and b., see the latest service requests:

1)  of 26 July 2024 # 311-194 761 40;

311-194 762 53;

311-194 763  43;

311-194 775 93;

2) of 27 July # EC-008 419 74 and

311-194 871 48, …68, and …82; and

3) those referred to therein.

b.iv. Most revealing are the recorded conversations with 311 operators and 43^rd Precinct Lt. Hilligan at (718) 542-0888; and on 15 August with Lt. Minear. No mandatory status statement has reached me.

[3] An informed and outraged! public will demand that judges and their judiciaries be held accountable and liable to compensation. So have been held abusive and malpracticing prosecutors and their offices; police officers and their departments; lawyers and their law firms; doctors and their hospitals; priests and their churches; pharmaceutical companies and their sellers; etc. Judges and their judiciaries should be too under the 14^th Amend. clauses on “equal protection of the laws [… from abusers who deny civil rights, honest services, and] due process”. Cf. Pulitzer-winner ProPublica.

[4] My website is at http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org. There I post some of my articles, the product of my professional research and writing, and strategic thinking. They have attracted so many webvisitors and elicited such a positive response that as of 7 October 2024, the number of visitors who had become subscribers was 52,134.

1. Those articles are supported by my 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^{* † ♣}

The investigations of NY City District Attorneys’ Offices
and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for SDNY
into pervasive public corruption in the NYPD and
among the NYC Mayor and his aides
lend credence to the complaint about
indictments fabricated on false and insufficient evidence.
A call for their investigations to extend to the indictment fabricators
and for the fabricated indictees to join forces as a class
to expose them and demand collective compensation.

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
Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net, DrRCordero@Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org, Corderoric@yahoo.com

September 21, 2024

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg
Att: Investigators of NYC Mayor Eric Adams and aides, and NYPD corruption
One Hogan Place
New York, NY 10013
tel. (212)335-9000;    https://manhattanda.org/policemisconduct/

Dear DA Bragg and Investigators,^‡

1. Your investigations and those of the FBI SDNY and EDNY into wrongdoing by Mayor E. Adams, his aides, the NYPD, and the FDNY have led Commissioner E. Caban to resign and others to plead guilty. They show that enterprise corruption pervades NYC government.
2. These events buttress the credibility of the evidence of their corruption that I am submitting herewith for you to investigate further, to wit, their fabrication of indictments based on false and insufficient evidence by NYPD officers, prosecutors, and judges at the Supreme Court Criminal Term of Bronx County, where Commissioner Edward Caban served while rising though the NYPD ranks, and its cover-up by many others.

1. I am a lawyer and was a grand juror in that Court. I had the knowledge and was in a position to realize that the prosecutors and police officers had no evidence for charging two persons with murder:

a. They presented no footage of the crime or photos of the victim or the street crime scene, or incident, arrest, or autopsy report.

b. The footage of the restaurants flanking the street did not show a crowd of onlookers or vehicles of the police, the medical examiner, or crime scene investigators.

c. The indictment was sought in reliance on grand jurors’ indifference and uncritical judgment: ‘an ADA can indict a ham sandwich’. Fabricated indictments are used to support baseless charges because the more guilty pleas and convictions, the greater the chances of reelection and promotion.

1. When I asked critical questions, the presenting and the supervising ADAs referred me to the grand jury judge. He discharged me on the spot even though neither those ADAs nor anybody else showed up to accuse me of anything.

2. I described these events in a 4,743-word, 8-page sworn statement and submitted it to the administrative judge of the Bronx criminal court. 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. These judges acted arbitrarily and capriciously in dereliction of duty.

3. I filed a complaint -in hardcopy and have certificates of mailing or delivery- with Commissioners Caban and his predecessor; two Internal Affairs Bureau chiefs; three chief judges and each of the associate judges of the NYS Court of Appeals (CA); the NYC and NYS administrative judges; Mayor Adams and his aides; IGs; public advocates and defenders; council members; et al., who have not replied. I have emailed them my complaint daily for months: more than 10,000 emails from my accounts with four different email service providers. I have made countless phone calls to them. To no avail; they have not responded, let alone requested a copy of my sworn statement.[i]

4. Fabricated indictments cause graver injury in fact than money exchanging hands as bribe for favors among a few public officers and business owners:

a. The fabricators have sent their indictees to prison, where they may still be; devastated their lives financially by causing them to post bail or retain a lawyer; and denigrated their reputation by attaching to them a criminal record, which may have led to their losing their jobs or being evicted.[ii]

b. There can be 10Ks of such indictees in NYC and NYS, and more people will fall victim to this abuse of power institutionalized as modus operandi. You and your investigators should not cede the investigation of this evidence to the FBI, NY Attorney General Letitia James, or the likes of Pulitzer winner ProPublica, WSJ, and Thomson Reuters.[iii]

1. So, I respectfully request that you ask me in to discuss it by October 7. If your office disregards its duty to “protect everyday New Yorkers from abuses by the powerful”, I will post this letter to my site and call for action.[iv]

Dare shout “I accuse!” You may trigger history and even enter it.

Sincerely,

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

Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net, DrRCordero@Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org, Corderoric@yahoo.com

[i]  Each of those officers had an individual duty to safeguard the integrity of the justice system. It is statistically impossible for all to have independently from each other decided not to respond. The Commission on Judicial Conduct dare allege repeatedly in writing(Exh.4) to me, a lawyer, that it lacked jurisdiction to investigate the complained-about judges of the Bronx County Criminal term because they were not members of the NYS Unified Court System! What does it allege to laypeople? The identical reaction of Comm. Caban and all the other NYPD and public officers points to complicit coordination in fact or in effect to cover-up the felonious fabrication of indictments by NYPD officers, prosecutors, and judges. The NY justice system is run like a racketeering organization, condoned or coordinated by the CA^♦. Only outsiders, e.g., you, the FBI, the AG, can duplicate here Operation Graylord in Chicago in the 1980’s but without the participation of any NY agency.

[ii] An informed and outraged! public will demand that ‘law enforcing’ judges and their judiciaries -who intercept and do not read– ‘be held accountable’ and liable to compensation. So have been held abusive prosecutors and their offices; police officers and their departments; lawyers and their law firms; doctors and their hospitals; priests and their churches; pharmaceutical companies and their sellers; etc. Judges and their judiciaries should be too under the 14^th Amend. clauses on “equal protection of the laws […from abusers who deny civil rights, honest services, and] due process”.

[iii] a. There is more evidence that Commissioner Caban must have known and condoned corruption and dereliction of duty in the Bronx.

a. For at least 11 years, the 43^rd Precinct has tolerated drag races at around 2:00 a.m. on Bruckner Express Way, from under the bridge on Castle Hill Av. toward the bridge on White Plains Road, zip code 10472.

 1) The racers rev up the motors of their cars and motorcycles to the applause and cheers of the many spectators that come to see and hear them. They park their vehicles and mill on the Express Way to stop the traffic and clear the ‘racetrack’. The drivers that are detained honk their horns angrily. The noise jolts the whole neighborhood. It is physically impossible for NYPD officers never to have heard them or the calls of neighbors disturbed by 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and even 6 times in one night at least once a week and on occasion 3 times in a week.

 2) These races are very dangerous for the racers, the spectators, and the drivers in the opposite direction.

3) Do police look the other way because of any benefit that they receive from the auto repair and chop shops thus promoting their work of souping up cars and motorcycles?

b. Fireworks are illegal. Yet, the police allow them to be exploded around zip code 10472 for even months after the 4^th of July.

a. Who has the money needed to buy such a large supply?

b. Is it stashed safely to prevent an explosion in this neighborhood of mostly apartment buildings? They are exploded by kids, who become ever more careless. Their explosive powder can be used to make bombs. Do the police, who inevitably hear the fireworks’ explosions and see their lights in the sky, receive a benefit from allowing them? For leads to investigate a. and b., see the latest service re-quests of 26 July 2024 # 311-194 761 40; 311-194 762 53; 311-194 763 43; 311-194 775 93; and on 27 July EC-008 419 74 and 311-194 871 48, …68, and …82; and those referred to therein. Most revealing are the recorded conversations with 311 operators and 43^rd Precinct Lt. Hilligan at (718) 542-0888; and on 15 August with Lt. Minear. No mandatory status statement has reached me.

[iv] My website is at http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org. There I post some of my articles, the product of my professional law research and writing, and strategic thinking. They have attract-ed so many webvisitors and elicited such a positive response from them that as of 21 September 2024, the number of visitors who had become subscribers was 52,101. Those articles are supported by my 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^{* † ♣}

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
Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net, DrRCordero@Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org, Corderoric@yahoo.com

http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL3/DrRCordero-leaders_demonstration_citizens_hearings.pdf

Articles like the one below are posted to my website at Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org. They have attracted so many webvisitors and elicited such a positive response that as of 28 November 2024, the number of them who had become subscribers was 52,654(App.3).

To subscribe to articles similar to the one hereunder:

a. go to   + New or Users >Add New; or
b. fill out the New User form at https://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/wp-admin/user-new.php.

Dear deans of school, officers of media outlets,
professors, journalists, lawyers, multidisciplinary experts
and Advocates of Honest Judiciaries,

1. I would like to share with you, as I have with others[1], my proposal[2] for all of us -hereinafter the leaders- to handle strategically the protest that Jewish and pro-Palestinian students can be expected to resume upon returning for the new academic year, against Israel’s war in Gaza and discrimination against Jews; its mishandling caused the resignation of the Pennsylvania, Harvard, and Columbia university presidents.
   a. The strategy consists in inducing the students to join forces in a coalition to hold an event intended to advance their respective but compatible interests: a 1963 Martin Luther King March on Washington-like demonstration at the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, DC, next September 29 at noon.
   b. This event is apt to have positive national and international repercussions as an effort will be made for it to be held simultaneously in cities across the U.S. and abroad.
2. I am also sharing the abstracts of some key stories[3] especially suited for students taking investigative team courses and students who need to write a thesis to earn a master’s or Ph.D. degree. I propose that we investigate them jointly; and that you commission an article[4].
3. To that end, the leaders and the coalitionists will jointly invite the Israeli opposition leader Benny Gantz to a tour of speeches at their schools and outlets[5] to promote a peace agreement, the release of the hostages, and the harsh concessions that Israel and Hamas must, or be forced to, make under international guarantees to move from the barbaric crimes committed by Hamas last October 7 and the Holocaust that Netanhayu and his enabler, President Biden, are perpetrating, toward a state of affairs reasonably calculated to bring about a long-lasting resolution to the Arab-Israeli conflict.
4. Moreover, the leaders will use the several committees necessary to organize the demonstration to foster cooperation between the coalitionists so that at the demonstration they can display convincingly that they have come to a greater understanding of each other’s concerns and to the realization that they can advance their interests more decisively working together than hating each other.
5. The organization of the demonstration will allow the leaders to launch an academic and journalistic joint venture[6] to hold unprecedented citizens hearings^♦.
   a. To be held at university auditoriums and media outlets, the hearings will permit people to tell in person or over the Internet their stories of abuse of power by unaccountable^3e  public officers, e.g., politicians and their appointees, that they have suffered or witnessed.
   b. They will thus attract at the most propitious time the attention of those officers: when the latter  need  for  themselves and others in their party people’s approval and donations.
   c. Their stories will inform[7] the national public of the nature, extent, gravity, and harm of the abuse, especially that committed by the most unaccountable abusers: judges[8] and their judiciaries. Public officers’ unaccountability and riskless abuse can become a key[^3a] electoral issue that motivates more investigation, exposure, and even leads to compensation of abusees and reform.
6. The leaders will analyze the stories to detect patterns of individual and coordinated abuse of power.
   a. They will publish their findings in the first Annual Report on Public Unaccountability and Riskless Abuse of Power in America;
   b. present them at the first national conference on abuse as institutional modus operandi;
   c. produce a documentary;
   d. create the Institute for Unaccountability Reporting and Reform Advocacy; etc.
7. The leaders will develop the MeToo!-like civic movement that the hearings will generate into a groundswell for turning academe and the media into a novel powerhouse of American governance, capable of holding public officers jointly and severally accountable and liable.
8. I offer to present digitally, and in person if you pay the expenses, this proposal to you and your guests.

Dare shout “I accuse!“…You may trigger history and even 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

Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net, DrRCordero@Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org, CorderoRic@yahoo.com

Endnotes

[1] See the growing list of leaders to whom this proposal is being made and their contact information in the file downloadable through the link^‡ in the footer supra.

[2] The digital version of this proposal is posted to my website at http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org. There I post some of my articles. They have attracted so many webvisitors and elicited such a positive response that as of 28 November 2024, the number of them who had become subscribers was 52,654(App.3).

1. The subscribers are people who read and subscribe to read more. They have shown interest in exposing abuse of power by public officers, especially judges; obtaining compensation; and promoting reform. They are likely to be educated, financially well-off, and influencers. They can help implement the strategy.
2. As a clientele base, they warrant the commercial development of my site.
3. This proposal is supported by my three-volume study (^♣ supra) of judges and their judiciaries, the product of my professional legal research and writing, and strategic thinking, titled thus:

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

http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL3/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates3.pdf

[3] Abstracts of cases ready for joint prosecution. These cases are described in articles already written, downloadable through their links hereunder, and reviewable for publication, for which I can edit them as requested.

1. i) Their exposure of abuse of power can so profoundly outrage the national public as to drive it to force politicians to conduct public hearings and official investigations; just as it can set off individual, class, and non-class aggregate actions to hold officers accountable for abuse of power, corruption, false advertisement, etc.; and liable for treble and punitive damages, and attorneys’ fees.
2. ii) An outraged national public can compel transformative reform in politics, the judicial and health systems, and the relation between giant commerce and dwarf customers.

a. Federal judges intercept people’s emails and mail to detect and suppress those of their critics, as shown by a statistical analysis. They have the vast technical expertise and equipment infrastructure to run a national IT network that allows the filing, storage, and retrieval of hundreds of millions of briefs, motions, records, petitions, applications, orders, decisions, dockets, schedules, reports, statistics, emails, and all other elements of their management system and electronic case filing(CM/ECF) administer by PACER(Public Access to Court Electronic Records).

1) The judges wield devastating decisional and retaliatory power over Internet-controlling companies(Lsch:17§C), which they can refrain from wielding if the companies assist them in their interception(OL:5fn7).

2) The U.S. Postal Service’s “Informed Delivery” service shows that the technology to intercept mail is already at work(OL3:1304¶20). Register to be emailed every morning a photo of the front side of your mail for that day. Imagine the computing power needed to identify your mail since “The Postal Service processed and delivered an average of 318 million mail pieces daily “.

3) All public power belongs to We the People in a democracy. No abuse of it will outrage us more than the exposure of judges’ violation of our most cherished constitutional freedoms, i.e., of speech, press, and assembly -on social media too-.

4) Exposing such interception will provoke a constitutional crisis -which branch will prosecute the judiciary?-; boost the leaders’ venture; set off a flood of lawsuits by abusees demanding compensation; may lead to the constitutional convention^4↓; etc.

b. As a lawyer and a grand juror, I had the knowledge and was in a position to realize that the assistant district attorneys (ADAs) had no evidence supporting their charge of murder brought against two defendants, and neither did the police officers who testified against them.

1) When I questioned what they were doing, the ADAs referred me to the grand jury judge, who discharged me from the jury peremptorily.

2) I have complained about this to the county and state administrative judges, the Judicial Conduct Commission, the NYPD and its IAB, and each of the judges of NYS Court of Appeals. All of them have covered for their colleagues.

3) Lawyers can jointly defend thousands of ‘fabricated indictees‘ by impugning their indictments; and win punitive damages. Scandal sells.

c. The Math of Abuse is a mathematical demonstration that judges do not read the overwhelming majority of case and motion briefs filed in their courts.

1) Rather, they dispose of them by having their clerks rubberstamp reasonless, unresearched, fiat-like 5¢ dumping forms. The latter do not discuss the facts or the law of the case at hand; their only operative words are “affirmed”, if the case was a decision appealed from; or “denied”, if it was a substantive motion requiring judicial action. The status quo remains, for which no judicial action was needed, only concealment of facts.

2) For proof, download the decisions posted to their websites and examine in the clerk of court or county clerk office the decisions only filed there because the judges did not dare post fiat-like, boilerplate, pro-forma decisions.

3) Thereby judges breached the contract formed when parties paid the brief filing fee in exchange for judges basing their decisions on those briefs, which they could only do if they read them.

4) Their clerks cannot make those decisions, for judicial power cannot be delegated to people not vetted for the knowledge, competence, and integrity required to be officially vested with such power.

5) However, clerks, secretaries, and ‘little people’ -with whom judges deal but who are nevertheless too ‘insignificant’ for judges to be cautiously prudent in their presence, e.g., bartenders, waiters and waitresses, maids, janitors, drivers- can be a rich source of inside information as Deep Throat(jur:106§c)-like informants.

6) Many losing parties will file individual, class, and non-class aggregate, actions to recover their filing fees; the money that they invested in prosecuting their case; and punitive damages for breach of contract, fraud, obstruction of justice, and running judiciaries as a racketeering enterprise.

7) By exposing the facts, you, your school, and your students will cause such public outrage as to make a name for yourselves and be played and depicted in an All the President’s Men-like blockbuster and bestseller(3§F).

d. The Follow the Money! And Follow the Wire! investigations apply forensic research techniques, e.g., Fraud and Forensic Accounting(FFA), big data search, and AI(jur:102§a; OL:194§E), to discover assets that judges have grabbed, concealed, evaded taxes on, and money laundered(OL:1).

1) Justice Thomas was shown to have received more than $4 million in gifts from billionaires with business before the Supreme Court. He has failed to declare it in his annual financial disclosure report mandated under the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 (5 U.S. Code, Appendix). He refuses to recuse himself from cases related to them.

2) His other eight fellow justices, never mind lower court judges, abstain from exhibiting the moral courage necessary to criticize him, let alone demand that he resign. After all, if one justice falls, he or she can bring down all the other justices and many judges as accessories before and after the fact, and for willful ignorance and blindness, culpable indifference, dereliction of duty to safeguard the integrity of the judicial system, obstruction of justice, etc.(jur:88§§a-e), and for their respective abuse of power.

3) The justices and judges tacitly shout at each other, “If you help them take me down, I bring you with me!” Beholden to each other as a result of their reciprocal complicit silence, they engage in an institutionalized cover-up. It pervades and controls the judicial system’s modus operandi.^8↓

4) Judges’ abuse of power and cover-up can be the predicate offenses prosecuted under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO; 18 U.S.C. §1961 (U.S. Code of federal criminal law) and its version in the law of the several states; cf. NY.

e. Judges abuse 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.

1) Judges have institutionalized the 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 abuse’s nature, extent, gravity, or harm.

2) Judges have defrauded the public by pretending that they will process complaints fairly and impartially in application of the tenet “Nobody is Above the Law” while in fact processing them to cover for each other. By covering for the abuse that was committed, they have encouraged more abuse, thus becoming accessories after and before the fact.

f. Judges’ bankruptcy fraud scheme handles $100s of billions annually. It is covered up by the very circuit judges who appoint the bankruptcy judges in their circuit for a 14-year term(28 U.S.C. §152) and can reappoint them if the bankruptcy judges know how to play the game. Circuit judges are loath to make any of their own appointees appear incompetent or corrupt, as it reflects poorly on their willingness and ability to vet judicial candidates reliably and the character of the candidates that they keep company with, in other words, “birds of the same feather fly together”.

1) Appeals from bankruptcy judges’ decisions are extremely rare, for the overwhelming majority of parties appear pro se and lack the money and the knowledge needed to appeal. What the bankruptcy judge says, goes.

2) Moreover, a bankruptcy judge can have a bankruptcy trustee removed from all the trustee’s thousands of cases by filing a complaint against him in one single case(28 CFR (Code of Federal Regulations) Part 58.6(a)(4)). Obviously, the trustee has every interest in not even appearing ever to challenge or otherwise displeasing the judge, and in showing his gratitude for every day that the judge allows him to keep his job.

3) As a result, bankruptcy judges are ‘kings who can do no wrong’, wielding ‘totally unaccountable power, which corrupts them totally’(jur:27fn28).

4) For his part, the trustee wields enormous power in his dealings with the debtor, for it is he who recommends to the judge what assets to exempt from distribution to the creditors and the percentage on the dollar to which debts must be paid. Appreciation for a recommended lower percentage, of course, must be shown with a kickback, as must be the judge’s approval of the recommendation.

5) These are some of the mechanisms that provide motive, means, and opportunity for pervasive abuse of power in the bankruptcy courts.

6) Those mechanisms are in line with Congress’s finding in 2005 of “absence of effective oversight” and in 1979 of “cronyism” in the bankruptcy system.(jur:32§§2-6) The result was and still is the unaccountability of the bankruptcy system cronies, e.g., circuit and bankruptcy judges, trustees, and the service providers that they hire, such as accountants, appraisers, warehousers, and lawyers. They take care of, and cover for, each other.

7) Unaccountable, the cronies are free to run risklessly an abusive bankruptcy petition mill. Thereby money becomes accessible by approving for processing every petition for protection from creditors regardless of its merits under bankruptcy law. After all, only if petitions are in the system can the cronies grab the money through their bankruptcy fraud scheme. An investigation must determine whether they abuse the Federal Judiciary’s national IT network to illegally transfer, conceal from individuals and the IRS, and launder onshore and offshore money that they have grabbed.

8) The scheme has millions of victims, namely, the debtors and creditors in one-off cases, who are unlikely to be among the cronies, who are repeated players and thus, the beneficiaries. If the leaders join forces to expose them, the leaders can earn a lot of money and make a name for themselves by shaking to the core not only the bankruptcy system, but also the rest of the judicial system, itself to be held accountable and liable.

g. Medicare administers a budget of $900+ billion for the benefit of its more than 67 million insureds. It works with thousands of HMOs and other health insurance entities.

1) They have common interests: pay the fewest claims and attract to, and maintain in their, networks the largest number of medical services providers.

2) 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.

3) The majority of insureds who appeal denials and balance billing appear pro se. Due to their ignorance of the law, they are abused.

4) The recovery can be huge and force transformative change.

h. 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.

1) It is a misnomer, for rewards are not earned by paying in cash and cannot be redeemed for cash despite the statement on its false advertisement: “Save time. Redeem your rewards instantly at checkout”. But at checkout you cannot pay the total of the purchase with your Cash Rewards. You can only apply one single “tier” of $1, $3, $5, $10 that is equal to or less than the total purchase cost. The balance must be paid with your money.

2) Your rewards, though earned, are not yours, for they expire.

3) Cash Rewards are a bait and switch scam. Walgreens has shown its propensity for abuse: For its involvement in the opioid epidemic, ‘It will pay $4.95 billion, plus more than $750 million in fees for attorneys and costs’.

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

[4] Synopsis of an article that can be written on commission. A series of articles can also be commissioned along the suggested subjects listed at §B. The leads in the articles can facilitate the joint investigation of their stories.

CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE ONCE AGAIN:

When We the People, who rebelled against King George III,
threw the tea bags overboard into the Boston Harbor, and
decided to stop obeying him to create our own government,
assert our status as
the sovereign of all public power in a democracy and
shouting our Boston Tea Party cry:
“No obedience without respect for the law”,
rebel against a power abusive, kingly Supreme Court,
throw its precedent-breaking and arbitrary decisions into disregard,
and
demand that Congress call the constitutional convention
that 34 states have petitioned it for since 2 April 2014
so that the dead weight of the Constitution that
only white, free, landed men
penned with quills in 1789
for the world of 235 years ago
can be lifted from our lives and
we all can choose the rules that we want to carry in our lives in
today’s diverse, equality-pursuing, digital world

[5] Columbia University President Lee Bollinger invited anti-Semitic and Holocaust denier Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to a debate, which they held on campus on 25 September 2007. By contrast, Mr. Gantz is supported by a large segment of the population of Israel, the U.S., and elsewhere.

[6] The venture’s motto is “Doing Justice While Making Money” by publishing Emile Zola’s “I accuse!‘-like articles^{a, b, c}; investigating leads and going on a tour of presentations(§§E,G); demanding the release of the FBI’s secret reports on vetted judicial candidates; conducting class actions and non-class aggregate litigation through representative journalism(OL3:1699³); and other actions.

a. Representative journalism is a proposed new form of journalism. It begins with the investigation of a story -such as those abstracted in endnote³ supra- by one or more journalists. They may bring in a multidisciplinary team of experts as needed, e.g., FFA, IT/AI, statisticians(³d). When they realize that the story affects a large number of people who individually cannot protect their own interests, thus falling prey to big unaccountable abusive entities, they form ad hoc teams of experienced attorneys to represent them in and out of court.

b. Proceeding jointly, for instance, as ‘a partnership limited to a specific case’, they will file class and non-class aggregate actions and, if strategically advisable, engage in multidistrict litigation. They may file civil RICO and enterprise corruption counts(³d.4 supra); and lobby on the abusees’ behalf in Congress, and state and local law-making bodies for official investigations, legislation, and law enforcement to hold abusers accountable and liable.

c. Representative journalists will grow their readership and revenue by informing the public and taking practical actions, e.g., on information gained from citizens hearings and academic and other experts. They may come to do business as an established entity; develop a team formation and management consulting service; and even a franchise by location or specialty.

[7] See the out-of-court inform & outrage strategy for exposing unaccountable judges’ and other public officers’ riskless abuse of power.

[8] Judges’ abuse of power has been exposed by The Wall Street Journal, Thomson Reuters, Huffpost, The Boston Globe, etc. ProPublica won a Pulitzer this year for exposing Supreme Court justices. See:

a. Federal Judges Admit Conflicts of Interests, Leaving Litigants Reeling; Huffpost

b. Friends of the Court: Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas’ decadeslong friendship with real estate tycoon Harlan Crow and Samuel Ali; ProPublica

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
by making a transfer using your online bank account Bill Pay feature or through Zelle:

to    Citi Bank, routing 021 000 089, acc. 4977 59 2001;

or   TD Bank, routing 260 13 673, acc. 4392 62 5245

Dare shout “I accuse!“…You may trigger history and even enter it.

Sincerely,

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

Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net, DrRCordero@Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org, Corderoric@yahoo.com

Forcing P. Biden to choose between
supporting the coalition demands
and
appearing as an unprincipled, hypocritical, and subservient non-leader
incapable of asserting American values
http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL3/DrRCordero-Jews_Palestinians_demonstration_in_DC.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 
Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net, DrRCordero@Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org, CorderoRic@yahoo.com

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 this link.

b. Articles similar to the one below have been posted to the website of Judicial Discipline Reform. They have attracted so many webvisitors and impressed them so positively that as of 11 September 2024, they had turned into subscribers 52,072 of them.

c. You too may subscribe to that site by going to:
1) Judicial Discipline Reform <left panel ↓Register; or
2) + 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 .

d. You are encouraged to in your and the public interest share this article and its link -under its title above- widely and post it to social media, such as Facebook, Youtube, WhatsApp, LinkedIn, Instagram, Google pus, Pinterest, Reddit, Snapchat, and X.

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

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

A. The strategy: a national demonstration to draw attention to abusers of power and gain compensation for abusees

1. Pro-Palestinian advocates and Jews have reasonable, non-mutually exclusive demands that they can advance by thinking strategically to join forces in a coalition:
             a. The former want the killing and starvation in Gaza Strip to stop and the assault on Rafah never to start.
             b. The latter want to stop antisemitism and the personal insecurity which it provokes here and abroad, and free the hostages.
2. Neither are strong enough to advance their demands decisively. Time works against them dangerously and frequently irreversibly.
             a. The campus encampments are likely to lose their impact when the students leave their campuses at the end of the academic term.
             b. The demand that universities disinvest from Israeli companies, in general, or those contributing to the destruction of the Gaza population, in particular, will take months or even years to have any perceptible effect.
             c. Meantime, the emotional and physical harm inflicted by discrimination against people because of who they are or what they wear will only keep worsening. All of them and those starving need help now.
3. The one person in the world who can force a prompt and dramatic inversion of the trend is President Biden: Only he has the military and economic means of doing so. But he persists uncritically in his decades-long support of Israel.
             a. Strategic thinking looks to identify the interest of his own that can make him decide to invert his conduct. That interest is winning his reelection bid. He must be cornered into choosing between his rote support of Israel AND preventing a deterioration of his reelection chances and perhaps even improving them.
             b. That can be achieved by Jews and pro-Palestinian advocates forming a coalition that makes him the target of their joint effort, highlighting the material facts that denigrate his image with voters here and leaders in the rest of the world.
4. So, P. Biden can be criticized for having:
           a. disregarded the ever growing segment of the Israeli population that wants Prime Minister Netanyahu to resign after calling for anticipated elections, as demanded by the opposition leader, Benny Gantz;
             b. failed to blame Netanyahu’s incompetence or complicity in allowing Hamas to build hundreds of miles of underground tunnels in Gaza;
             c. failed to condemn Netanyahu’s effort to impair the independence of the Israeli judiciary only to escape the bribery charges under investigation by the Israeli Justice Department and remain in power; etc.
5. P. Biden can be characterized as:
            a.  a hypocrite, who rightfully condemns the inexcusable barbarism committed by Hamas on 7 October 2023, and P. Putin’s genocidal war in Ukraine but fails to condemn Netanyahu the Holocauster of Palestinians;
             b. a subservient ally who begs him not to be too harsh on the Gaza people; and thus
             c. the enemy of Gazans, Israelis, Jews worldwide, students exercising nonviolently their free speech right, and the American values of equality of human beings, proportionality of justice, and intolerance of abuse of power; and
             d. a man too old and weak to tell Netanyahu ‘stop murdering Gazans or I will stop arming you and destroy your weapons and bases in a blitz’.
6. We can organize a demonstration at the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, DC, next September 29, a Sunday, to be transmitted to people around the world invited to hold similar demonstrations, where the keynote speakers will be Benny Gantz…and P. Biden, who will either embrace our demands or hide as a non-leader facing a tumultuous Nominating Convention in August.
7. I offer to present in person or virtually more details to you and your colleagues.

Dare shout “I accuse!”…You may trigger history and even enter it.

B. Will students be taken into custody and targeted for fabricated indictments?, which are made up with false and insufficient evidence by prosecutors and NYPD officers in coordination with judges, including those of the NYS Court of Appeals. A revealing case supports a proposal for citizens hearings, capable of turning academe and the media into a powerhouse that holds judges and the politicians who put them in office and protect them there accountable and liable to compensation.^‡

1. I am a lawyer and was a grand juror. I had the knowledge and was in a position to realize that the Assistant District Attorneys (ADAs) had no evidence supporting their charge of murder brought against two defendants, and neither did the police officers who testified against them:

          a. They presented no footage of the crime or photos of the victim or the street crime scene, or incident, arrest, or autopsy report. The footage of the restaurants flanking the street did not show a crowd of onlookers or vehicles of the police, the medical examiner, or crime scene investigators.

          b. The indictment was sought in reliance on grand jurors’ indifference and uncritical judgment. It put in practice the avowal of abuse “an ADA can indict a ham sandwich”. Fabricated indictments are used in plea bargaining to support baseless charges that can extort the defendants’ agreement to the pleas sought by abusive prosecutors.

          c. When I asked critical questions, the presenting and the supervising ADAs referred me to the grand jury judge, who discharged me on the spot even though neither those ADAs nor anybody else showed up to make any allegations against me. If that is how they treat a lawyer, imagine how they can treat students and other laypeople critical of the abusers.

          d. I filed a complaint with three successive chief judges and each of the associate judges of the Court of Appeals; NYS and NYC administrative judges; two NYPD Internal Affairs Bureau chiefs, two Commissioners, and inspectors general; council members; public advocates and defenders; who did not reply. They are accessories, having failed their duty to investigate abuse of power and engaging in an explicit or implicit coordinated cover-up, thus aiding the fabricators.

          e. How many students will become their fabricated indictees?

1. This is a proposal to join forces to expose abuse of power so pervasive and coordinated that it has become the way of doing business of unaccountable officers who run the system of justice for their gain and convenience as a racketeering enterprise.

2. In implementing this proposal, my website at http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org will be useful. There I post some of my articles, the product of my professional law research and writing skills and strategic thinking. They have attracted so many webvisitors and elicited such a positive response that as of 11 September 2024, the number of visitors who had become subscribers was 52,072.

3. Those articles are supported by my three-volume study of judges and their judiciaries, titled and downloadable through the links here* ^{† ♣}:

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

1. Judges’ abuse of power has been exposed by The Wall Street Journal, Thomson Reuters, Huffpost, The Boston Globe, ProPublica, which just won the Pulitzer Prize for investigative journalism; etc.

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 of power 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 shout “I accuse!”…You may trigger history and enter it.

Sincerely,

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

Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net, DrRCordero@Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org, Corderoric@yahoo.com

A test case intended to
expose similar abuse of power in all other jurisdictions.
http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/IAB/DrRCordero-Court_of_Appeals_cover-up.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
Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net, DrRCordero@Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org, CorderoRic@yahoo.com

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 this link.

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.

Hon. Rowan D. Wilson, Chief Judge
and
Each of the associate judges of the
NY State Court of Appeals [the highest state court]
20 Eagle Street
Albany, NY 12207;
tel. 1(518)455-7700

Dear Chief Judge Wilson,^‡

1. Starting with my complaint of May 28, 2022 infra, I have informed the successive chief judges, the associate judges, clerks in their offices and in that of the clerk of court of the NY State Court of Appeals (CA) of my having witnessed as a grand juror in the Bronx County Supreme Court Criminal Term in NY City the fabrication of indictments on false and insufficient evidence(§A).

2. After I asked in the grand jury room critical questions pointing to such fabrication, I was discharged on the spot by Grand Jury Justice Laurence Busching with the subsequent approval of Administrative Justice Alvin Yearwood. Thereby I suffered injury in fact by deprivation of my right to be a member of a grand jury; and of my constitutional rights to confront my accusers and to be afforded due process to defend myself.

3. The defendants who were charged with murder in the fabricated indictment and others who have been victimized by such indictments have suffered and will continue to suffer even more grievous injury in fact as a result of the base motives and complicit cover-up of those to whom I have complained, some of whom are identified hereunder(§B).

4. There is no denying such cover-up: Till this day, I have not received from any CA member even written acknowledgment of receipt of my letters, let alone a statement of how they will proceed.

5. On the contrary, when I have called, clerks Heather Davis, Ann Byer, and Ms. Taylor have acknowledged that my letters were received; and stated that the respective judge would be informed of my call; and my call would be referred for action to “the Counsel”, meaning most likely Chief Clerk and Legal Counsel Lisa LeCours. Nobody has contacted me.

6. The consistency of their refusal to engage me in any discussion allows the reasonable inference -which jurors are allowed to draw even in capital cases- that their way of dealing with me had been coordinated: Public servants intentionally misled me with a false expectation despite knowing that nobody would contact me.

7. The cover-up has taken a self-incriminating form: I filed my complaint about Justices Yearwood and Busching with the Commission on Judicial Conduct. The latter dismissed it alleging that the Commission lacked jurisdiction to process it because those justices were not members of the NYS Unified Court System (UCS)! I filed with Acting C.J. Cannataro, C.J. Wilson, and the other CA judges the letters between the Commission and me; and UCS webpages showing that those justices are UCS members. The CA judges knew that and received notice thereof through those webpages.

a. The CA judges and their clerks had actual knowledge of fabricated indictments and of the Commission’s mendacity; and

b. had duties of supervision of the UCS and the Commission;

c. ‘the end does not justify the means’;

d. “people are deemed to intend the foreseeable consequences of their actions”;

e. ‘power corrupts and unaccountably wielded is absolute and corrupts absolutely’; and

f. ‘I was following orders’ affords no defense.

1. Thus, since knowing about fabricated indictments and condoning them, the judges and clerks have constructively intended to fabricate them and coordinate their cover-up. They have sent the ‘fabricated’ indictees to, and kept them in, those hellish places of terrifying depravity and wanton violence that are the Rikers Island and the other NYS prisons.

2. Action requested: I respectfully request that you:

a. take notice of the statement of facts next;

b. have CA issue me with a written order to disclose to it my 4,743-word, 8-page sworn statement of facts(¶14d infra); and

c. investigate this complaint, summoning me to discuss it with you and the investigators.

Dare shout “I accuse!”…You may trigger history and enter it.

I, Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq., declare pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1746 and under penalty of perjury that I am submitting on 8 March 2024, as true and correct to the best of my knowledge the following:

A. How the fabrication of indictments and its cover-up were revealed

1. I am a lawyer and hold a Ph.D. in law. I was a member of a grand jury in Bronx, New York City. I had the knowledge¹ and was in a position to realize that the prosecutors and police officers had charged people with murder despite their lack of any evidence that any crime had been committed:

¹ This complaint is supported by my professional law research and writing, and strategic thinking. They are the skills that have already produced my 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*^†♣

The study discusses evidence supporting the axiom ‘Unaccountability breeds abuse’. Its corollary is ‘What judges allow themselves to do -exposed by top national news networks, e.g., The Wall Street Journal, Thomson Reuters, and The Boston Globe, others copy and exceed’.

How many judges and the individuals and entities, such as government departments and private companies, with whom they coordinate their abuse have found comfort and encouragement in the unethical and illegal acts that justices of the U.S. Supreme Court and the ‘Friends of the Justices’ have committed for decades, as revealed by ProPublica?

Some of my articles^♦ on unaccountability and abuse of power are posted to my website Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org. They have attracted so many webvisitors and impressed them so positively that as of 9 March 2024, those who had become subscribers numbered 49,760.

They read what was in front of them and asked for more. They can reasonably be expected to be educated, intellectually curious, influential, affluent, and ready to seek compensation in a class action against public servants who fabricate indictments and judges who in self-interest condone such fabrication and coordinate its cover-up.
____________________

1. The prosecutors presented no footage of the crime or photos of the victim or the street crime scene, or incident or autopsy report. The footage of the restaurants flanking the street showed no crowd of onlookers or vehicles of the police, the medical examiner, or crime scene investigators.

2. One footage showed only a Chinese female customer talking to the bearded white male clerk of a bodega over the counter and it had no sound! This footage had no probative value. But it proved the saying “a prosecutor can manipulate a grand jury into indicting a ham sandwich” by exploiting grand jurors’ known indifference and uncritical judgment. So, it was presented in bad faith to mislead the grand jury into thinking that it justified the indictment.

3. When I asked critical questions, the presenting and the supervising prosecutors referred me to the grand jury judge. He discharged me in his courtroom with a court reporter although neither those prosecutors nor anybody else showed up to make any accusation against me.

4. I stated these facts 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 oral argument dismissed it by letter on the disingenuous allegation that the grand jury term had expired.

5. Rogue prosecutors present to a grand jury charges whose supporting evidence is lacking, false, or insufficient to warrant their degree of gravity, i.e., they are baseless or overcharges. If the jury votes them true, the prosecutors have successfully fabricated an indictment. With it, they seek to coerce the indictee into agreeing to a power abusive plea or prosecute him/her on fabricated charges.

6. The fabricators reciprocally cover up so leveraging fabricated indictments because through them they secure higher conviction rates; greater chances of reelection and promotion; and IOUs to be cashed in when needed.

7. They gain a benefit while inflicting injury in fact on the fabricated indictees, such as sending them to jail; causing them financial hardship by requiring bail; and stigmatizing them with a criminal record. Thereby their family and friends are also injured.

8. Everybody who learns about fabricated indictments is injured by the fear of becoming a fabricated indictee, thus suffering the loss of trust in the justice system.

9. The public at large is injured by deprivation of the honest services that the fabricators are duty-bound to render it as public servants.

10. The fabricators join in committing abuse of power, honest services fraud, racketeering, and enterprise corruption.

B. Public officers who instead of investigating have coordinated a cover-up

1. I wrote a complaint letter^♠, mailed it and its follow-ups and adaptations, and subsequently made calls, to:

^♠ To have access to those letters through links, read this article at OL3:1650.

a.       i.   NY State Court of Appeals then-Chief Judge Janet DiFiore; -tel. (518)455-7700-;

ii. succeeding Acting Chief Judge Anthony Cannataro;

iii. current Chief Judge Rowan Wilson; and

a) each of the associate judges -tel. (518)445-2360-;

b) Deputy Clerk of Court Heather Davis; and

c) Clerks Ann Byer and Ms. Taylor in the Office of the Chief Judge;

b.      i.   Bronx County [NY City (NYC)] Court Supreme Criminal Term Administrative Justice Alvin Yearwood -tel. (718)618-3700-; and

ii. Grand Jury Justice Laurence Busching;

iii. NYC Criminal Court Administrative Judge Tamiko A. Amaker -tel. (646)386-4937, (646)386-4900-;

c.      i. former NYS Chief Administrative Judge Lawrence Marks;

ii. current NYS Chief Administrative Judge Joseph Zayas; and

iii. Principal Administrative Secretary Tonya Speckhardt -tel. in Albany, NY, 1(518)453-8680; in NY City, (212)428-2884 and (212)428-2120-;

iv. Deputy Chief Administrative Judge Deborah Kaplan, Civil Term -tel. (646)386-5567-;

d.     i. former NY Police Department (NYPD) Internal Affairs Bureau (IAB) Chief David Barrere;

ii. current IAB Chief Miguel Iglesias -tel. (212)741-8401-;

iii. IAB Lt. Atala, Det. Arata, Det. Atway, Sgt. Cortez, Sgt. Dario, Duran, Capt. Keon, Det. Kifaieh, Kim, Det. Peattie, Det. Perez, Det. Pier-Owens, Det. Sunu, Officer Washington,

1) complaints to IAB #     2022-13831;      2022-15482;             2022-15601;     2022-19474;      2023-00275;         2022-03787;

2) Records Unit -tel. (212)741-8414-; and Assessment Unit -tel. (212)741-8444-;

e.       i. former NYPD Commissioner Keechant Sewell -tel. (646)610-5410; fax (646)610-5865-;

ii. current NYPD Commissioner Edward Caban;

f.       i. former NYPD captain and current NY City Mayor Eric Adams;

ii. Chief of Staff Frank Carone -tel. (212)639-9675-; Mayor’s Operation Unit complaint reference no. EC-00482580

g. Clerk Ms. Brenda, NYC Department of Investigation -tel. (212)825-5959-; complaint reference no. EC-00482590

h.      i. Office of Court Administration Inspector General Sherrill Spatz, Esq., and

ii. Deputy Inspector General Carol Hamm, Esq. -tel. (646)386-3500, fax (212)514-7158-;

i.       i. NYC Public Advocate Jumaane Williams;

ii. Chief of Staff Rance Huff -tel. (212)669-7200-;

j.       i. NYS Attorney General Letitia James -tel. (800)771-7755-;

ii. Public Integrity Chief Gerard Murphy -tel. (212)416-8610-;

k.      i. NYS Commission on Judicial Conduct -tel. (646)386-4800; fax (518)299-1757-;

ii. complaint # 2022/N-1084;

l. et al. (OL3:1518; 1561; 1562)

1. Since 28 May 2022, some 50 public officers, including entities, with the duty to serve and authority to investigate, have been informed by letter^♠(OL3:1650) fax, phone, and over 10,500 emails of the fabricated indictments and requested to investigate them for their victims’ sake; their email addresses are:

iab@nypd.org, iabcmdcntr@nypd.org, outreach@oignypd.nyc.gov, Shawn.Morris@nypd.org, Sherman.Tyson@nypd.org, Fernando.Garza@nypd.org, Billy.Ramirez@nypd.org, Jesus.Ramos@nypd.org, Kandice.Hall@nypd.org, Robert.Candela@nypd.org, John.McLoughlin@nypd.org, Xiomara.Linton@nypd.org, CorderoRic@yahoo.com, question@nycourts.gov, ig@nycourts.gov, bronxjury@nycourts.gov, doipress@doi.nyc.gov, agencymail@customercare.nyc.gov, Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net, rhuff@advocate.nyc.gov, reception@advocate.nyc.gov, jdominguez@advocate.nyc.gov, recordsaccess@advocate.nyc.gov, nsmith@advocate.nyc.gov, gethelp@advocate.nyc.gov, public.integrity@ag.ny.gov, NYAG.Pressoffice@ag.ny.gov, ig.press@ig.ny.gov, Press.Office@exec.ny.gov, mtcsciq1@bb.nyc.gov, scheduling@bronxbp.nyc.gov, pressinquiry@bronxbp.nyc.gov, mivory@bronxbp.nyc.gov, Everas@bronxbp.nyc.gov, lwalton@bronxbp.nyc.gov, jpeguero@bronxbp.nyc.gov, webmail@bronxbp.nyc.gov, jcortes@bronxbp.nyc.gov, rmiraglia@bronxbp.nyc.gov, amukoko@bronxbp.nyc.gov, DrRCordero@Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org, dinowitz@council.nyc.gov, accessibility@council.nyc.gov, district8@council.nyc.gov, district12@council.nyc.gov, district13@council.nyc.gov, district14@council.nyc.gov, district15@council.nyc.gov, district16@council.nyc.gov, district18@council.nyc.gov, socratessolano2021@gmail.com, Info@bronxdefenders.org, justineo@bronxdefenders.org, media@bronxdefenders.org,

1. The informed public officers have failed to even reply -but see ¶7 supra- despite their duty to investigate with due diligence a credible complaint of public corruption based on verifiable facts. Any looking the other way, willful ignorance, or willful blindness on their part constitutes dereliction of duty.

2. What are the odds of none of them replying but for coordination established before this case?

3. Their conduct is non-coincidental, the product of a tacit or expressed complicit agreement on cover-up and reciprocal protection; cf. agreements in restraint of competition by following the price leader. Their failure to investigate results from their common interest in avoiding judges’ retaliation and ensuring their protection if needed, the rights of indictees and the public notwithstanding.

Dare shout “I accuse!”…You may trigger history and enter it.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely,

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

Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net, DrRCordero@Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org, CorderoRic@yahoo.com

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

A call
to Medicare Appeals Council
to decide appeal M-23-386, filed on 28 October 2022
and still pending
and
a call
to people who have been denied their rights by
Medicare and related entities,
to class action law firms, and to investigative journalists,
to join forces to expose the abuse of power and cover-up
affecting so many people who assert their rights
as single party to their stand-alone case and
even do so without a lawyer (pro se), whereby
they have barely any chance against
hospitals, medical practitioners,
equipment and laboratory services providers,
health insurance companies and
health management organizations (HMOs)
and their networks of services and equipment providers,
medical decisions reviewers, administrative law judges,
Medicare, Medicaid, and the Medicare Appeals Council,
all with their lawyers and
working in coordination to further their common interest in
enlarging their networks of services and equipment providers;
denying claims of people to save money; and/or
billing them for the balance of bills in excess of
what the tables of medical costs allow by law and contract, which
constitutes balance billing and
has been illegal since 1997^♦(OL3:1611§A)
because it defeats the purpose of
medical costs limited by health insurance,
thus prompting the recent adoption by Congress of
the No Surprise Bill Act,
which so many entities and Medicare blatantly disregard^‡
‡ http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/ALJ/23-8-28DrRCordero_class_action_v_Medicare.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
Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net, DrRCordero@Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org, CorderoRic@yahoo.com

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 this link.
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  the latest articles, go to http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL3/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates3.pdf.

A. To lawyers, journalists, schools, patients, and
Advocates of Honest Judiciaries

1. The above-named entities have engaged in coordination consisting in harmonious conduct in support of common interests, described below. Thereby they have reached implicitly or explicitly reciprocal exoneration agreements providing that ‘I help and protect you today and you help and protect me tomorrow’. They function as a collective entity ‘too powerful to be held accountable’.
2. As a result of their unaccountability, they have been able to form and operate a racketeering enterprise. Cf. Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO); 18 U.S.C. §§1961 to 1968; and Enterprise Corruption; NY Consolidated Laws, Penal Law-PEN §460. There is a lot of money to be grabbed through racketeering.a. “The Medicare Program [has] 65.0 million beneficiaries and total expenditures of $905 billion in 2022″. It works with hundreds of health insurance and management organizations (HMOs), and medical services and equipment providers. All of them have common interests: pay the fewest claims and attract to, and maintain in their, networks the largest number of providers. To advance their interests they:

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

2) disregard their legal duty to accept as total payment the amounts stated in Medicare’s and HMOs’ tables of medical services and equipment costs; and

3) condone the billing of insureds for the unpaid balance, which constitutes the illegal practice of ‘balance billing’.

i. 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, P.L. 105-33, prohibits services and equipment providers from balance billing Medicaid QMBs (Qualified Medicare Beneficiaries) for Medicare cost-sharing.

ii. The provider is duty-bound statutorily and contractually to submit its bill to Medicaid and accept as full payment what Medicaid pays, as set forth in its tables of services and equipment costs. See also Overview of Medicaid Provisions in the Balanced Budget Act.

iii. Knowledge of the prohibition on balance billing insureds is imputed to the provider because by law and contract it was informed of it: There is no need to prove that it had actual knowledge.

iv. The provider has ‘superior knowledge’ relative to the knowledge that insureds can reasonably be expected to have. Consequently, the provider and the insureds do not deal at arm’s length. When the provider takes advantage of this knowledge differential to balance bill an insured, it abuses its power.

b. Most insureds who appeal claim denials and balance billing appear pro se, unable to afford lawyers precisely when they must pay mounting medical costs. Due to their ignorance of the law, they easily fall prey to abusive providers.

c. Moreover, burdened by their health problems, few insureds have the substantial resources of emotional energy, let alone money, needed to struggle through four levels of appeal until reaching the Medicare Appeals Council, whose decision is appealable to a U.S. district court.

1. The exposure of the providers’ coordinated abuse of power can be set off by holding unprecedented citizens hearings.

a. They are to be held by journalists, media outlets, IT experts, and journalism, law, and IT students and professors.

b. Their venue will be media stations, school auditoriums, and via the Internet so that wherever abusees are, they can tell their story of the abuse that they have suffered or witnessed by providers and the other entities.

c. At the citizens hearings, the abusees will shout self-assertively the rallying cry:

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

1. Abusees can so inform and outrage the national public as to cause it to challenge the abusers’ unaccountability through the electoral process and a class action. To that end, we can join forces to turn the above-named entities’ coordinated abuse of power into a key issue of the presidential debates, the primaries, and the general election. This issue can attract the attention of the national public and politicians, whether principled or opportunistic, because “The Medicare Program is the second-largest social insurance program in the U.S.”, after Social Security.

2. Together we can pioneer a multidisciplinary academic and journalistic business venture; and launch of a civic, MeToo!-like movement arising from an informed and outraged national public ready to wield its strongest powers: electoral donating, volunteering, and voting. The venture and the movement can implement a concrete, reasonable, and feasible plan of action offering rewards:

a. The plan includes a class action, for it can accomplish what abusees cannot proceeding individually. A class action win can force transformative change in the way health entities coordinate their abuse of patients, in particular, and of the national public, in general. Lawyers can win huge rewards: treble damages, attorney’s fees, and national recognition that increases their number of clients; cf. the suits against tobacco, guns, and opioids entities.

b. Journalists who investigate(OL:194§E) this story and join in holding the unprecedented citizens hearings can reasonably expect to be considered for a Pulitzer prize.

c. Students can be nationally recognized as the youth of the Montana climate case have been. They can parlay the experience gained by creating a niche law and investigative practice.

d. The media and the schools, suffering from low public esteem and income, can increase their appeal and profitability by becoming an engine of transformative socio-political change to be reckoned with. The schools can emerge as the fifth power for public accountability.

1. I offer to make via video conference or, if in NY City, in person, a presentation on the citizens hearings and the plan of action. See my contact information in the letterhead above. Consequently, this email and its link^‡ can be shared and posted widely to announce my offered presentation.

The presentation is supported by my professional law research and writing, and strategic thinking. They are the skills that have already produced my 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*^†♣

1. The study discusses evidence supporting the axiom ‘Unaccountability breeds abuse’. Its corollary is ‘What judges allow themselves to do -exposed by The Wall Street Journal and Thomson Reuters-, others copy and exceed’.

a. How many of the above-named entities and judges have found comfort and encouragement in the unethical and illegal practices that justices of the U.S. Supreme Court and the ‘Friends of the Justices’ have engaged in for decades, as revealed by ProPublica; and that a former President has engaged in for years, as stated by NY State Judge Arthur Engoron in his decision on Trump and his business of Tuesday, 26 September 2023?

1. Some of my articles on unaccountability and abuse of power are posted to my website Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org. They have attracted so many webvisitors and impressed them so positively that as of 22 October 2023, the number of visitors that had become subscribers was 49,036.

a. Those subscribers not only read what is in front of them, but also welcome more. They can reasonably be expected to be educated, influential, and capable of understanding how they are harmed by coordinated health entities and willing to support a class action against them. 

B. Thousands of emails to top Medicare and related officers and entities have met the silence of a coordinated cover-up

1. Thousands of emails have been sent to dozens of top officers of Medicare and health insurer EmblemHealth for more than a year, who have left them unanswered. Their same conduct cannot reasonably be said to be merely coincidental. Their failure to answer constitutes the circumstantial evidence from which a reasonable inference can be drawn: It betrays the silence of a coordinated cover-up. So does their failure to provide discovery, disclosure, even a responsive brief to answer my complaint of 21 May 2022, and to enter default judgment as a consequence thereof.

2. Likewise, their failure to decide the appeal M-23-386, filed with the Medicare Appeals Council almost a year ago on 28 October 2022, betrays self-interested dereliction of duty and obstruction of justice. A sample of the email headers and text has been collected below. They were sent:

To:    Medicare.Appeals@hhs.gov, OSDABImmediateOffice@hhs.gov, OS-OMHAATLECAPE@hhs.gov, OSOMHAHearingTechSupport@hhs.gov, erin.nugent@hhs.gov, DABMODHotline@hhs.gov, notifications@dab.efile.hhs.gov, dawn.kos@hhs.gov, john.colter@hhs.gov appeals@dab.efile.hhs.gov, James.Griepentrog@hhs.gov, Jon.Dorman@hhs.gov, erin.brown@hhs.gov, Rajda.Nachampassak@hhs.gov, Darryl.Holloway@hhs.gov, alethia.wimberly@hhs.gov, hillary.didona@hhs.gov, James.Brown@hhs.gov, Kathy.Greene@hhs.gov, leslie.mcdonald@hhs.gov, Sherese.Warren@hhs.gov, corderoric@yahoo.com, medicareappeal@maximus.com, SHillegass@emblemhealth.com, EHCommunications@emblemhealth.com, toni-ann.devito@emblemhealth.com, CManalansan@emblemhealth.com, esosa@emblemhealth.com, M_Cipolla@emblemhealth.com, sdambrosio@emblemhealth.com, SBergstrom@emblemhealth.com, Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net, DrRCordero@Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org

C. A similar case of coordinated abuse of power and cover-up involving prosecutors, police officers, and judges

1. In the same vein are the thousands of emails and letters sent, and phone calls made, to the dozens of prosecutors, police officers, and judges in the below bloc of email addresses since 7 June 2022, with no response, on the subject of:

Fabricated indictments^♦
based on false and insufficient evidence
presented to grand juries by
prosecutors, police officers, and judges
who abuse the jurors’
ignorance of the law and
untrained and uncritical judgment.
They reciprocally cover up
leveraging fabricated indictments
to coerce defendants into unfavorable plea bargains.
That leads to
higher conviction rates,
greater chances of reelection and promotion, and
collection of IOUs to be cashed in when needed.
Thereby they gain a benefit by inflicting
injury in fact on defendants,
deprive them and the public of honest services, and
obstruct justice.
They thus commit fraud, racketeering, and enterprise corruption.
The proposal to expose
the fabricators and their abuse of power through
unprecedented citizens hearings (¶2↑) and
a story that can earn journalists and media outlets Pulitzer Prizes.

1. The many officers listed next have failed to respond though duty-bound to deal effectively with their constituents’ grievances, especially those brought to their attention so repeatedly and for such a long time. Their conduct is non-coincidental. It is motivated by interests that can foreseeably be advanced by obstructing justice through an implicitly or explicitly coordinated cover-up. Any alleged willful ignorance and blindness is particularly inexcusable because of their duty of due diligence to know. Those officers have engaged in dereliction of duty and abuse of power. The abusees can tell their stories at the citizens hearings, thereby enabling the detection of patterns of circumstances where the fabricators fester and their modus operandi.

To: iab@nypd.org, iabcmdcntr@nypd.org, outreach@oignypd.nyc.gov, Shawn.Morris@nypd.org, Sherman.Tyson@nypd.org, Fernando.Garza@nypd.org, Billy.Ramirez@nypd.org, Jesus.Ramos@nypd.org, Kandice.Hall@nypd.org, Robert.Candela@nypd.org, John.McLoughlin@nypd.org, Xiomara.Linton@nypd.org, CorderoRic@yahoo.com question@nycourts.gov, ig@nycourts.gov, doipress@doi.nyc.gov, bronxjury@nycourts.gov, agencymail@customercare.nyc.gov, rhuff@advocate.nyc.gov, reception@advocate.nyc.gov, nsmith@advocate.nyc.gov, gethelp@advocate.nyc.gov, jdominguez@advocate.nyc.gov, recordsaccess@advocate.nyc.gov, public.integrity@ag.ny.gov, NYAG.Pressoffice@ag.ny.gov, ig.press@ig.ny.gov, Press.Office@exec.ny.gov, mtcsciq1@bb.nyc.gov, scheduling@bronxbp.nyc.gov, pressinquiry@bronxbp.nyc.gov, mivory@bronxbp.nyc.gov, Everas@bronxbp.nyc.gov, lwalton@bronxbp.nyc.gov, jpeguero@bronxbp.nyc.gov, webmail@bronxbp.nyc.gov, jcortes@bronxbp.nyc.gov, rmiraglia@bronxbp.nyc.gov, amukoko@bronxbp.nyc.gov, accessibility@council.nyc.gov, dinowitz@council.nyc.gov, district8@council.nyc.gov, district12@council.nyc.gov, district13@council.nyc.gov, district14@council.nyc.gov, district15@council.nyc.gov, district16@council.nyc.gov, district18@council.nyc.gov, district18@council.nyc.gov, socratessolano2021@gmail.com, Info@bronxdefenders.org, justineo@bronxdefenders.org, media@bronxdefenders.org, Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net, DrRCordero@Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org,

D. 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 shout “I accuse!”…You may trigger history and enter it.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely,

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

Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net, DrRCordero@Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org, CorderoRic@yahoo.com

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

E. Sample of headings and text of thousands of emails, going back to 30 September 2022 and collected in the file here, sent to and from Dr. Cordero’s email accounts at Verizon, Yahoo, and Judicial Discipline Reform, and Medicare officers and entities, which have failed to reply and decide the appeal, thus furthering their cover-up

  1.  Sample of emails from to date back to 1 October 2023

——– Original Message ——–
Subject: Medicare appeal M-23-386, filed on 28oct22, is still pending through a cover-up: a call to Medicare Appeal Council to decide it; & to the public, lawyers & journalists to expose similar abuse of power everywhere
Date: 2023-11-12 4:39 pm
From: drrcordero@judicial-discipline-reform.org
To: medicare.appeals@hhs.gov, osdabimmediateoffice@hhs.gov, os-omhaatlecape@hhs.gov, osomhahearingtechsupport@hhs.gov, dabmodhotline@hhs.gov, notifications@dab.efile.hhs.gov, appeals@dab.efile.hhs.gov, james.griepentrog@hhs.gov, jon.dorman@hhs.gov, john.colter@hhs.gov, erin.brown@hhs.gov, erin.nugent@hhs.gov, darryl.holloway@hhs.gov, rajda.nachampassak@hhs.gov, dawn.kos@hhs.gov, alethia.wimberly@hhs.gov, hillary.didona@hhs.gov, james.brown@hhs.gov, leslie.mcdonald@hhs.gov, sherese.warren@hhs.gov, kathy.greene@hhs.gov, corderoric@yahoo.com, dr.richard.cordero_esq@verizon.net
Cc: medicareappeal@maximus.com, shillegass@emblemhealth.com, toni-ann.devito@emblemhealth.com, cmanalansan@emblemhealth.com, lcampos@emblemhealth.com, ehcommunications@emblemhealth.com, sbergstrom@emblemhealth.com, m_cipolla@emblemhealth.com, esosa@emblemhealth.com, sdambrosio@emblemhealth.com, sbergstrom@emblem.mail.onmicrosoft.com, larry@tribelaw.com, tribe@law.harvard.edu, jsg@law.harvard.edu, jturley@law.gwu.edu, dersh@law.harvard.edu, katyaln@law.georgetown.edu, michael.siconolfi@wsj.com, jennifer.forsyth@wsj.com, christopher.stewart@wsj.com, eric.sylvers@wsj.com, kate.milani@wsj.com, clare.ansberry@wsj.com, john.shiffman@thomsonreuters.com, michael.berens@thomsonreuters.com, matthew.weber@thomsonreuters.com, tips@thomsonreuters.com, alexia.garamfalvi@thomsonreuters.com, david.bario@tr.com, liptak@nytimes.com, mark.lombardi@thomsonreuters.com, mderienzo@publicintegrity.org, emily.holden@theguardian.com, tips@latimes.com, ryan.grim@theintercept.com, tips@propublica.org, watchdog@publicintegrity.org, thehill@email.thehill.com, media@propublica.org, patricia.wen@globe.com, newstip@globe.com, newsletters@lists.propublica.net, stephen.engelberg@propublica.org, eric.umansky@propublica.org, robin.fields@propublica.org, a.c.thompson@propublica.org, kimberly.kindy@washpost.com, heather.long@washpost.com, letters@washpost.com, rexivan.olarte@lexisnexis.com, ann.marimow@washpost.com, jariley@duanemorris.com, info@momsforliberty.org, paul.duggan@washpost.com, lynh.bui@washpost.com, joepatrice@abovethelaw.com, staci@abovethelaw.com, mcnulaj@nytimes.com, levt2002@yahoo.com, eevallejo@yahoo.com, attorneydonbailey@gmail.com, apropertyownersnetwork@gmail.com

—– Forwarded Message —–
From: dr.richard.cordero_esq@verizon.net
To: Medicare.Appeals@hhs.gov; OSDABImmediateOffice@hhs.gov; OS-OMHAATLECAPE@hhs.gov; OSOMHAHearingTechSupport@hhs.gov; DABMODHotline@hhs.gov; notifications@dab.efile.hhs.gov; appeals@dab.efile.hhs.gov; James.Griepentrog@hhs.gov; Jon.Dorman@hhs.gov; john.colter@hhs.gov; erin.brown@hhs.gov; erin.nugent@hhs.gov; Darryl.Holloway@hhs.gov; Rajda.Nachampassak@hhs.gov; alethia.wimberly@hhs.gov; dawn.kos@hhs.gov; hillary.didona@hhs.gov; James.Brown@hhs.gov; Kathy.Greene@hhs.gov; leslie.mcdonald@hhs.gov; Sherese.Warren@hhs.gov; medicareappeal@maximus.com; SHillegass@emblemhealth.com; esosa@emblemhealth.com; toni-ann.devito@emblemhealth.com; EHCommunications@emblemhealth.com; M_Cipolla@emblemhealth.com; SBergstrom@emblemhealth.com  sdambrosio@emblemhealth.com; CManalansan@emblemhealth.com; sbergstrom@emblem.mail.onmicrosoft.com; lcampos@emblemhealth.com; DrRCordero@Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org; corderoric@yahoo.com
Cc: michael.siconolfi@wsj.com; jennifer.forsyth@wsj.com; christopher.stewart@wsj.com; eric.sylvers@wsj.com; kate.milani@wsj.com; clare.ansberry@wsj.com; john.shiffman@thomsonreuters.com; michael.berens@thomsonreuters.com; matthew.weber@thomsonreuters.com; tips@thomsonreuters.com; alexia.garamfalvi@thomsonreuters.com; david.bario@tr.com; liptak@nytimes.com; Mark.Lombardi@thomsonreuters.com; mderienzo@publicintegrity.org; emily.holden@theguardian.com; tips@latimes.com; ryan.grim@theintercept.com; tips@propublica.org; watchdog@publicintegrity.org; Thehill@email.thehill.com; media@propublica.org; patricia.wen@globe.com; newstip@globe.com; newsletters@lists.propublica.net; Stephen.Engelberg@propublica.org; Eric.Umansky@ProPublica.org; robin.fields@propublica.org; a.c.thompson@propublica.org; Kimberly.Kindy@washpost.com; heather.long@washpost.com; letters@washpost.com; rexivan.olarte@lexisnexis.com; ann.marimow@washpost.com; scwl@cox.net; aging@americanbar.org; JARiley@duanemorris.com; info@momsforliberty.org; larry@tribelaw.com; tribe@law.harvard.edu; paul.duggan@washpost.com; lynh.bui@washpost.com
Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2023 at 04:21:35 PM EDT
Subject: Medicare appeal M-23-386, filed on 28oct22, is still pending through a cover-up: a call to the public, class action lawyers, and journalists to expose similar abuse of power everywhere

Subject: Medicare appeal M-23-386, filed on 28oct22, is still pending through a cover-up: a call to Medicare Appeal Council to decide it; & to the public, lawyers & journalists to expose similar abuse of power everywhere
Date: 2023-10-05 7:58 pm
From: drrcordero@judicial-discipline-reform.org
To: Medicare.Appeals@hhs.gov, OSDABImmediateOffice@hhs.gov, OS-OMHAATLECAPE@hhs.gov, OSOMHAHearingTechSupport@hhs.gov, DABMODHotline@hhs.gov, notifications@dab.efile.hhs.gov, appeals@dab.efile.hhs.gov, James.Griepentrog@hhs.gov, Jon.Dorman@hhs.gov, john.colter@hhs.gov, erin.brown@hhs.gov, erin.nugent@hhs.gov, Darryl.Holloway@hhs.gov, Rajda.Nachampassak@hhs.gov, alethia.wimberly@hhs.gov, dawn.kos@hhs.gov, hillary.didona@hhs.gov, James.Brown@hhs.gov, Kathy.Greene@hhs.gov, leslie.mcdonald@hhs.gov, Sherese.Warren@hhs.gov, medicareappeal@maximus.com, SHillegass@emblemhealth.com, esosa@emblemhealth.com, toni-ann.devito@emblemhealth.com, EHCommunications@emblemhealth.com, M_Cipolla@emblemhealth.com, SBergstrom@emblemhealth.com, sdambrosio@emblemhealth.com, CManalansan@emblemhealth.com, sbergstrom@emblem.mail.onmicrosoft.com, lcampos@emblemhealth.com, Corderoric@yahoo.com, Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net, DrRCordero@judicial-discipline-reform.org
Cc: michael.siconolfi@wsj.com, jennifer.forsyth@wsj.com, christopher.stewart@wsj.com, eric.sylvers@wsj.com, kate.milani@wsj.com, clare.ansberry@wsj.com, john.shiffman@thomsonreuters.com, michael.berens@thomsonreuters.com, matthew.weber@thomsonreuters.com, tips@thomsonreuters.com, alexia.garamfalvi@thomsonreuters.com, david.bario@tr.com, liptak@nytimes.com, Mark.Lombardi@thomsonreuters.com, mderienzo@publicintegrity.org, emily.holden@theguardian.com, tips@latimes.com, ryan.grim@theintercept.com, tips@propublica.org, watchdog@publicintegrity.org, Thehill@email.thehill.com, media@propublica.org, patricia.wen@globe.com, newstip@globe.com, newsletters@lists.propublica.net, Stephen.Engelberg@propublica.org, Eric.Umansky@propublica.org, robin.fields@propublica.org, a.c.thompson@propublica.org, Kimberly.Kindy@washpost.com, heather.long@washpost.com, letters@washpost.com, rexivan.olarte@lexisnexis.com, ann.marimow@washpost.com, scwl@cox.net, aging@americanbar.org, JARiley@duanemorris.com, info@momsforliberty.org, larry@tribelaw.com, tribe@law.harvard.edu, paul.duggan@washpost.com, lynh.bui@washpost.com

Subject: Medicare appeal M-23-386, filed on 28oct22, is still pending through a cover-up: a call to Medicare Appeal Council to decide it; & to the public, lawyers & journalists to expose similar abuse of power everywhere
Date: 2023-10-04 10:10 am
From: drrcordero@judicial-discipline-reform.org
To: Medicare.Appeals@hhs.gov, OSDABImmediateOffice@hhs.gov, OS-OMHAATLECAPE@hhs.gov, OSOMHAHearingTechSupport@hhs.gov, DABMODHotline@hhs.gov, notifications@dab.efile.hhs.gov, appeals@dab.efile.hhs.gov, James.Griepentrog@hhs.gov, Jon.Dorman@hhs.gov, john.colter@hhs.gov, erin.brown@hhs.gov, erin.nugent@hhs.gov, Darryl.Holloway@hhs.gov, Rajda.Nachampassak@hhs.gov, alethia.wimberly@hhs.gov, dawn.kos@hhs.gov, hillary.didona@hhs.gov, James.Brown@hhs.gov, Kathy.Greene@hhs.gov, leslie.mcdonald@hhs.gov, Sherese.Warren@hhs.gov, medicareappeal@maximus.com, SHillegass@emblemhealth.com, esosa@emblemhealth.com, toni-ann.devito@emblemhealth.com, EHCommunications@emblemhealth.com, M_Cipolla@emblemhealth.com, SBergstrom@emblemhealth.com, sdambrosio@emblemhealth.com, CManalansan@emblemhealth.com, sbergstrom@emblem.mail.onmicrosoft.com, lcampos@emblemhealth.com, Corderoric@yahoo.com, Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net, DrRCordero@judicial-discipline-reform.org
Cc: michael.siconolfi@wsj.com, jennifer.forsyth@wsj.com, christopher.stewart@wsj.com, eric.sylvers@wsj.com, kate.milani@wsj.com, clare.ansberry@wsj.com, john.shiffman@thomsonreuters.com, michael.berens@thomsonreuters.com, matthew.weber@thomsonreuters.com, tips@thomsonreuters.com, alexia.garamfalvi@thomsonreuters.com, david.bario@tr.com, liptak@nytimes.com, Mark.Lombardi@thomsonreuters.com, mderienzo@publicintegrity.org, emily.holden@theguardian.com, tips@latimes.com, ryan.grim@theintercept.com, tips@propublica.org, watchdog@publicintegrity.org, Thehill@email.thehill.com, media@propublica.org, patricia.wen@globe.com, newstip@globe.com, newsletters@lists.propublica.net, Stephen.Engelberg@propublica.org, Eric.Umansky@propublica.org, robin.fields@propublica.org, a.c.thompson@propublica.org, Kimberly.Kindy@washpost.com, heather.long@washpost.com, letters@washpost.com, rexivan.olarte@lexisnexis.com, ann.marimow@washpost.com, scwl@cox.net, aging@americanbar.org, JARiley@duanemorris.com, info@momsforliberty.org, larry@tribelaw.com, tribe@law.harvard.edu, paul.duggan@washpost.com, lynh.bui@washpost.com

On 2023-10-03 9:51 am, drrcordero@judicial-discipline-reform.org wrote:

On 2023-10-03 9:03 am, drrcordero@judicial-discipline-reform.org wrote:

—– Forwarded Message —–
From: corderoric@yahoo.com
To: medicare.appeals@hhs.gov; osdabimmediateoffice@hhs.gov; os-omhaatlecape@hhs.gov; somhahearingtechsupport@hhs.gov; dabmodhotline@hhs.gov; notifications@dab.efile.hhs.gov; appeals@dab.efile.hhs.gov; james.griepentrog@hhs.gov; jon.dorman@hhs.gov; john.colter@hhs.gov; erin.brown@hhs.gov; erin.nugent@hhs.gov; darryl.holloway@hhs.gov; rajda.nachampassak@hhs.gov; alethia.wimberly@hhs.gov; dawn.kos@hhs.gov; hillary.didona@hhs.gov; james.brown@hhs.gov; kathy.greene@hhs.gov; leslie.mcdonald@hhs.gov; sherese.warren@hhs.gov; medicareappeal@maximus.com; shillegass@emblemhealth.com; esosa@emblemhealth.com; toni-ann.devito@emblemhealth.com; ehcommunications@emblemhealth.com; m_cipolla@emblemhealth.com; sbergstrom@emblemhealth.com; sdambrosio@emblemhealth.com; cmanalansan@emblemhealth.com; sbergstrom@emblem.mail.onmicrosoft.com; lcampos@emblemhealth.com; dr.richard.cordero_esq@verizon.net; drrcordero@judicial-discipline-reform.org; corderoric@yahoo.com
Cc: michael.siconolfi@wsj.com; jennifer.forsyth@wsj.com; christopher.stewart@wsj.com; eric.sylvers@wsj.com; kate.milani@wsj.com; clare.ansberry@wsj.com; john.shiffman@thomsonreuters.com; michael.berens@thomsonreuters.com; matthew.weber@thomsonreuters.com; tips@thomsonreuters.com; alexia.garamfalvi@thomsonreuters.com; david.bario@tr.com; liptak@nytimes.com; mark.lombardi@thomsonreuters.com; mderienzo@publicintegrity.org; emily.holden@theguardian.com; tips@latimes.com; ryan.grim@theintercept.com; tips@propublica.org; watchdog@publicintegrity.org; thehill@email.thehill.com; media@propublica.org; patricia.wen@globe.com; newstip@globe.com; newsletters@lists.propublica.net; stephen.engelberg@propublica.org; eric.umansky@propublica.org; robin.fields@propublica.org; a.c.thompson@propublica.org; kimberly.kindy@washpost.com; heather.long@washpost.com; letters@washpost.com; rexivan.olarte@lexisnexis.com; ann.marimow@washpost.com; scwl@cox.net; aging@americanbar.org; jariley@duanemorris.com; info@momsforliberty.org; larry@tribelaw.com; tribe@law.harvard.edu; paul.duggan@washpost.com; lynh.bui@washpost.com
Sent: Tuesday, October 3, 2023 at 12:06:33 AM EDT
Subject: Medicare appeal M-23-386, filed on 28oct22, is still pending through a cover-up: a call to the public, class action lawyers, and journalists to expose similar abuse of power everywhere

On Sunday, October 1, 2023 at 11:53:16 PM EDT, Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq. <corderoric@yahoo.com> wrote:

2.  Sample of thousands^‡ of emails to and from Medicare and related officers and entities from 30 September 2022 to 30 September 2023

…