Judicial Discipline Reform

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

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

A. From Sen. Warren’s denunciation to the Judiciary as a racketeering branch

1. Senator Elizabeth Warren has just released her “plan” for holding federal judges accountable for failing to recuse themselves from cases in which they own shares in one of the parties and even resolving such conflict of interests in favor of that party and to the benefit of themselves, even if at the expense of the opposing party and the rule of law.

2. Her “plan” provides for judges’ accountability to be ensured by the Judicial Conference of the U.S., an entity formed by judges who themselves may have engaged and still engage in the self-serving resolution of such conflict; and by Congress, the entity that confirms judicial nominees and thereafter protects them as ‘our men and women on the bench’.

3. Those entities are interested in preserving judges’ unaccountability. Expecting them to work against their interest is unrealistic and dooms her “plan” to failure(^†>OL2:998).

4. Yet, Sen. Warren is the only member of Congress and the first presidential candidate who has dare criticize federal judges.

5. Given her example of courage, will journalists, editors, and publishers, i.e., the media, dare investigate her denunciation of judges’ self-serving resolution of conflicts of interests to determine whether it exposes their claim to integrity as a pretense?

6. Their investigation (*>OL:194§E) can be guided by the axiom ‘power is ever expanding’, and its corollary ‘the more blatantly one breaks the rules, the more likely it is that one broke them in the past and is ready to do so in future’? How far have judges individually and collectively gone in abusing their power?

7. If the media dare follow Sen. Warren’s lead, they can make a scoop that provokes the scandal with the farthest-reaching impact ever:

a. Federal judges are the only judges whose decisions affect the whole country.

b. They are the only officers appointed for life; so they need not restrain their conduct to avoid alienating voters or reappointers.

c. Only they have self-disciplining authority, which they have abused by dismissing 100% of complaints and denying 100% of petitions to review those dismissals(*>jur:10-14; OL2:548, 748), both required by law to be filed with them(^†>OL2:918).

d. Judges wield power to decide the controversies between the other two branches, e.g.,

1) whether Congress can issue subpoenas that override the President’s claims to executive privilege;

2) a single district judge suspended nationwide the President’s Muslim travel ban order;

3) judges have determined that the President cannot invalidate Congress’s constitutional ‘power of the purse’ by reallocating to the construction of the U.S.-Mexican wall funds appropriated for other purposes.

e. Judges have abusively turned their arbitral power into power to retaliate. The risk of its application has frightened the other branches into abstaining from subjecting them to constitutional checks and balances.

8. Unencumbered by fear of job loss and punishment, and unchecked by the other branches, judges advance their interests by”

a. abusing their power over the property, liberty, and the rights and duties that frame the lives and shape the identity of parties and the rest of We the People; while

b. protecting themselves by intercepting people’s emails and mail to detect and suppress critical ones(^†>OL2:929).

9. Judges have the motive, means, and opportunity to turn riskless abuse into their coordinated, and the Federal Judiciary’s institutionalized, modus operandi(OL2:760). They are the officers(*>jur:88§§a-c) of a racketeering branch.

10. This is shown in my two-volume study of judges and their judiciaries:

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

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

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

a. Download the volume files using MS Edge, Firefox, or Chrome; it may happen that Internet Explorer only downloads a blank page.

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

c. In each downloaded file, go to the Menu bar >View >Navigation Panels >Bookmarks panel and use its bookmarks, which make navigating to the contents’ numerous(* ^†>blue references) very easy.

B. Dare rely on the precedent for exposing unaccountable judges’ abuse of power

11. The Washington Post dare pursue the story about “a garden variety burglary” by burglars, disparagingly dubbed “the Five Plumbers”, who broke into the Watergate complex in Washington, DC, on June 17, 1972. The Post continued daring until the story, shunned by its peers, became the Watergate scandal. On its bandwagon, every media outlet had to climb. They rode it to the point of driving President Nixon to resign on August 8, 1974, and causing “All the President’s Men”, his aides, to be convicted of abuse of power, conspiracy, obstruction of justice, etc. During those 2+ years, The Post became a household name and established its reputation as a preeminent newspaper.

12. Dare go beyond The Post by setting off a generalized media investigation that exposes how Supreme Court justices engaged in self-enrichment and abuse of power as lower court judges, continue to do so(*>jur:65§§1-4), and as “circuit justices” for the circuits to which they have been allotted under 28 U.S.C. §42, cover for those judges(^†>OL2:918); and topple, not only “Men”, but a branch.

13. After The New York Times dare publish its exposé of sexual predator Harvey Weinstein on October 5, 2017, The New Yorker scrambled to publish its own exposé only five days later. The MeToo! movement erupted worldwide overnight and brought about transformative change. These publishers won Pulitzer prizes. TIME made its Persons of the Year those who dare be “Silence Breakers”.

14. The New York Times dare denounce the mistreatment of civil right protesters to suppress their criticism, which led to NYT v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964), and its actual malice standard in defense of freedom of speech and the press. It dare publish the Pentagon Papers, which exposed the lies underlying the Vietnam War.

15. Dare become today’s L’Aurore (First Light of Day), which published French writer Emile Zola’s I accuse! letter on January 13, 1898, and made journalistic history in the publishing of public misconduct exposés(*>jur:98§2). Dare write openly or be a discreet in print Deep Throat –the confidential informant during the Watergate investigation(jur:106§c)- like…

16. Anonymous Whistleblower dare file his/her few pages of public misconduct complaint and thereby launched the Ukrainian scandal generalized media investigation. In two weeks, the media accomplished what Special Counsel Robert Mueller failed to do in his almost two-year probe and nearly 400-page report: cause the opening of first an informal, now a formal, impeachment inquiry.

17. We the People, emboldened by the MeToo! attitude, dare shout self-assertively the rallying cry:

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

18. You, emboldened by Sen. Warren, can request each of the other presidential candidates to take a stand on her denunciation of self-enriching, abusive judges. This can substantially impact the campaign by inserting the issue in it.

19. Thereby you can pioneer an event that has never occurred in the thousands of years during which kings and governments have appointed ‘their men and women to the bench’:

a. You can thus enable the People to assert -during a presidential campaign, when politicians are most responsive to public outrage- their status as the source of all political power and masters of all public servants, entitled to hold also their judicial public servants accountable AND liable to compensate the victims of their abuse.

20. That will be transformative change in the judiciary and the rest of government.

21. To foster that change, dare invest in the research and writing, and strategic thinking of Judicial Discipline Reform, as set forth in its business plan(^†>OL2:914), e.g., to develop http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org, whose appeal is proven by its 28,479+ subscribers(OL2:Appendix 3).

22. Dare publish one(OL2:998) or a series(OL2:719§C) of my articles to inform the People about how judges prove that “power corrupts and absolute [unaccountable] power corrupts absolutely”(*>jur27fn28).

23. If you dare seize this opportunity to bring about such transformative change, you can become nationally recognized by a grateful People as their Champion of Justice.

24. Time is of the essence.

Dare trigger history!(^†>OL2:953)…and you may enter it.
^† http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates2.pdf

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

because

Every meaningful cause needs resources for its advancement;
none can be advanced without money

25. So I have written a prospectus(^†>OL2:914)^‡ to apply to venture capitalists for venture capital –not a loan– to run Judicial Discipline Reform as a for-profit business guided by the motto:

Making money while doing justice.
^‡ http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-Venture_Capitalists.pdf

26. The capital will help Judicial Discipline Reform to continue its professional and original law research and writing, and strategic thinking.

27. It will also enhance its website at http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org. Its public appeal is so extensive that out of its many visitors it has turned into subscribers 28,554 and counting(OL2:Appendix 3). That proven appeal can be fostered and monetized by enhancing the site from an informational one into:

a. a clearinghouse for complaints(OL2:918) about judges that anybody can upload; and

b. a research center for auditing(*>OL:274-280, 304-307) many complaints in search of (*>jur:131§b, *>OL:255) the most persuasive type of evidence, i.e., patterns(OL2:792§A), trends, and schemes(OL2:614) of abuse of power.

28. Capital is also needed to undertake the concrete, realistic, and feasible Programmatic Activities (OL2:916§C, 978§E) aimed to form a national movement and attain its objectives of judicial abuse exposure, compensation, and reform. The Program shows that there is a thought-out business plan reasonably calculated to turn a profit.

29. I offer to present this article and the application for venture capital to you and your colleagues at a video conference or in person; cf.:

http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_judges_abuse_video.mp4

http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_judges_abuse_slides.pdf

30. You may use the information below to contact me and discuss the presentation’s terms and conditions and its scheduling.

31. Meantime,

Support
Judicial Discipline Reform
and its professional law research and writing
and strategic thinking.

Donate
through

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

or
at the GoFundMe campaign at
https://www.gofundme.com/expose-unaccountable-judges-abuse

Dare trigger history!(^†>OL2:953)…and you may enter it.
^† http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates2.pdf

Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Judicial Discipline Reform
2165 Bruckner Blvd.
Bronx, NY 10472-6506
http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org
Tel. (718)827-9521

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

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

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

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

This article can be posted on social media and shared through this link: http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_introduction_video_slides_judges_abuse.pdf

These are the links to the presentation components:
http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_judges_abuse_video.mp4
http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_judges_abuse_slides.pdf

Dear Visitors and Subscribers^‡ to this site,

I take pleasure in submitting to your review my presentation video and slides on how you, your friends and family, and the rest of We the People can contribute to exposing unaccountable judges’ riskless abuse of power, which harms you and all of us.
‡ To subscribe to this site go <left panel ↓Register   or   + New or Users >Add New.

You can thus have a transformative impact on the administration of justice and the presidential campaign while pioneering law practice, reporting/publishing, and academic fields.*
* This article is based on the two-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* ^†

^* http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf^†  http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf

A. Judges’ statistics show their unaccountability and riskless abuse of power

1. The presentation has its reliable foundation in the federal judges’ official statistics, which they must under 28 U.S.C. §604 [Title 28 of the U.S. Code of federal laws, section 604] submit to Congress annually. Their statistics show that federal judges:

a. have had only 8 of their peers impeached and removed in the last 230 years since the creation of the Federal Judiciary in 1789! Their decisional independence has become personal untouchability, which eliminates the deterrence to abuse entailed by the fear of losing one’s job;

b. dismiss 100% of complaints against them, which must be filed with them(§351), a dismissal rate that allows and even encourages them to grab benefits through abuse of power in reliance on the farce of self-ensured accountability and the reality of self-granted impunity;

c. do not read the vast majority of briefs, required by the courts, depriving parties of the honest service which they reasonably expected and contracted for when they paid filing fees, of which the parties were defrauded under the false pretense of judges’ brief-based decisions;

d. officially weight the case of a pro se party as ⅓ of a case from its filing and before judges consider its merits, denying it the equal protection of the law afforded a party who pays the same filing fee but whose case is weighted as one or more cases and treated accordingly;

e. dispose of 93% of appeals to the federal circuit courts in meaningless summary orders contained in ‘dumping forms’, i.e., unresearched, reasonless, fiat-like orders in forms rubberstamped by their clerks to dump appeals of no interest to the judges out of the latter’s caseloads;

f. deny systematically any en banc motion for all the judges of a court to review an order of any panel of its judges, so that by either tacit or explicit agreement the judges mutually assure the survival of their orders however abusive, wrong, or perfunctory they are, thus fostering their unprincipled and self-interested attitude of “Our power stands unreviewable!”…as such “it is absolute and corrupts absolutely”.

2. Statistical analysis shows that federal judges intercept people’s emails and mail to detect and suppress critical ones, maintaining through coordinated abuse their pretense of honesty to ward off external supervision and protect their unaccountability and benefits already and yet to be grabbed. This article in the format of a professional letter proposing joint action was mailed in hardcopy to over 120 addressees. Will the letters and any reply be delivered or intercepted?

3. The judges have abused their power to prevent the exercise on them and their branch of constitutional checks and balances by the other two branches for fear of retaliation, such as by suspending nationwide their executive orders or holding their laws unconstitutional.

4. Likewise, they escape the power of control of the masters of even judicial public servants in “government of, by, and for the people”: We the People.

5. As a result, they have turned their Judiciary into Judges’ State Above the state.

6. They have extended their State to their state counterparts, for whom federal judges provide the federal rules of procedure and evidence as the model for the state ones, and illustrate their application with riskless disregard for due process, equal protection, justifying reasons, reasonable expectations, and foreseeable harm.

B. Precedent for expecting exposure of abuse to have a transformative impact

7. I propose analyzing judicial independence based on the circumstances enabling abuse of power: unaccountability, risklessness, coordination, and secrecy –clerks bound by confidentiality agreements and all meetings held behind closed doors, where the most insidious corruptor festers hidden from ‘disinfecting sunshine’, Money!, lots of money in controversy.

8. Yet, you can bring about a transformative change in judges’ accountability for the first time in history and everywhere in the world:

a. Indeed, the publication by The New York Times and The New Yorker on October 5 and 10, 2017, respectively, of their exposés of Harvey Weinstein’s sexual abuse gave rise overnight to the MeToo! movement, which here and abroad has had the first-ever transformative impact on the social and judicial handling of sexual abusers. It has given rise in the public to a self-assertive attitude, expressed in the rallying cry:

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

9. A similar eruption of an international civic movement for judicial abuse of power exposure, compensation, and reform can result from your exposing judges’ abuse as their institutionalized modus operandi and their Judiciary as their private arm for coordinating the planning and execution of their abuse.

C. The presidential campaign as the most opportune time to expose the abuse

10. There is an overcrowded field of 20+ presidential candidates desperately in need of voters’ support to qualify for the nationally televised presidential debate scheduled for October, lest missing such publicity event dries up the stream of donations and volunteers needed to run their campaigns until the Iowa caucus in late February.

11. Desperate people do desperate things, like denouncing judges’ abuse, if the expected reward outweighs the risk of retaliation. The candidates can vie for a reward that can make their campaign’ survival possible: recognition as the leader of the huge untapped leaderless voting bloc of The Dissatisfied with the Judicial and Legal System, unjust for many and too expensive for all.

12. As the MeToo! public, The Dissatisfied, and the media are informed of judges’ abuse, they will reciprocally reinforce their outrage and competitive and commercial need to investigate the issue. They will demand that:

a. the candidates at a press conference, an op-ed article, their rallies, townhall meetings, and interviews denounce judges’ abuse; and

b. call for traditional congressional hearings as well as unprecedented hearings held by universities and the media to take the testimony of victims of, and witnesses to, judges’ abuse. At those hearings, unlike in your brief or complaint against a judge, you and others will have the opportunity to be heard on your experience at the hands of unaccountable, abusive judges.

13. Their demand can attain, in the U.S. to begin with, a key exposure objective: to insert the issue into the presidential campaign.

14. But time is of the essence: The more candidates are still in the race, the stronger the pressure to be the first to denounce the abuse rather than drop out of the race.

D. Why exposing judges’ abuse should matter to you

15. We all can work together on something of historic transcendence: the transfer of the administration of justice from the State of Judges to the government of We the People.

16. That is ‘government, not of powerful, abusive men and women, but by the rule of law’.

17. You can contribute to exposing judges’ abuse of power whether you have or had a case in court; and have been represented by a lawyer or had to appear in court pro se to be treated as only ⅓ of a party.

18. Even if you have not had a case in court and are not a victim of, or a witness to, judges’ abuse, their abuse deprives you and those that you care about of your effective membership in the People, the sovereign of all public power, entitled to hire, fire, and hold judges accountable for their conduct and liable to compensate their victims as they do everybody else.

E. Realistic actions to expose judges’ abuse and carve a business niche

19. You can carve a law practice, reporting/publishing, and academic niche suing for compensation, investigating, and writing on, judges’ abuse.

20. You can begin with the abuse committed at the very top, by the justices, who committed it as judges, still do from the Supreme Court, and cover it up to protect their former lower court colleagues and all the judges who belong to the circuit to which each justice is respectively assigned as its circuit justice, lest the judges trade up in plea bargaining their incriminating testimony against ‘a bigger fish’ for a lesser charge for themselves.

21. Multidisciplinary teams, e.g., of lawyers, journalists, documentarists, talkshow hosts; experts in business practices, Information Technology, and public relations; advertisers, professors and students, can form to execute any element of this program of actions. They can:

a. handle the flood of motions to void dumping orders and remand for new process;

b. investigate the interception of emails and mail;

c. hold a tour of presentations on judges’ abuse at universities, public interest and defenders organizations, bar associations, press clubs, chambers of commerce, digital technology and artificial intelligence meetings, home owners associations, children and family conferences, probate groups, shareholders associations, etc.;

d. gather the parties before the same judge or the same court into a group that jointly claims from that judge and court the refund of filing fees and compensation for unread briefs;

e. organize those groups into the local chapters of the national civic movement for judicial abuse of power exposure, compensation, and reform;

f. conduct public interest law clinics for victims of, and witnesses to, the abuse, and offer other courses analyzing the causes and effects of judges’ unaccountability and abuse of power;

g. pursue the abuse as the subject of the teamwork class of journalism students;

h. propose judges’ abuse as the subject of students’ term project, master’s thesis, and doctoral dissertation;

i. interview, if need be on promise of anonymity, current law clerks to the justices and other top judges as well as former clerks, who today may be law professors and deans, to detect from their valuable accounts as insiders patterns of conduct among judges; and turn into confidential informants sitting and former judges disgusted by judges’ abuse of power that they witnessed, condoned, and even participated in;

j. investigate judges’ relation to organizers of and participants in, and conduct at, conferences, whether held by judiciaries or corporate entities that have or are bound to have cases in court; in effect pay for all the judges’ expenses; and can afford to do all that while the individuals who are most frequently their opposing parties cannot;

k. call for nationally televises hearings on judges’ abuse held by Congress as well as unprecedented ones held by universities and the media so that their findings of the nature, extent, and gravity of the abuse provoke such national media and public outrage that judicial reforms that today appear inconceivable become unavoidable under public pressure;

l. produce the documentary Black Robed Predators Perched on Benches for commercial distribution, so that it can be like 9/11 Fahrenheit, which at the time was the largest grossing documentary ever;

m. develop search engines and algorithms to audit judges’ writings and detect patterns, trends, and schemes of abuse;

n. apply Forensic and Fraud Accounting techniques to judges’ annual mandatory public financial disclosure reports;

o. use Follow the money! techniques and the Al Capone strategy to search for judges’ concealed assets, tax evasion, and money laundering;

p. publish editorial comments, articles, syndicated columns, and journals on judges’ unaccountability and abuse of power;

q. apply Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations techniques jurisprudence, and scholarship to design the sociogram and operational diagram of unaccountable judges and their cronies protected by their riskless abuse, such as complicit lawyers, bankruptcy trustees, appraisers, warehousers, auctioneers, accountants, house renovation contractors, bankers, managers of private clubs that serve as conspiracy dens;

r. develop this website http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org, which has 27,125 subscribers and counting, into a clearinghouse for complaints against judges and a center for research on judges’ unaccountability and riskless abuse;

s. develop and make widely available templates for people to detect and describe in a uniform and comparable way judges’ abuse of power;

t. collect, verify, and edit accounts of judges’ abuse and comment on its nature, extent, and gravity in the Annual Report on Judicial Unaccountability and Abuse in America;

u. hold a series of regular talkshows on judges’ abuse that gives rise to a Coalition of Hosts to Justice that develop their shows collectively into a powerhouse of American politics and a rival to the national TV networks;

v. hold the first-ever, and national, multimedia, and interactive conference on judges’ abuse of power, sponsored by a nationally respected university or think tank and media outlets;

w. create the Institute for Judicial Unaccountability Reporting and Reform Advocacy attached to a top university;

x. facilitate the formation a single-issue Tea Party-like movement for a new crop of politicians willing to act as the representatives of the People by taking on an unaccountable judiciary and its judges;

y. promote internationally the exposure of judges’ unaccountability and riskless abuse just as America has exported other trend-setting ideas in society, politics, and the arts that have changed the world;

w. advocate the grant of the petition to Congress by 34 states –thus satisfying the requirement of Article V of the Constitution– since April 2, 2014, for a constitutional convention, which can transform the American governance system by the People abolishing Judges’ State Above the state and for the first time in history inscribing in their constitution, a new one, their right to hold their judicial public servants accountable and liable; etc.

F. Money can be made doing justice

22. The arguments that judges have developed to hold the executive branch, the President, and the Catholic Church accountable for their abuse of power can be used against them:

a. Former CBS Reporter Sharryl Attkisson and CBS noted strange behaviors of her office and home computers. They hired three independent IT experts to examine them. They determined that her computers had been roamed by the target of her journalistic investigation: the Department of Justice, which wanted to find out the state of her research into both:

1) the killing of the American ambassador and his aides in Benghazi, Libya; and

2) its Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms’ disastrous Fast and Furious gunrunning operation that led to the killing of an American border patrol with a gun that it had sold to Mexican druglords. Reporter Attkisson is now suing the Department of Justice for $35 million.

b.i. Judges have allowed the suit against President Donald Trump under the emoluments clause of the Constitution to go forward to determine whether he has abused his power to enrich himself through his Trump hotel in Washington, DC.

b.ii. While that case is still being litigated, a Florida judge found that Donald Trump had unjustifiably refused to pay The Paint Spot, a provider of paint for Trump National Doral Miami resort, and imposed damages and attorney’s fees of more than $300,000, or over 10 times the amount in controversy.

b.iii. Another judge found Trump liable to pay $25 million in compensation for fraud to the students of Trump University.

c. Despite the state/church separation clause in the First Amendment to the Constitution, the judges have held the Catholic Church liable to pay more than $2 billion to the victims of its pedophilic priests and its policy of protecting them from exposure.

d. How many clients would like to sue their lawyers for charging them $10Ks for appealing to a court of appeals although the lawyers knew or should have known had they done their due diligence of checking the judges’ own statistics made available to the public annually and the orders posted on their courts’ websites that the judges would not read their appellate briefs and instead would have their clerks dispose of their appeals by rubberstamping 5¢ dumping forms that did not discuss either the facts or the law of their cases, and did the only thing that clerks who have no judicial power, were not vetted to exercise it, and cannot receive it by delegation can do: maintain the status quo with a single operative word, “Affirmed” or “Denied”?

G. Concrete, reasonable, and feasible actions that you can take now

23. Therefore, I respectfully propose that you:

a. review my video and slides;

b. share and post them and this letter as widely as possible so that they go viral and reach the national public and the presidential candidates; and

c. invite me to make via video conference and in person a presentation followed by Q&A to you and your guests.

24. Let’s join forces at this most opportune time to make an Emile Zola’s I accuse!-like denunciation that earns us the recognition by a grateful People as their transformative Champions of Justice.

25. So, I look forward to hearing from you.

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

26. Every meaningful cause needs resources for its advancement; none can be advanced without money.

Support
Judicial Discipline Reform
and its professional law research and writing
and strategic thinking.

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

or
at the GoFundMe campaign at
https://www.gofundme.com/expose-unaccountable-judges-abuse

Dare trigger history!(^†>OL2:953)…and you may enter it.
^† http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf

 Sincerely,

Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
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

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

NOTE: Given the interference with Dr. Cordero’s email and e-cloud storage accounts described at *>ggl:1 et seq., when emailing him, copy the above bloc of his email addresses and paste it in the To: line of your email so as to enhance the chances of your email reaching him at least at one of those addresses; if you do not receive even an acknowledgment of receipt, call him at 1(718)827-9521.

* http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf

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

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

This article can be shared and posted to social media
provide it is done non-commercially
without deletions or additions,
proper attribution is made to its author,
Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.,
and the links to this website, namely,
http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org
and to his study of judges and their judiciaries(see infra)
are provided.

Subscribe for free to these articles
by going to the left panel and down to the Register bottom.

Dear Advocates of Honest Judiciaries,

Thank you for inviting me to speak at your respective event on the issues of:

a. the riskless abuse of power(*>jur:5§3; OL:265) including the denial of due process and equal protection of the law, by unaccountable judges at courts of general and limited jurisdiction, such as family, probate, and bankruptcy courts(^†>OL2:614);

b. my out-of-court inform and outrage strategy for the public to join forces and take concrete, realistic, and feasible steps in order to form a national civic movement for judicial abuse exposure, redress, and reform; and

c. the insertion in the presidential campaign of the issue of unaccountable judges’ abuse so that candidates are forced to address it in their political platforms, press conferences, rallies, townhall meetings, and the presidential debates.

A. Balancing the benefit of my speech with the charge of my speaking fee

1. I receive many invitations to speak. I cannot accept all, much less agree to speak pro bono at events that I am in addition expected to attend by paying for my transportation, room and board, and all other expenses.

2. Here applies the axiom, “What one receives at no charge and can drop at no cost is not appreciated”…and I am left out on the cold sidewalk holding the bag of unpaid bills after investing scores of hours doing my homework to learn about the event, tailor my message to its audience, and prepare handouts, as well as closing my office for one or two days.

3. Hence, to speak at events I charge a fee based on expected attendees and additional ones who show up, paid on a retainer basis, just as clients pay lawyers in advance, and the flight ticket and hotel room and board paid also in advance, with other expenses paid upon presentation of the bill. A flat fee can be arranged for events held by national organizations.

4. The investment in having audiences hear my well-researched and reasoned message with a concrete, reasonable, and feasible plan of action, and experience my lively and uplifting delivery warrants the fee.

5. Indeed, the quality, tenor, and originality of content and format of the articles posted on this website – http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org – illustrate what I actually do in terms of professional law research and writing and strategic thinking, and point to what I am capable of doing when I am in front of a life audience. The currently more than 25,495 subscribers and many more visitors to my website prove that my message and presentation are highly appealing.

6. My capacity to imagine an audience being addressed with sidesplitting and good taste humor is shown in my skits(^†>OL2:491, 530, and 724¶4) in my otherwise very serious study of judges and their judiciaries. The study is titled and downloadable for free thus:

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

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

^† Volume 2: http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf >from page OL2:394

a. Download the volume files using MS Edge, Firefox, or Chrome; it may happen that Internet Explorer only downloads a blank page.

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

c. In each downloaded file, go to the Menu bar >View >Navigation Panels >Bookmarks panel and use its bookmarks, which make navigating to the contents’ numerous(* ^†>prefix:page# references) very easy.

7. The study describes at *>OL:359§F a half or one day seminar that includes a role-playing exercise for learning the workings of a complex judicial and legal system by the seminary participants playing the several types of system members as they advance or protect their respective harmonious and conflicting interests. Invaluable benefits can be reaped by putting oneself in the position of a different system member while interacting and, what is more, competing with them in the midst of an audience.

B. Holding the same type of meeting while wishfully thinking that it will accomplish something different in court

8. In our country, even the executive orders of a president elected by 62.5 million voters can be suspended nationwide by one single district judge and the suspension can be confirmed by two or three circuit judges. It follows that a host of orders, decisions, and controversies emanating from lower parties end up in court too and at the mercy of one judge and his or her peers and colleagues, for “he who can do the most, can do the lesser”.

9. Whatever you and your group advocate and decide at an event, such as a meeting or convention, it can be suspended or prohibited by one or several judges for any reason and even for no reason at all!(^†>OL2:457§D). They need not fear any adverse consequence for themselves therefrom, for they are held unaccountable by each other(^†>OL2:903§E) and the politicians who recommended, sponsored, nominated, and confirmed or appointed judicial candidates, and thereafter protect them as “our men and women on the bench”(OL2:610§3).

10. If we ‘keep holding separate events as up to now while expecting to have a different effect’ when we end up in court again, then as Einstein put it, ‘we engage in the conduct of irrational people’. We take the wishful thinking in our heads for what we will accomplish out there in the real world.

11. By holding a separate annual event, we will merely commiserate ineffectively in the same place at the same time with other victims of abusive judges.

12. The judges will keep picking each of us apart one after the other, denying us not only the services that we are entitled to, but also that they require us to pay for:

a. Judges do not even read the vast majority of briefs that they require parties to file, although producing and filing them costs each party $1Ks and even $10Ks(^†>OL2:760).

b. Judges intercept our email and mail communications to prevent us from ‘assembling’, including on the Internet, and exercising our constitutional ‘right to freedom of speech and the press’ to expose them(^†>OL2:885).

c. Judges hold priests, pilots, pharmaceutical companies, doctors, and pharmacists, lawyers, police officers, and everybody else accountable and liable for the injury that they cause. Yet, they hold themselves unaccountable by dismissing 100% of complaints against them and denying 100% of petitions to review those dismissals(^†>OL2:881). If you want to know how Supreme Court Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., was informed officially about it but failed to take action reasonably calculated to end such self-interested abuse of power, read the file at http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-11Circuit.pdf.

C. Thinking strategically to link our separate events so as to make them the series over time and place of a national campaign

13. By contrast, we can join forces so that each of our events and those of other people whom we and our fellow members may persuade to come on board become peak occasions in a continuous joint effort: a virtual national campaign of events linked over time and place.

14. Thereby we can turn each event of our virtual national campaign into another occasion to advance our common cause:

a. We the People are the sovereign source of power in a democracy, that is, “government of, by, and for the people”(*>jur:82fn172). We are the masters of all public servants. We hire them to deliver to us the services that we need.

b. For the judicial services that we need, we hire judicial public servants to serve us as judges. We are entitled, and retain the right, to hold them accountable for their failure to perform their duties, their ‘mal-performance’, and their abuse of power, and liable to compensate those whom they have injured.

c. Our common cause aims to exercise the right to hold judges accountable, expose their unaccountability, obtain redress, and force judicial reform.

15. We can link our events to advance our common cause by us and the members of our groups:

a. informing the national public before, at, and after our events about judges’ failure to deliver the services(^†>OL2:760) for which they were hired and their abuse of power(^†>OL2:885); and

b. outraging the public with that information so as to stir it up to demand that all 2020 presidential and other candidates take a stand on that issue on their political platform and at every press conference, rally, townhall meeting, and presidential debate (set to start this coming June).

1. Benefits of linking our events into a national campaign

16. That is how we can insert the issue of judges’ unaccountability and consequent abuse of power in this campaign and for the first time in our national discourse.

17. Thereby we advance the formation of a national civic movement for judicial abuse exposure, redress, and reform. To that movement we lead the only entity strong enough to hold judges accountable and liable: We the People.

18. Imagine the boost that our respective efforts to assert constitutional rights; reform family, probate, and bankruptcy courts; establish an effective means of judicial accountability; etc., would receive if we could discuss them at each of our events conceived of as episodes of a single series held over time all over the country so that attendance is made possible and affordable for the largest number of people. Of course, at every event there can also be discussion of the issues of especial interest to the main segments of the audience and their particular organization.

19. That is how each presidential candidate conducts his or her national presidential campaign: not by holding one annual convention in one place, but rather by holding a rally, a townhall meeting, or a press conference in a different place every other day or every week. Although they run national campaigns, candidates also discuss the issues that are most important to the largest segments of the audience at hand.

20. By joining forces to link our events, we can have the practical effect of a national campaign where we repeat and mutually reinforce our message so that together we advance our common cause.

D. The actions that we can take and encourage our fellow members to take

21. Leaders lead to where followers would not naturally go; otherwise, they are merely following at the front those behind them, who by the force of habit push them to go to the same place as ever.

22. If we think strategically and show leadership by adopting this strategy and having our groups understand and help implement it, we can attain synergism: The public impact of our linked events will be greater than the sum of our individual events held separately.

23. Therefore, I respectfully encourage you to:

a. book me as a speaker;

b. share this email and its strategy with the members of your groups and ask them to read it because KNOWLEDGE IS POWER;

c. ask that they share and post this and my similar emails widely so that we can attract the attention of the national public and the presidential candidates and convince the latter that we represent something of immense value to them: the huge(^†>OL2:719¶¶6-8) untapped voting bloc of The Dissatisfied with The Judicial and Legal System; and

d. comment on implementing this strategy with a view to holding a video conference to discuss it.

E. No meaningful cause can be advanced without money

Visit the website at, and subscribe for free to its articles thus:
http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org > left panel ↓Register

or   + New or Users >Add New.

24. My website can be enhanced as laid out in my business plan(^†>OL2:563) into a for-profit venture intended to lead up to the creation of an institute for judicial unaccountability reporting and reform advocacy(jur:130§5).

25. To that end, you and your peers and colleagues can organize a meeting where I can present to potential investors how my website can be turned into:

a. a clearinghouse for complaints about judges that anybody can upload(^†>OL2:881); and

b.a research center(*>jur:131§b) for searching(*>OL:277§§D-E) many complaints for the most persuasive type of evidence, i.e., patterns, trends, and schemes schemes(OL2:657§4, 682¶d) of abuse of power; e.g. http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-11Circuit.pdf >OL2:792.

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

DONATE TO
Judicial Discipline Reform
and its professional law research and writing, and
strategic thinking

here

or

at the GoFundMe campaign at
https://www.gofundme.com/expose-unaccountable-judges-abuse

26. Time is of the essence and this is the most opportune time: during a presidential campaign, when politicians must out of principle or opportunism pay attention to popular dissatisfaction. We the People are at our strongest now. Let’s join forces to use our strength effectively.

27. Consequently, I look forward to hearing from you at your earliest convenience.

Dare trigger history!(*>jur:7§5)…and you may enter it.
* http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf

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

28. To retain my legal services, see my model letter of engagement(*>OL:383).

Sincerely,

Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Judicial Discipline Reform
Bronx, NY 10472-6505
       http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org
      Tel. (718)827-9521

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

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

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

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

You may share and post this article
in its entirety, without any addition, deletion, or modification,
with credit to its author, Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.,
and the link to his website:
http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org.

This article is also found at:
http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf >OL2:821

A. Judges’ abuse in their courts and the strategy for their exposure outside them

1. The Programmatic Presentation discusses forming a national civic movement for judicial abuse of power exposure, redress, and reform.

2. It welcomes victims of, and witnesses to, judges’ abuse, and all advocates of honest judiciaries. They recognize that in ‘government, not of men and women, but by the rule of law’(*>OL:5⁶)[1] it is vital for We the People, the masters of all public servants, to hold our judicial public servants accountable for performing the work for which we hire them, to wit, administer justice according to law, and liable to compensate those whom they harm.

3. The materials corresponding to the(* ^†>references) are found in my professionally researched and written, 2-volume study of judges and their judiciaries, titled and downloadable thus:

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

Volume 1: * http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf >all prefixes:# up to OL:393

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

Use the above links to download the files in MS Edge, Firefox, or Chrome; open the downloaded files in Adobe Reader, https://acrobat.adobe.com/us/en/acrobat/pdf-reader.html, so that you can open the Bookmarks panel and use the bookmarks that make navigating to the numerous(* ^†>parenthetical references) very easy.

A smaller file with this article and the Programmatic Presentation outline infra can be downloaded through this link: http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/retrieve/DrRCordero-national_movement_v_judicial_abuse.pdf.

4. Judges wield enormous power(OL:267§4) over people’s property, liberty, and the rights and duties that frame their lives. They abuse it for their benefit(OL:173¶93) when they, among other things:

a. deny parties their due process and equal protection rights(^*>jur:5§3);

b. do not read their briefs and have their clerks dispose of cases and motions by rubberstamping dumping forms(^†>OL2:760), i.e., unresearched, unreasoned, arbitrary orders;

c. intercept their critics’ communications(OL2:781) thus abridging their right of free speech;

d. complicitly exonerate each other from all(OL2:792) complaints to escape any adverse consequence of their abuse, a catchall term for any form of their harmful conduct. Yet, judges hold malpracticing doctors and lawyers, brutal police officers, pedophilic priests, and pilots liable for the harm that they cause whether intentionally, negligently, or accidentally and even if they too are among the casualties.

5. The People, as the source of all governmental power, are entitled to bring Judges Self-elevated Above the Law down to where Everybody is Equal Before the Law.

6. This objective can only be achieved by informing the national public of the nature, extent, and gravity of judges’ abuse and so outraging it as to cause it to demand further exposure, redress, and reform. This is our out-of-court inform and outrage strategy(OL2:713).

7. To implement it, we need to reach out to the national public and attract the largest number of people to a national civic movement. The Programmatic Presentation shows why attaining that objective is realistic, feasible, and opportune given:

a. the public’s MeToo! attitude of intolerance of any form of abuse; and

b. its current strongest position to force consideration of its demands: during a presidential campaign when poli-ticians depend the most on voters and must be seen listening and willing to satisfy their demands.

B. Share, post, and organize the holding of the Programmatic Presentation

8. You can be part of forming a national civic movement that enables the People to exercise on the judiciary the ‘checks and balances’ that the other two branches have failed to. In brief, you can:

9. SHARE this introduction to the Presentation(OL2:821) and its outline(OL2:823) with your friends, family, and other people who have or had cases in the same court as you do or did. Just go to the court’s website, download its decisions, and find there their or their lawyers’ contact information.

10. POST them to websites, social media, and yahoogroups(see a list of them at OL2:433) as widely as possible so that it may go viral(*>jur:164§9). Your posting will reach many who have experienced or witnessed judges’ abuse and many others who can become an invaluable source of information:

11. Whether out of principle or opportunism, journalists and politicians may join forces with us to advance their own personal, professional, commercial and/or our common interest. They can become effective allies of result, for they have superb means of nationally disseminating news and issues. We want journalists to report on us; and politicians to insert our cause in their platforms and every stump speech as a way to stand out from the pack of candidates competing against them.

12. ORGANIZE a group to whom I can make the Presentation in person, if they pay my expenses; otherwise, via video conference. To identify other parties with cases before the same judge as in your case, search for the decisions of that judge and/or apply the method for searching with other parties for patterns and trends of abuse(*>OL:274-280, 304-307).

  1. You are no longer alone

13. Let it be a source of comfort for all of you that none must any longer suffer abuse in silence or protest it alone in separate, futile efforts(^†>OL2:815). You are among people who have experienced the same abuse by judges as you have. Now all of you have the opportunity to take joint action to expose them(*>jur:92§d), obtain redress, and compel reform.

2. From a Presentation group to a local chapter

14. A group at a Presentation can give rise to a local chapter of the national movement. All groups will join forces to lend weight to the nationwide demand for courts to refund the fees collected in cases where judges abused parties and compensate them for the harm that they caused.

3. A Presentation for parties and non-parties

15. None of you must have or have had a case before a judge to benefit from the Presentation. Judges abuse their power just as VIPs sexually abuse theirs: because they can. But while a sexual abuser harms only one person sometimes, judges abuse many parties daily, harming their families, neighbors, employees, patrons, etc., and the rest of the People through the precedential value of their decisions.

16. Therefore, to whom do you run for protection from abuse by others, including the other branches of government, when judges are the most powerful abusers…and unaccountable(*>jur:21§§1-3)?

4. Big and little can become Workers of Justice

17. You may invite judges, law clerks, and lawyers disgusted by being executioners of abuse(*>OL:180). Outside the Presentation, they may share with us information as confidential informants(^†>OL2:788 ¶37).

18. ‘Little people’ may also want to make confidences: court clerical staff, marshals, janitors, food delivery boys, and similarly situated people are ‘invisible’ to the judges, as are the drivers, waiters, waitresses, key counter and room service personnel, and their peers at hotels, seminars, restaurants, country clubs, banks, etc., patronized by judges(*>jur:106§c). Their presence, much less their ears and common sense, is not even noticed by judges as they coordinate their abuse and engage in competitive boasting about who has outsmarted the system the most.

19. The more representative local chapters are of all members of the public, the stronger they and the national movement will be in their demand for exposure, redress, and reform. All can become Workers of Justice.

C. Take knowledge for free for its power and give money for our common cause

20. KNOWLEDGE IS POWER: Empower yourself by gaining knowledge from the study* ^† and the articles posted here.

Subscribe to this website
http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org  
for free thus:

+New or Users >Add New.

21. No meaningful endeavor can be advanced without money. Donate to support Judicial Discipline Reform’s:

a. professional law research and writing; and

b. the implementation of its business plan(OL2:563) for turning its website into both a clearinghouse for complaints against judges uploaded by the public and a research center for the public to search for patterns, trends, and schemes(OL2:614)revealing judges’ coordinated abuse.

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

Donate here

or
at the GoFundMe campaign

https://www.gofundme.com/expose-unaccountable-judges-abuse

Dare trigger history!(*>jur:7§5)…and you may enter it.
* http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf

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

OUTLINE
of
the Programmatic Presentation
on forming a national civic movement
to expose judges’ abuse of their enormous power
over people’s property, liberty and
the rights and duties that frame their lives;
obtain redress; and
lead to reform

D. Purpose of the movement; basis of the Program; and audience of the Presentation

1. Purpose of the movement

22. A national civic movement(^†>OL2:821; *>jur:164§9) is being formed to expose judges’ unaccountability and consequent riskless abuse(jur:5§3, *>OL:154¶3) for their own benefit(OL:173¶93) and to the detriment of We the People of their enormous power(OL:267§4) over people’s property, liberty, and all the rights and duties that frame their lives.

23. The movement seeks redress for its members through, e.g., the refund of their court filing fees and compensation for the damages(^†>OL2:760) that judges’ abuse has caused parties and others.

24. A series of Presentations will launch the process of both informing the public of the nature, extent, and gravity of judges’ abuse and so outraging it(^†OL2:741) as to stir it up to compel the adoption of measures that today appear inconceivable into reforms(^*>jur:158§§6-8) that are accepted as unavoidable to ensure that judges apply the law and are as equally subject to it as everybody else.

2. Basis of the Program

25. The basis of the Program is the professionally researched and written, 2-volume study* ^† of judges and their judiciaries:

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

3. Audience of the Presentation

26. The audience of the Presentation includes victims of, and witnesses to, judges’ abuse; current, past, and potential parties to lawsuits; advocates of judiciaries that honestly apply the rule of law; academics; students; newscast anchors, investigative journalists, and reporters; politicians; lawyers; law clerks; voters; etc.

E. Presentation topics: movement’s precedents; opportuneness; interests; and actions

1. Precedents for the national civic movement

27. The precedents for the national movement are current and the conditions for their repeat obtain:

a. Groups of people with a common view on a single issue, taxes, gathered in local chapters that merged into the Tea Party and in less than 10 years dominated local and national politics;

b. After the publication by The New York Times and The New Yorker on October 5 and 10, 2017, respectively, of their exposés of Harvey Weinstein’s sexual abuse, the MeToo! movement erupted into being to expose the millenarian impunity of sexual abusers(^†>OL2:812§D).

2. Opportuneness of forming the movement now

28. The public’s MeToo! attitude of personal involvement in exposing abuse, and intolerance of any form of it makes this the right time for the national public to rally to a national movement to shout(OL2:635):

Enough is enough!
We won’t take judges’ abuse anymore.

29. The social and political circumstances are propitious for forming the movement:

a. A sympathetic attitude can be expected from most of the new members of the House, who be-long to minorities that have experienced abuse, are anti-establishment, and want change now.

b. The 2020 election campaign is underway and during it politicians will be most receptive and vulnerable to the demands of voters, particularly those organized in movements(^†>OL2:648) that have many voting members. Politicians are likely to deem supporting the movement a means of reaching out to, and becoming the sought-after leader of, the huge(OL2:719¶¶6-8) untapped voting bloc of The Dissatisfied with The Judicial and Legal System.

3. Interests driving the movements’ formation

30. The audience will be interested to learn that judges count pro se cases as a third of a case(^†>OL2:455§B); do not read the vast majority of briefs(OL2:760); dispose of 93% of appeals in “procedural, unsigned, unpublished, without comment, and by consolidation decisions”( OL2:457§D); dismiss 100% of complaints against them and of petitions for review of such dismissals(OL2:792); etc.

31. The personal, professional, and commercial interests of principled and opportunistic people, and the interest in justice of the most passionate people, the abused by judges, will drive the movement.

32. The movement will be energized by a powerful motivator: the recovery of money lost to abusers: the joint demand by parties all over the country for courts and judges to refund court filing fees and pay compensation for the $1,000s and even $10,000s that judges made parties waste when they required parties to produce briefs that the judges willfully failed to read, even knew in advance that they would not read(OL2:760), but fraudulently pretended that they had read(OL2:729).

33. Enlightened self-interest, “Everyone can advance his or her own interest by pursuing the common interest first”(OL2:815), should lead people to join the movement and think strategically(OL2:445§B).

4. Actions that you can take

34. To help form the national civic movement for judicial abuse of power exposure, redress, and reform, you, the reader, can share and post the introduction(^†>OL2:821) to, and this outline(OL2:823) of, the Programmatic Presentation, which I offer to make to a group of your colleagues, friends, and family, in person with all expenses paid, or via video conference. See also a series of articles(OL2:719§C) that can inform the public about, and outrage it at, judges’ abuse.

35. Help spark a generalized investigation by professional and citizen journalists into two unique national stories of the potentially most outrageous forms of judges’ abuse of power:

a. Follow the Money!(*>OL:194§E), the investigation into how judges rely on their unaccountability to risklessly profit from case-related information, engage in money laundering, and evade taxes, particularly through a bankruptcy fraud scheme(^†>OL2:614) driven by the most insidious corruptor: Money!(*>jur:27§2);

b. Judges’ unlawful interception of their critics’ communications(OL2:781), a violation of the 1^st Amendment “freedom of speech, of the press, and the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances”(OL2:792¶1), committed in the self-interest of preventing their critics from joining forces to expose judges’ abuse.

36. Help “assemble” We the People at unprecedented citizen hearings(^†>OL2:812§E) where victims of, and witnesses to, judges’ abuse, and advocates of honest judiciaries will offer testimony to panels of newscast anchors, investigative journalists, journalism professors, and IT experts. The hearings can be locally organized by, and held at, a talkshow hosts coalition(*>OL:146, 144§D), universities, media outlets, and civic entities; and attended by a live and a broadcast audience.

37. Help organize with university professors and students the first-ever conference(*>dcc:11) on judicial abuse exposure, redress, and reform, one multi-disciplinary, nationally multimedia broadcast, and interactive(jur:97§1), to hear investigative reporters, public interest leaders, politicians, etc.

38. KNOWLEDGE IS POWER: Empower yourself by gaining knowledge from the study*^† and the articles posted here.

Subscribe to this website
http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org  
for free thus:

+New or Users >Add New.

39. No meaningful endeavor can be advanced without money. Donate to support Judicial Discipline Reform’s:

a. professional law research and writing; and

b. the implementation of its business plan(OL2:563) for turning its website into both a clearinghouse for complaints against judges uploaded by the public and a research center for the public to search for patterns, trends, and schemes(OL2:614)revealing judges’ coordinated abuse.

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

Donate here

or
at the GoFundMe campaign

https://www.gofundme.com/expose-unaccountable-judges-abuse

Dare trigger history!(*>jur:7§5)…and you may enter it.
* http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf

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

Sincerely,

Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Judicial Discipline Reform
2165 Bruckner Blvd.
Bronx, New York 10472-6505
    tel. 1(718)827-9521

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

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

To retain Dr. Cordero’s legal services, see his model letter of engagement(*>OL:383).

NOTE: Given the interference with Dr. Cordero’s email and e-cloud storage accounts described at *>ggl:1 et seq., when emailing him, copy the above bloc of his email addresses and paste it in the To: line of your email so as to enhance the chances of your email reaching him at least at one of those addresses. If you do not receive at least an acknowledgment of receipt credibly from him within a week, resend your email until you do, or contact him otherwise

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

[

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

You may share and post this test complaint
in its entirety, without any addition, deletion, or modification,
with credit to its author, Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.,
and the link to his website:
http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org.

This test complaint is also found at:
http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf >OL2:792

Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr.
Supreme Court of the U.S.
One First Street, NE
Washington, D.C. 20543

Dear Chief Justice Roberts,

1. I and the people assembled with me, exercising our 1^st Amendment “freedom of speech, of the press, and the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances”(*>jur:111§3), which no statute or self-interested required ‘confidentiality’ can abrogate, file publicly this complaint under the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act of 1980 (the Act), 28 U.S.C. §§351-364(jur:24^18a) about Judge Brett Kavanaugh, Chief Judge Merrick Gar-land, and their peers and colleagues in the U.S. District of Columbia Circuit (the complained-about judges or the judges; DCC) for dismissing 100% of the 478 complaints about them filed under the Act in DCC, and denying 100% of petitions for review of such dismissals during at least the 1oct 06-30sep17 11-year period.

The materials corresponding to the (parenthetical references in blue) are contained in my 2-volume study of judges and their judiciaries, which is titled and downloadable for free thus:

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

• Volume 1: http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf >all prefixes:page # up to OL:393

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

2. That is a fact established by the statistics(infra §C) that they were required under 28 U.S.C. §604(h)(2)(jur:26^23a) to submit and did submit to Congress and the public.
3. The Act is to be construed broadly: It does not require complainants to show standing to file a complaint about a judge, whether by having suffered injury in fact as a result of the judge’s misconduct or disability complained about; meeting any residence requirement relative to the judge’s workplace or residence; or otherwise. Rather, it provides under §351(a) thus:

Any person alleging that a judge has engaged in conduct prejudicial to the effective and expeditious administration of the business of the courts, or alleging that such judge is unable to discharge all the duties of office by reason of mental or physical disability, may file with the clerk of the court of appeals for the circuit a written complaint containing a brief statement of the facts constituting such conduct.

4. The 15 complaints filed with DCC about J. Kavanaugh following his confirmation hearings in Sep. 2018 were transferred under Rules 25 and 26 of the Rules for Judicial Conduct and Disability Proceedings(Rules; jur:125²⁶⁴; ^†>OL2:778) by C.J. Garland, who disqualified himself, to DCC Judge Karen Henderson, who in turn transferred them to you. You assigned them on October 10 to Ten Circuit Chief Judge Timothy Tymkovich. In the third paragraph of the letter to him, you wrote thus:

I have selected the Judicial Council of the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit to accept the transfer and to exercise the powers of a judicial council with respect to the identified complaints and any pending or new^[1] complaints relating to same subject matter.

^[1] Chief Judge Timothy M. Tymkovich
U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10^th Circuit
Byron White U.S. Courthouse
1823 Stout Street, Room 102G
Denver, CO 80257-1823

5. Therefore, we respectfully petition you and all other officers to likewise transfer and process this complaint with the other 15 so that their processing may be informed by each other; all be used to detect judges’ patterns and trends of misconduct and the Federal Judiciary’s institutionalized policy of misconduct as its modus operandi; and their processing may lead to the independent investigation of the Judiciary’s unlawful interception of its critics’ communications.

A. The facts of the complained-about judges’ prejudicial conduct

6. Through their 100% dismissal of the 478 complaints about them and 100% denial of the petitions for review, the judges have “engaged in §351(a) prejudicial conduct”. Indeed, they have:a. arrogated to themselves the power to abrogate in effect that Act of Congress, which it is “the business of the courts” and its judges(infra ¶c) to enforce together with its other acts;

b. abused the self-disciplining power entrusted to them under the Act by exonerating them-selves from all complaints so as to evade any disciplinary action, thereby resolving in their favor the conflict of interests arising from being the target and the judges of the complaints;

c. breached their oath of office under 28 U.S.C. §453 whereby “[We] solemnly swear (or affirm) that [we] will administer justice without respect to persons [like our peers, colleagues, and friends as opposed to other parties to complaints], and do equal right to the poor [in connections to us] and to the rich [in IOUs on us that we gave the peers, colleagues, and friends who dismissed complaints about us], and that [we] will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon [us] as judges under the Constitution and laws of the U.S. [e.g., the Act]”. Instead, they administered ‘unequal protection from the law’ with respect to relationship to them by being 100% partial toward their peers, col-leagues, and friends when they became the target of complaints, all of which they dismissed;

d. disregarded their duty under the Code of Conduct, Canon 1, which requires them to “uphold the independence and integrity of the judiciary”. They have shown that how they “discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon [them] as judges under the…laws [such as the Act]” depends upon whether the person whose conduct they are judging is their peer, col-league, or friend, on whom they dependent for cover-up of their misconduct and disability;

e. prejudiced through interdependent partiality “the integrity of the judiciary”, of whose essential character for the “effective…administration of the business of the courts” they have imputed knowledge because the Commentary to Canon 1 provides thus: “Deference to the judgments and rulings of courts depends on public confidence in the integrity and independence of judges. The integrity and independence of judges depend in turn on their acting without fear or favor. Although judges should be independent, they must comply with the law and should comply with this Code. Adherence to this responsibility helps to maintain public confidence in the impartiality of the judiciary. Conversely, violation of this Code diminishes public confidence in the judiciary and injures our system of government under law”;

f. failed to maintain the “good Behaviour” required of them under Article III, Section 1, of the Constitution “to hold their Offices”; defined by what their oath singles out, i.e., their pledge to “faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties [under the] laws”, such as the Act; and reiterated by Canon 1 in its Commentary “they must comply with the law”;

g. committed “impropriety and the appearance of impropriety” prohibited by Canon 2, for under Canon 2A “reasonable minds with knowledge of the relevant circumstances after reasonable inquiry would conclude” that it is ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ impossible for all the judges to independently deem that 100% of the 478 complaints about them filed over 11 years were properly dismissible but for a complicit reciprocal complaint dismissal agreement;

h. denied complainants the benefit intended for them under the Act of redress for the prejudice that they had suffered or witnessed relating to the judges’ misconduct or disability;

i. deprived complainants and the rest of the public of the working mechanism for complaining that the Act had provided for their protection from misconducting and disable judges;

j. showed reckless disregard for 100% of the nature, extent, frequency, and gravity of the misconduct and disability complained about in the 478 complaints filed about, and dismissed by, them, whose recklessness was aggravated by their systematic failure to investigate the complaints through the appointment of special committees, provided for under §353;

k. showed reckless indifference to the rights and well-being of complainants and the rest of the public by leaving them exposed to 100% of the prejudice caused by the misconduct and disability complained about, and any additional prejudice at the hands of the exonerated judges, who were left free of any deterrent to further committing misconduct and indulging in disability; and at the hands of other judges who, realizing that misconduct and disability had no adverse consequences for judges, committed misconduct and indulged in disability;

l. disregarded Canon 3 providing that “The duties of judicial office take precedence over all other activities”, for the number of extra-judicial activities highlighted on their individual page on the DCC website allows ‘the math of perfunctoriness’(OL2:760) to demonstrate how lack of time accounts for 93%(OL2:457§D) of appeals being disposed of through the clerk-filled out, reasonless, arbitrary, fiat-like dumping forms of summary orders(jur:43§b);

m. intentionally “prejudic[ed] the effective and expeditious administration of the business of the courts” and the persons to whom they swore to administer justice, We the People, for it is a torts tenet that “people are deemed to intend the foreseeable consequences of their acts”. By dismissing 100% of the complaints and denying 100% of review petitions, the judges rendered their misconduct and disability riskless, which enabled their further prejudicial misconduct and disability. Worse yet, they emboldened themselves and others to commit misconduct and indulge in disability of ever more diverse nature, to a greater extent, more frequently, and of higher gravity. While dismissing and denying for over a decade, they saw their foreseeable prejudice become a fact, whose continued occurrence they intended;

n. deceived potential and actual complainants by pretending that their complaints would be fairly and impartially processed although the judges intended to dismiss 100% of them, thus running the Act’s complaint mechanism as a sham that works fraud on We the People.

B. Action requested

7. Therefore, we respectfully petition the judicial officers processing this complaint to:
8. deem and treat this complaint as the public document that it already is; and make it available to the public easily and widely as it progresses through the stages of its processing;
9. communicate to us and the public the judges’ answers; and afford the opportunity to reply, for it would constitute partiality toward them to take their answers at face value;
10. in the interest of justice for the complainants and public confidence in judges, make the 478 complaints and their dismissal orders, review petitions, and denials public, and transfer them under Rules 25 and 26 to be processed impartially by DCC-unrelated §353 special commit-tees, whose members need not be judges or lawyers (next) and which can replace the failed mechanism of judges –priests, police officers- judging their peers, colleagues, and friends;
11. hold fact-finding public hearings on this and all other complaints to ascertain the causes for complaint, which hearings Judge Anthony Scirica, Chair of the Judicial Conduct and Disability Committee, stated at the October 30 hearing on Code and Rules proposed changes are conceivable as part of the Committee’s work; and let independent fact-finders, i.e., news anchors and editors, investigative reporters, and journalism professors(OL2:777¶21c), conduct them to find whether dismissing complaints not matter the nature, extent, frequency, and gravity of the misconduct and disability turned into all judges’ pattern of action that became the Judiciary’s institutionalized policy of misconduct as its modus operandi(OL2:756¶¶9-11);
12. have independent IT, mail, and phone forensic experts investigate the Judiciary’s interception of its critics’ communications(OL2:781), such as mine by email, mail, phone, my website, PayPal, GoFundMe, LinkedIn, and FB accounts(*>ggl:1); and make their findings public:

Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net , DrRCordero@Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org , CorderoRic@yahoo.com , Dr.Richard.Cordero.Esq@gmail.com , Dr.Richard.Cordero.Esq@outlook.com , Dr.Richard.Cordero.JDR@gmail.com , Dr.Richard.Cordero.Esq.JDR@gmail.com;   tel. (718)827-9521

Subscribe for free to
the series of articles of
http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org thus:
+ New or Users >Add New

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

Donate to Judicial Discipline Reform’s
professional research and writing effort
to advance our common interest in exposing
unaccountable judges’ riskless abuse of power;

at the GoFundMe campaign
https://www.gofundme.com/expose-unaccountable-judges-abuse

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

C. Links to official court statistics on complaints about judges and their analysis

8. Article on official statistics on complaints about J. Kavanaugh, DCC Chief Judge Merrick Garland, & peers and their analysis using “the math of abuse”: http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/retrieve/DrRCordero_JJ_Kavanaugh-Garland_exoneration_policy.pdf
9. Table of complaints against judges lodged in, and dismissed by, DCC in the 1oct06-30sep17 11-year period: http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/retrieve/DrRCordero_table_exonerations_by_ JJ_Kavanaugh-Garland.pdf
10. Collected official statistics on complaints about federal judges in the 1oct96-30sep17 21-year period: http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/retrieve/DrRCordero_collected_statistics_ complaints_v_judges.pdf
11. Template to be filled out with the complaint statistics on any of the 15 reporting courts: http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/retrieve/DrRCordero_template_table_complaints_v_judges.pdf
12. Article on statistics and math: neither judges nor clerks read the majority of briefs, disposing of them through ‘dumping forms’: unresearched, unreasoned, arbitrary, and fiat-like orders; http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf >OL2:760, 457§D

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

Sincerely,

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

---

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

You may share and post this article non-commercially
in its entirety, without any addition, deletion, or modification,
with credit to its author, Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.,
and the link to his website:
http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org.

This article is also at:
http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf >OL2:773

 

Dear Deans, Professors, Students and Members of the Media, and Advocates of Honest Judiciaries

I read with interest the articles in The Crimson and those written by others at Yale concerning then-Judge Kavanaugh and the power of law students to cause their deans to take a position on his confirmation, as well as the letters relating to him that more than 2,400 law professors and more than 2,000 Mothers in the Law Profession published in The New York Times(NYT).

This is a proposal for you, your professors and students, the media, and me to join forces, not to revisit the sexual abuse allegations leveled against him, but rather to use his case to insert into the national debate on the evaluation of judicial candidates’ fitness to serve what is more important: their service.

Indeed, the very politicians who put judges in office cannot thereafter turn around and investigate their appointees for lack of integrity and competence, lest they incriminate their own vetting procedures and skills for evaluating character and competence.

To evade their responsibility for exercising constitutional checks and balances on ‘our men and women on the bench’, politicians have delegated to judges authority to self-discipline. In the federal government, they have adopted the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act of 1980 (28 U.S.C. §§351-364; *> jur:24^18a).

Thereunder, the only way for anybody to complain about a federal judge is by lodging a complaint in the circuit where the judge serves. There it is processed by precisely his or her peers, colleagues, and friends. They are required to submit the statistics of their processing of those complaints to Congress and the public in the Annual Report of the Director [who is appointed by the Supreme Court chief justice] of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts (AO; 28 U.S.C. §604(h)(2); jur:26^23a).

Those statistics(^†>OL2:772§G) show that Judge Kavanaugh and his peers dismissed 100% of the 478 complaints about them lodged with their District of Columbia Circuit and reported in the annual official statistics for the 1oct06-30sep17 11-year period(OL2:748). They have abused their self-disciplining authority to grant themselves 100% exoneration from complaints regardless of the complained-about conduct’s nature, extent, and gravity.

Acting only in self-interest, he and his peers have left complainants and the rest of the public at the mercy of complained-about judges and their covering-up peers.

Held by politicians and themselves unaccountable, life-appointed judges, in practice unimpeachable and irremovable(jur:21§a), risklessly abuse(*>OL:154¶3) for their gain and convenience their enormous power over people’s property, liberty, and all the rights and duties that frame their lives.

Their service is incriminated, not by an individual’s allegations and partisan opinions, but by their own non-partisan, verifiable, and official statistics. The latter’s analysis through “the math of abuse” exposes them as Judges Above the Law.

This novel statistics-based approach to judicial service evaluation is the product and distinguishing feature of my study of judges and their judiciaries, titled and downloadable thus:

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

• Volume 1:
  http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf >all prefixes:page # up to OL:393

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

Justice Kavanaugh now has the strongest personal motive to prevent any investigation into his and his peers’ abuse of power to secure his and his peers’ 100% exoneration from complaints about them. Such investigation can force the disclosure of the complaints, conveniently kept secret; the detection of patterns and trends of abuse; and the exposure of the organization and execution of, and benefits from, their cover-up.

Nor can Justice Gorsuch, who comes from the 10^th Circuit, allow such investigation. There he, who so values camaraderie(^†>OL2: 546¶¶4-6), and his peers dismissed 99.83% of complaints about themselves(OL2:548).

This explains why the 15 complaints about Judge Kavanaugh lodged in the last month that his peer, Judge Karen Henderson, referred to Chief Justice John Roberts, were in turn referred by him for processing to precisely the 10^th Circuit.

The presumption of a whitewash would not be less justified if C.J. Roberts had referred them to the Second Circuit, the former circuit of Justice Sotomayor. While there, she and her peers denied 100%(jur:11) of petitions for review of dismissal of complaints about themselves (jur:65§§1-3). The percentage of complaints dismissed in all the circuits is 99.82%(jur:10, 12-14).

The exposés of Harvey Weinstein’s sexual abuse and its cover-up by VIPs published by NYT and The New Yorker pressured C.J. Roberts into referring for sexual misconduct investigation Former 9^th Cir. Chief Judge Alex Kozinski, who then resigned.

The almost 700 letters of complaint about abuse in the Federal Judiciary submitted to the C.J. caused him to admit to abuse therein and to set up a study committee(^†>OL2:645). Its report has led to proposed changes to the Code of Conduct for U.S. Judges and the Judicial Conduct and Disability Rules for processing complaints.

Only as recently as October 2 did the Administrative Office announce only on its website that the changes will be the subject of only one single hearing at the Thurgood Marshall Federal Judiciary Building in Washington, D.C., rather than at each of the more than 200 federal courts.

How many people can afford to travel to D.C. at all, never mind do so the day before to be ready to testify at 9:00 a.m. on Tuesday, October 30, for only a few minutes?

Any request to be heard must be emailed by October 18 to CodeandConductRules@ao.uscourts.gov; for the first week, a ‘glitch’ prevented AO’s receipt of those emails; http://www.uscourts.gov/news/2018/10/02/judiciary-hold-public-hearing-proposed-changes-judges-code-and-judicial-conduct.

This has been an announcement pro forma about compliance in bad faith with the hearing requirement. It is a sham!

No change to the Code or the Rules will stop judges from dismissing complaints about themselves, just as the changes adopted in 2008 and 2015 did not.

Such dismissal is their institutionalized mechanism for enforcing the complicit agreement through which judges reciprocally ensure their unaccountability for their past abuse and the risklessness of their future abuse. Abuse of power is the modus operandi(OL2:457§D, 760) of Powerful Judges Who Can Do No Wrong.

Students have shown to have the power to draw public attention to abuse. You, law professors and students, and we lawyers have the duty to expose abuse by judges, the ones who run(OL2: 717) our profession and corrupt it by ensuring their impunity.

Your publication of this letter and one or more of my articles(OL2:755, 719§C) and your protest against the sham hearing can launch a generalized media investigation into judges’ abuse of power akin to the one into sexual abuse sparked by NYT’s and The New Yorker’s publication of their exposés. Just days later, the MeToo! movement emerged. It has led to a historic societal transformation from silent sexual abusees to a national public that shouts:

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

That is precedent for the reasonable expectation that if we join forces to expose judges’ abuse of power using J. Kavanaugh’s dismissal of complaints as a test case, we may bring about a historic transformation:

We can insert this issue into the mid-term elections, the national debate, and the presidential campaign; and enable We the People for the first time ever to hold our judicial public servants accountable.

We may expose what will be a national scandal: judges’ interception of their critics’ communications to each other and to others –did you receive my previous ones to you?-, shown by a statistical study and verifiable by IT experts examining computers and servers (See the following article; also at ^†>OL2:775).

Thus, I respectfully request that you publish this letter and call me(*>jur:1) to invite me to make a presentation to you, school members, and media colleagues. Time is of the essence.

Dare trigger history!(*>jur:7§5)…and you may enter it.
* http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf

Subscribe for free to this series of articles thus:
+ New or Users >Add New

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

Donate

to Judicial Discipline Reform’s
professional research and writing effort
to advance our common interest in exposing
unaccountable judges’ riskless abuse of power
at the GoFundMe campaign
https://www.gofundme.com/expose-unaccountable-judges-abuse

I look forward to hearing from you. Kindly send your reply to this block of my email addresses: Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net, DrRCordero@Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org, CorderoRic@yahoo.com.

Sincerely,

Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Judicial Discipline Reform
New York City
http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org

---

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

You may share and post this article non-commercially
in its entirety, without any addition, deletion, or modification,
with credit to its author, Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.,
and the link to his website:
http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org.

This article is also at:
http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf >OL2:775

A. Statistics as the source of probable cause to believe that there is interception

There is reason to believe that the communications among critics of judges, including Advocates of Honest Judiciaries, and between them and third parties are intercepted, which is prohibited as provided for in the Criminal Code under 18 U.S. §2511(*>OL:5a¹³).

This is demonstrated through the statistical analysis(>OL:19² >‡>ws:58 §7) of communications(>ggl:1; ^†>OL2:476, 425, 405§§A-C) in my study of judges and their judiciaries, which is titled and downloadable thus:

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

• Volume 1:
  http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf >all prefixes:page # up to OL:393

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

Statistically, people line up in a standard normal distribution, which is a continuum that goes from one extreme of low values to the opposite extreme of high values of the variable in question. This continuum, when graphically plotted on an X,Y system of coordinates produces a bell curve. Most people bunch up on either side of the top –the crown– of the bell. Hence, it is abnormal and a sign of manipulation to see the values for everybody on only one of the two extremes.

Although I email to tens of thousands of email accounts directly and through hundreds of yahoogroups, hardly ever do I receive an email that is positive and encouraging.

Nevertheless, my website (this one at http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org) has 24,700 subscribers and counting; it is built on the most widely used platform in the world, WordPress. When was the last time that you liked what you read on a site so much that you subscribed to it, although you and the rest of us suffer under information overload?

It is counterintuitive for people to subscribe but leave no comment. It is decidedly suspect for the number of subscribers, which had reached an average of 90 a day, with peaks of over 110, to drop to 0 in the space of a week and then pick up to only around 3 a day(OL2:604¶2).

To some emails I receive no reply at all. Practically every reply that I do receive is negative and critical of them. That is counterintuitive in a country as divided as ours, where at one end of the spectrum of everything there are people strongly in favor of it and at the other end people strongly against it. Cf. A rubric of one of the national TV networks, either CBS or NBC, is precisely “A Nation Divided”. Although I have communicated with some Advocates of Honest Judiciaries for years, I do not receive emails from them anymore. People email me, I reply to them with an encouraging message, but then I do not receive any more emails from them.

More than 2,000 Mothers in the Legal Profession and more than 2,400 law professors took out each an ad in The New York Times regarding J. Kavanaugh. I addressed them in the Subject: line of emails that I sent to tens of thousands. Despite that and although I too am a lawyer, and a doctor of law at that, I have not received a single reply from any of them. This is most suspect because we have harmonious interests(>dcc:8¶11; Lsch:14§§2-3). Those protected under the 1^st Amendment(>jur:23^12b), are “freedom of speech, of the press; the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances”.

Moreover, requests that I make for membership in yahoogroups are approved only for my next posting to them to be rejected because I am told I am not a member.

1. Recent cases showing government interception of communications

The National Security Agency (NSA) engaged in a warrantless, indiscriminate, mass ‘dragnet’ collection of the metadata of communications of scores of millions of unsuspected people(OL2:395§B), as revealed by the secret documents that Edward Snowden leaked.

Former CBS Reporter Sharyl Attkisson has sued the U.S. Department of Justice for $35 million for hacking her personal and work computers to spy on the status of her investigative reporting on the attacks by extremists on the American embassy in Benghazi, Libya, that killed the American ambassador and three of his aides; and the fiasco Fast and Furious gunrunning operation of its Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms, which sold even assault rifles to track their way to Mexican druglords(OL:346¶131) and resulted in one such rifle being used to kill an American border patrol. Her articles were so incriminating that A.G. Eric Holder would respond to congressional demands for documents with entire pages blacked out. He was the first sitting member of the presidential cabinet to be held by Congress in contempt of it. Accordingly, he was forced to resign.

These cases show that the government, of which the judiciary is part, engages in illegal digital activity against those whom it perceives as a threat, such as a persistent investigative reporter, and even those who are suspected of nothing at all, such as those caught in NSA’s surveillance dragnet.

It is the judges of the secret court set up under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) that approve up to 100% of the NSA’s secret request for secret orders of secret surveillance. Do they do so for the quid pro quo of the interception by the NSA of the communications of critics of judges? That is what the proposed Follow it wirelessly! investigation must determine(OL2:600§B).

B. Money and a scandal that focuses the media on judges’ abuse of power

Potentially, there is money to be made by suing the government for breach of constitutional rights and the right to privacy. More realistically, exposing to the national public that judges have abused their power to intercept their critics’ communications and prevent their ‘assembling to petition for redress of judges’ abuse’ would constitute a scandal far greater than that provoked by Snowden’s leak. It would shock America’s conscience and put you and your organization on the frontpage of every publication and at the top of every newscast, and on the list of Pulitzer Prize candidates.

C. What you can do to expose government interception of communications

I respectfully propose that you participate in exposing the interception of the communications of critics of judges by those who have the greatest interest therein: judges themselves. You can:

1. widely share and post my articles with your address as the reply address to see what kind and number of replies you receive, which you can forward to me under an unrelated Subject: line;
2. help finance IT experts’ examination of critics’ email accounts and computers, and servers;
3. help organize presentations(OL:194§G) by me at law, journalism, IT, and business schools, pro se groups, and venture capitalists who may be interested in my business plan(OL2:563).

Consider this proposal in light of these principles of strategic thinking(OL2:445§B, 475§D) and dynamic analysis of harmonious and conflicting interests(OL2:570§E, 475§D, 465§1):

1. The enemy of my enemy is my friend (we share the interest of defeating our common enemy).
2. The friend of the friend of my friend may want to become my friend (which speaks to the indirectness of connections and a means of building alliances of result even if not of interests).
3. People never work as hard as when they work for themselves. (Ask yourself: What interest of her own can the person that I want to persuade to do something advance by joining forces with me? Cf. Some such interests are to make herself and her group or organization known.)

Time is of the essence to insert the issue of unaccountable judges’ abuse in the mid-term elections.

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

Subscribe for free to these series of articles thus:
+ New or Users >Add New

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

Donate
to Judicial Discipline Reform’s
professional research and writing effort
to advance our common interest in exposing
unaccountable judges’ riskless abuse of power
at the GoFundMe campaign

https://www.gofundme.com/expose-unaccountable-judges-abuse

I look forward to hearing from you. Kindly send your reply to this block of my email addresses: Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net, DrRCordero@Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org, CorderoRic@yahoo.com.

Sincerely,

Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Judicial Discipline Reform
New York City
http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org

---

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

You may share and post this article non-commercially
in its entirety, without any addition, deletion, or modification,
with credit to its author, Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.,
and the link to his website:
http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org.

This article is also at:
http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf >OL2:725

A. You have no recourse against unaccountable judges, whose abuse is riskless

1. You may be or have been a party to a lawsuit who have suffered, or may be or have been a court clerk(^†>OL2:687), a lawyer(*>jur:106§c), or even a judge(*>OL:180) who have seen others suffer, judges’ abuse(*>OL:154¶3) of their power over your and other people’s property, liberty, and all the rights and duties that frame everybody’s life.

The materials corresponding to the (blue text references) are found in my study of judges and their judiciaries, which is the basis of this strategy. The study is titled and downloadable for free thus:

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

* Volume 1: http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf >all prefixes:page # up to OL:393

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

2. Judges abuse their power, among other ways, by disregarding due process and the equal protection of the law, and making up rules as they go. They do not even read the majority of briefs, thus knowingly causing filers injury in fact(infra ¶23.d.4).
3. Their motive for abusing power is their convenience at work and material and social benefits.
4. They have the opportunity in the more than 50 million new cases filed every year(*>jur:8fn4,5) and the scores of millions being prosecuted or pending disposition.
5. They wield the most frightening means: the power to do because they can and can get away with it. They are so empowered because they are held by the politicians who put them on the bench(OL2:610§3) and by themselves unaccountable(*>jur:21§§1-3). Theirs is unaccountable power, the kind that “corrupts absolutely”(jur:27fn28).
6. As a result, when you were, or saw others, being abused, there was nobody you could turn to for help, let alone to hold judges accountable and liable to compensation. You were alone. When you try on your own to expose judges’ abuse, you stand no chance against them whatsoever(OL2:548).
7. But that can change now if you think strategically(OL2:593¶¶15-16; 445§B): You can join forces with others to seize the opportunity to expose judges’ abuse opened by the nomination of Judge Brett Kavanaugh to become the successor to U.S. Supreme Court Retiring Justice Anthony Kennedy. His party affiliation should be as irrelevant to you as has been yours or that of the judges who abused you or whom you witnessed abusing others.
   

   B. The duty of Judge Kavanaugh, all the other judges, and the Federal Judiciary itself, not to commit abuse and to expose it
   

8. It is Judge Kavanaugh’s duty, and has been for the past 11 years as a judge:
   
   a. to keep his oath of office(*>jur:53¶106) to “do equal right to the poor [in connections with me] and to the rich [therein, such as “a brother and sister of the robe”(^†>OL2:546) and] to uphold the Constitution and the laws thereunder;b. to uphold the Constitution as it provides that a judge can keep his or her office only “during good Behaviour”(jur:22fn12);

   c. to enforce the constitutional provision that “all civil Officers”, including judges, are subject to impeachment and removal even for “Misdemeanors”(*>OL:126¶b);”

   d. to counter and denounce(OL2:611§B) any judge, and all the more so the Federal Judiciary as an institution(^†>OL2:633§D, 582§C), that abuses his or her power by interfering(OL2:395) with the constitutional right of every citizen, never mind a group of them, to “petition the Government for a redress of grievances” against judges(*>OL2:633¶19);

   e. to report “grounds for believing”, which involves ‘a belief’ as opposed to evidence or proof, that a judge has violated a law and the matter should be investigated(jur:69fn130);

   f. to file a complaint against a judge who “engaged in conduct prejudicial to the business of the courts or is disable mentally or physically”(*>jur:24§b; OL:160§B);

g. to “uphold the integrity of the judiciary” by denouncing a judge who has engaged in misconduct(jur:57¶119); etc.

9. Judge Kavanaugh has violated his duty of office by either committing abuse of power himself, as a principal, or tolerating it, as an accessory.
10. Toleration of abuse occurs through knowing indifference or willful blindness(*>jur:90§§b-d), or systematic exemption from discipline by dismissing 99.82% of complaints against fellow judges(*>jur:10-14; ^†>OL2:548). It is motivated by gaining the social benefit of being and remaining accepted by the other judges, rather than being outcast for denouncing abusers and retaliated against as a traitor.
11. By tolerating abuse, a judge incurs accessorial liability by becoming:
    a. an accessory after the fact of the abuse that he has witnessed but has kept silent about, thus covering up for the abuser and enabling the latter to keep any abuse benefit; andb. an accessory before the fact of the abuse that through his explicit or implicit promise of complicit silence he encourages judges to continue or start committing.
12. The other justices of the Supreme Court have likewise committed abuse of power individually(jur:65§§1-3) or collectively(OL2:455§§B-F; cf. 608§A). They continue committing or tolerating abuse when it involves a continuing crime, such as concealment of assets to evade taxes or hide the assets’ illegal origin(jur:65fn107b,c). Those assets can never be declared, lest the concealer incriminates himself or herself(jur:105fn213).
13. Due to the abuse committed or tolerated, Judge Kavanaugh is unfit to become a justice and be entrusted for life with even more power to affect everybody in our country, just as the other justices are unfit to remain as such on the Court.
    

    C. What you can do to make your experience or knowledge of abuse known nationally
    

14. Therefore, what should energize you is not the issue whether Judge Kavanaugh should staff the Supreme Court.
15. Rather, what should catch your imagination and drive you to action is the opportunity to take advantage of the national attention concentrated on all things judicial by the media investigating Judge Kavanaugh and the Senate Committee on the Judiciary holding his confirmation hearings.
16. You can endeavor to insert in the national debate as well as the primaries and mid-term elections the issue of how Judge Kavanaugh, the justices of the Court(jur:71§4), and the other judges have committed and tolerated abuse of power to such a routine, widespread, and coordinated degree as to have institutionalized abuse as their modus operandi(jur:49§4). They have turned the Federal Judiciary into a safe haven for abusers(OL2:645). Seize the opportunity to hold them accountable and liable to compensation.
17. You the abusees and you the witnesses to abuse, regardless of your politics, can do this first by joining forces, and then by thinking strategically and imaginatively, which calls for doing the unprecedented.
    

    1. Building alliances with politicians and journalists
    

18. The strategic strengthening of your forces requires that you build alliances with other people who share your interest in exposing judges’ abuse or can by so doing advance interests of their own that are harmonious with yours.
19. Potential allies are politicians, whether members of either or no party. They are seeking your vote so that they must be sensitive and responsive to your concerns and demands. Moreover, they have access to the media, which are an indispensable ally to reach the national audience, in general, and opinion builders and influencers, in particular.
20. Some politicians or people that they care about have been abused by judges or similar powerful entities, such as big money.
21. Other politicians can be persuaded to see this as an opportunity to become the standard bearer of the parties to the cases pointed out supra ¶4, to whom must be added the scores of millions of parties and related people who deem their cases to have been wrongly or wrongfully decided. They form a huge untapped voting force: The Dissatisfied With The Judicial and Legal System.
22. Neither you nor the Dissatisfied nor the rest of the public need to suffer their abuse silently in the new era of a self-assertive people with a MeToo! attitude. We all can shout together across the country the rallying cry:

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

2. A joint campaign to contact particular politicians to persuade them to advance their and your interests by exposing judges’ abuse

23. You can take concrete action to turn politicians into your allies of interests:

a. Read this email thoroughly and share it with all your friends and family, workmates, peers, other victims of judges’ abuse, advocates of honest judiciaries, etc.; and post it to social media as widely as possible;

b. Request that the Senate Judiciary Committee at the confirmation hearings on the nominee; https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/nominations/judicial, hear not only the self-serving statements of the nominee, but also your experience or knowledge of judges’ abuse; contact:

1) Chairman Chuck Grassley, www.grassley.senate.gov/contact; tel. (202) 224-3744; Subcommittee on Judicial Nominations Majority Office, tel. (202)224-5444);

2) Ranking Member Dianne Feinstein, https://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index. cfm/e-mail-me, tel. (202) 224-3841; Subcommittee on Judicial Nominations Minority Office, tel. (202)224-3244).

c. Contact two prominent politicians who have already attracted national attention, i.e.,

1) U.S. House Candidate Alexandria Ocasio-Cortéz, who in the primaries defeated the no. 4 in the Democratic hierarchy and presumed next speaker; us@ocasio2018.com; tel. (845)605-2742;

2) New York Gubernatorial Candidate Cynthia Nixon, an education and social activist, who played Miranda in Sex and the City; info@cynthiafornewyork.com;

d. Request that they:

1) hold a press conference to denounce judges’ abuse of power, as proposed(OL2:718, 722);

2) at the conference, invite the public to email them a concise 350-word(jur:124fn261.b) description of only those elements in their cases that lie outside judges’ margin of discretion so that they indisputably constitute abuse of power, e.g.

a) sexual abuse and harassment(OL2:645);

b) participation in a bankruptcy fraud scheme(OL2:614);

c) concealment of assets(jur:65fn107c);

d) money laundering(OL:194§E);

e) failure to comply with mandatory financial information disclosure requirements(jur:105fn213);

f) bribes disguised as unrelated financial transactions(OL2:470§2);

g) credit card fraud(jur:15);

h) mortgage fraud(*>jur:xxxviii);

i) coordinated exploitation of case information and ex parte communications with the opposing party (*>jur:xxxv);

j) conflict of interests and failure to recuse(jur:146fn272);

k) cover up of the wrongdoing of a fellow judge(jur:65§1);

l) connivance between judges and politicians(jur:77§§5-6);

m) official bias against pro ses, who must nevertheless pay the same filing fees(OL2:455§B);

n) failure to report partially and all-expense paid seminars and travel(jur:146fn272);

o) dockets showing document entry dates that do not correspond with the dates stamped on the documents or with carrier’s delivery notification;

p) tampering with transcripts produced by court reporters;

q) the failure to read briefs, evidenced as described at OL2:729, affecting the largest number of parties, involving the deprivation of the constitutional rights of due process and equal protection of the law, and causing parties the loss of their whole investment in the case, which constitutes injury in fact (see ¶4) infra);

3) ask that the Senate Judiciary Committee hear also you and others similarly situated;

4) call on the media to do the unprecedented: in their own commercial interest and to repair their battered public image, hold nationally televised public hearings conducted by news anchors, top journalists, and professors and graduate students of journalism. This is how the media can become The People’s Spokesman; and

5) announce the unprecedented: the formation of a national movement of parties and related people who made an enormous investment to write, or have lawyers write, briefs and motions, and paid fees to file them with courts, whose judges did not even read them and dumped on clerks for them mechanically to affirm decisions on appeal and deny motions using dumping forms(OL2:608§A); the movement will demand the courts to refund the filing fees and pay damages(OL2:726).

24. To request that those politicians take such action, you may forward this email to them and ask everybody else to do likewise. Then you can send it also to every other candidate in the primaries and mid-term elections. Let all of them compete for the title of National Champion of Justice and the donations and campaign help that come along with it; cf. https://www.governor.ny.gov/content/governor-contact-form.
25. Victims of, and witnesses to, judges’ abuse and Advocates of Honest Judiciaries, we must not miss this unique opportunity to insert the issue of judges’ abuse of power in the media investigation of Judge Kavanaugh, the Senate confirmation hearings, and the primaries and mid-term elections. We need not suffer in silence or fight alone a losing battle against abusive judges defending as a class their unlawful position: Judges Above The Law.

Join forces and take strategic action to expose them!

Visit the website Judicial Discipline Reform at,
and subscribe for free to its series of articles thus:

http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org > + New or Users >Add New

Put your money
where your outrage at judges’ abuse
and your passion for justice are.

Donate here through PayPal

or

at the GoFundMe campaign at
https://www.gofundme.com/expose-unaccountable-judges-abuse

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

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

---

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

You may share and post this article non-commercially
in its entirety, without any addition, deletion, or modification,
with credit to its author, Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.,
and the link to his website:
http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org.

This article is also at:

http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf >OL2:713

NOTE: This program irremediably changes the number of paragraphs and headings. Please excuse the abnormal result.

A. The precedent of The New York Times’ article on Harvey Weinstein’s sexual abuse and its transformation of public attitude toward any form of abuse

1. The publication by a national publisher of one or a series of my articles exposing unaccountable judges’ riskless abuse of power could do what the NYT’s sexual abuse article of last October 5 unexpectedly accomplished: breach the taboo on the subject, set in motion a generalized media investigation of sexual abusers and abusees, and reveal public intolerance henceforth of that abuse.
2. What the NYT article did is a realistic precedent: With surprising celerity, it gave rise to the MeToo!, TimesUp, NeverAgain, Stop School Shootings, and similar civic movements expressive of social transformation. People have broken their resignation to suffer abuse in silence and, on the contrary adopted a self-assertive attitude that courageously shouts against all forms of abuse a common and rallying cry:  

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

1. If a national newspaper and/or magazine publisher dare publish one or a series of articles, such as mine, exposing judges’ abuse of power, there is the realistic possibility of achieving:

a. the intermediate objective of causing the media and the public to insert the subject of unaccountable judges’ consequent riskless abuse of power in the primaries and the mid-term elections and thereafter in the national debate; which can pave the way to…

b. the ultimate objective of compelling the adoption by politicians–even if only after a constitutional convention(^†>OL2:517§B)– of judicial reform(*>jur:158§§6-8) that effectively holds judges accountable for their performance and liable to compensate the victims of their abuse.

1. My already written articles on judges’ abuse are available for review by publishers

1. I have the necessary academic and professional credentials(*>a&p:16) to offer for publication articles exposing unaccountable judges’ abuse.
2. Many of the articles that I have listed in my query letter (below and at ^†>OL2:703) and am offering for publication are already written. They are included in my over 1,150-page study* ^† of judges and their judiciaries. So a publisher can examine what I have done rather than hope that I can deliver on what I offer to do.

That study is titled and downloadable for free thus:

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

* Volume 1: http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf >all prefixes:page number up to OL:393

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

2. KNOWLEDGE IS POWER for those who have the commitment and stamina to gain it

1. The list of professionally researched and written articles will help empower those who recognize the pragmatic truth in the axiom “KNOWLEDGE IS POWER”. By reading and studying those articles, they can gain the knowledge that they need to confront the most powerful officers in our country: Judges Above the Law.
2. The professional quality of the research and writing of an article and the concrete, realistic, and novel character of its ideas are the criteria that should determine whether it is worth reading by a potential Champion of Justice.
3. The brevity of an article is the determining factor only for casual readers, judicial reform hobbyists, and pro ses self-improvised a lawyers. They cannot read anything longer than the offhand blurb of a blog, a mental hiccup digitally recorded as a thought scribble. Accordingly, they are likely to commit the gross dishonesty and incompetent advocacy of commenting on articles that they did not bother to read past their titles.
4. Swapping blurbs with fellow group members is not a strategy for exposing judges’ abuse: It is a careless, often deceptive pastime.
5. Blurb-only readers give us, Advocates of Honest Judiciaries, a bad name. They cannot be expected to make the enormous effort necessary to amass the only power available to Advocates: the power of knowledge. That is the only power that we have to oppose to judges’ abusively exercised power over people’s property, liberty, and all the rights and duties that frame their lives.
6. Knowledge is what earns us the attention and respect of others.
7. Knowledge can allow us to outsmart judges on our own terms. Outsmarting judges begins with recognizing that Advocates will never prevail over judges in court, their turf, where judges apply and disregard rules however they want and conjure up new ones as they go to exempt themselves from discipline and ensure their survival.
8. Nor can blurb-only readers be expected to engage in the intense thinking process necessary to analyze what they learn, figure out the functioning of our judicial and legal system, and devise an abuse-exposing strategy that is sufficiently concrete, realistic, and feasible to have a chance at success.
9. That is the kind of strategy that can catch the imagination, and lead to the participation, of those called upon to implement it, the Advocates; and persuade those asked to provide what is indispensable to any implementation: donors of money.
10. The strategy must also be sufficiently novel to avoid the application to those who devise and implement it of Einstein’s aphorism: “Doing the same thing while expecting a different result is the hallmark of irrationality”. Doing so is irrational because it ignores the fundamental law of our physical and human worlds: cause and effect.
11. I give this and the following criticism constructively and mean for it to be taken likewise. It would be an inappropriate reaction to be peeved, defensive, and lash out at me.
12. Instead, this criticism should elicit reflection, reevaluation of conduct, and reorientation of effort toward a productive joining of forces that advances our common cause of exposing unaccountable judges’ abuse.

B. Exposing unaccountable judges’ riskless abuse by either the irrational continuation of suits in court and appeals to judge-appointing officials or the reasonably calculated out-of-court inform and outrage strategy

1. The irrational, self-contradictory premise of suing judges in court in the expectation that they will uphold the law that they are charged with breaking

1. The Federal Judiciary is the model for its state counterparts, providing the standard for their rules of procedure and evidence. It officially weights a case filed by a pro se as one third of a case(^†>OL2:455§§B-D).
2. Consequently, federal judges are not only authorized, but also expected not to waste more than a third of their time on a pro se case. A federal judge can have over 600 weighted cases in his or her caseload(*>jur36fn57).
3. To think that by a pro se filing a case against a judge(^†>OL2:709§2), never mind a group of judges(OL2:708§1), progress will be made in exposing their abuse is wishful thinking, driven by ignorance of the statistics(*>OL:275§1) and incapacity to draw their implications.
4. A case that charges judges with disregarding the facts as well as due process and the equal protection of the law yet asks judges who are judging judges and therefore themselves to order their peers and themselves to stay within the limits, and comply with the provisions, of court rules-enabling legislation is self-contradictory. One need not be a lawyer to be logical.
5. One only needs to think rationally: It is irrational to ask a bully to stop breaking the neighborhood rule against bullying because there is a neighborhood rule that prohibits bullying. The bully breaks that rule, not because he does not know that it exists, but rather because he is a bully and could not care less about that or any other rules but his own: the rule of abuse.
6. The irrational premise of such a case will induce a judge to give that case less than a third of the attention that he or she gives the average case. The official statistics bear this out(*>jur:21§a).
7. One does not enhance one’s credibility by advancing such an irrational premise.
8. The same holds true for any proposal to ask the federal or a state department of justice to go against the very judges that the president or the governor nominated or appointed.
9. Why would a justice department antagonize the judges that can retaliate by holding the president’s or the governor’s political agenda unconstitutional, not to mention holding that the president or the governor broke the law by, for example, colluding with the Russians or hiding assets to evade state taxes?
10. Expecting people to work in one’s interest and against their own is irrational. It contradicts the instincts of self-gratification and -preservation.

2.  The out-of-court inform and outrage strategy that appeals to the people’s power to expose judges’ abuse and establish their accountability

1. The strategy pursued through the publication of one or a series of my articles is reasonably calculated to achieve this:

a. to inform the national and state public about the issue of judges’ abuse, and so to outrage it at, judges as to stir up the public to demand that those running for public office and incumbents take a position on the issue on their political platforms and at every rally and townhall meeting.

1. Only We the People, the source of all political power, can by wielding our voting, street, donation, and campaign volunteer power compel politicians, lest they be voted out of, or not into, office, to launch the investigation needed to expose the full nature, extent, and gravity of judges’ abuse as the first step toward effective judicial reform.

• The media, acting in its own commercial and reputational interest(^†>OL2:696§3), is the People’s indispensable ally in this endeavor.
• That is why we the Advocates must cause the media to publish an exposé of judges’ abuse. It can be reasonably expected to outrage a public now intolerant of every form of abuse.
• In turn, that public outrage will motivate the media to jump on the bandwagon of the investigation of that form of abuse: Audiences flock to the publisher of scandal news. Scandal sells copy. All publishers must investigate and publish it on pain of being abandoned by their respective audience.

C. Attracting media attention by parties joining forces to demand from their court the refund of filing fees

1. Courts offer “judicial services”(OL2:608) and demand a fee to file any case or motion paper. Yet, they are not materially capable of delivering those services(“The math of perfunctoriness” OL2: 609§A).
2. Their judges do not even read the majority of briefs. Clerks, who need not be lawyers and lacking judicial discretionary authority can only mechanically apply fixed instructions, dispose of most papers through their use of dumping forms(OL2:609¶5).
3. Such a form has its blanks filled out with the minimum information necessary to identify the paper being disposed of; the rest is standard reasonless, fiat-like orders that disregard the paper’s facts and law so as to engage in ad hoc arbitrariness for gain or convenience, and effortlessly dump the paper off of the judges’ caseload.
4. Disposition of a paper through a dumping form constitutes false advertisement, fraud in the inducement, and breach of contract as part of the judges’ filing fee fraud scheme(OL2:609§2).
5. The recovery of filing fees provides a monetary incentive for parties in the same court whose papers have been disposed of through dumping forms to respond to Advocates contacting(OL:276§C) them.
6. Acting as a group –or even a class– of parties similarly situated as victims of the same injury in fact they would assert a common interest in obtaining the refund of their filing fees.
7. The recovery of filing fees provides a monetary incentive for parties in the same court whose cases and motions have been disposed of by dumping forms to respond to Advocates contacting(OL:276§C) them. Acting as a group –or even a class- of parties similarly situated as victims of the same injury in fact they would assert a common interest in obtaining the refund of their filing fees.
8. The publication of my article on dumping forms and filing fee recovery can spark the formation of Refund the money! groups everywhere.
9. Their suits can attract media attention because they do not require the media to assess the facts and law of each case. On the contrary, it would suffice to notice that despite no two cases being the same, all their cases were disposed of in the only near identical and perfunctory way allowed by a form.
10. The scandal of ‘dumping form justice’ can lead to ever deeper journalistic investigations into the operation of courts by unaccountable judges who coordinate their riskless abuse of power into the most harmful form of structured abuse: schemes(OL2:696§3).

D. Asserting rights and making money by exposing judges’ interception of the communications of their critics

1. I welcome the suggestion and invite you and all other readers to implement it: Post on social media, including Gab.ai, and Minds, my query letter(OL2:703) and other articles that I have written and will keep writing.
2. Indeed, Google suspended my gmail account twice, doing so without giving me notice. Likewise, Dropbox and Microsoft disabled my accounts.
3. The circumstances(>ggl) under which they did so, the harm to their commercial interest notwithstanding, provide probable cause to believe that they acted in coordination with those who benefit the most(^†>OL2:582§C) from intercepting the communications of critics of judges and preventing their formation of a team(>jur:128§4) in violation of their 1^st Amendment rights to “freedom of speech, of the press; the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances”(jur:130fn268).
4. If we Advocates hired computer forensic experts and they established such interception and traced it back to federal judges, we could assert our rights and make money too(below ¶9.m.2); and OL2:705¶9.m.2)).
5. The ensuing public outrage would be more intense than that provoked by E. Snowden’s NSA revelations(OL2:395§B) and most apt to expose judges’ abuse as a Nixon-like criminal enterprise.

E. You can contribute to implementing the out-of-court inform and outrage strategy by distributing my query letter widely

48.  Therefore, I respectfully encourage all readers to distribute the query letter below as widely as you can to all your friends and family and peers and, of course, to all those who are newspaper and/or magazine publishers and journalists, or are associated with them, including journalism school deans, professors, and students, who can benefit from the proposed investigation and its abundance of leads(OL:197§G).

1. Let’s expose judges’ abuse by our taking advantage of the current public intolerance of any form of abuse and the mid-term campaigning. Join the distribution of the query letter below so that We the People, informed and outraged, confront politicians when they are most vulnerable and responsive: when vying for votes. They are answerable for having in self-interest put judges on the bench and connivingly(^†>OL2:610§3) held them there unaccountable to the detriment of the People.

• In that vein, I offer to make paid presentations and hold one-day seminars on the strategy for exposing unaccountable judges’ abuse(OL2:712§E).

Dare trigger history!(*>jur:7§5)…and you may enter it.
* http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf

Put your money where your informed outrage
and your passion for justice are.

Donate here

or

at the GoFundMe campaign
https://www.gofundme.com/expose-unaccountable-judges-abuse

Visit the website at, and subscribe for free to its articles thus:
http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org> + New or Users >Add New

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

(If a link does not open a webpage, copy and paste it into your browser’s web address box, and click ‘enter’.)

Sincerely,

Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
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

---

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

You may share and non-commercially post this article in its entirety,
without any addition, deletion, or modification,
with credit to its author, Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.,
and the link to his website:
http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org.

This article is also at:

http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf >OL2:702

A. Identifying the addressees of the proposal and the benefit that they stand to derive from it

1. This is a query letter addressed to publishers, editors, and officers of media and academic organizations as well as entities and groups of people that advocate honest judiciaries and defend against unaccountable judges’ consequent riskless abuse.
2. I propose that you represent or publish my work, whether non-fiction, fiction, or both, already written or to be commissioned, and my performance as presenter of this work to a live audience composed of you, your associates, similarly situated people, and the public at large.
3. In exchange, you can benefit commercially and reputationally from reaching the vast target market identified below at the most propitious moment, namely, when:a. We the People are preparing to wield in the mid-term elections our most significant democratic power, the power to elect our public servants; andb. people have been transformed from passive abusees who suffer abuse in silence into a self-assertive People who gathered in movements such as MeToo!, Time’sUp, and Never Again courageously shout the common and rallying cry:

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

B. A study and a website that allow you to verify the quality of the articles and their appeal to the target market

4. Attuned to this national public attitude of self-assertive exposure of abusers are my proposed paid series of articles; and joint journalistic investigation, academic research, and reporting; on the topical subjects of the various types of writings that compose my study, thus titled and downloadable:

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

* Volume 1: http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf >all prefixes:page number up to OL:393

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

This study contains the materials corresponding to the (blue text references) made below.

5. You may review my study to ascertain the professional quality of my writings and of the investigation/research that provides their foundation and that is proposed to be jointly further pursued and reported on.
6. What I have written on speculation I can adapt to meet your requirements; and can undertake other writings, including court briefs, commissioned by you.
7. There is a market for the proposed articles and reporting. To begin with, they will attract many of the people who are parties to the more than 50 million cases filed in our federal and state courts every year(*> jur:8fn4,5) and to cases pending or deemed to have been decided wrongly or wrongfully.
8. To those parties must be added many of their negatively affected or impressed friends and family, peers, employees, clients, shareholders, etc. They feel abused by unaccountable judges who for their own convenience and gain have risklessly disregarded the strictures of due process and equal protection of the law, thus harming people’s property, liberty, and all the rights and duties that frame their lives.
9. All of those parties and related people form a vast target market: The Dissatisfied with the Judicial and Legal System.
10. In fact, the articles posted to this website at http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org have already attracted more than 24,160 subscribers, not just visitors(^†>Appendix). The website can be developed as my brand and selling platform as laid out in my business plan(OL2:563, 577).
11. Therefore, it is reasonable to expect that The Dissatisfied as well as the rest of the public, especially voters, will be attracted to my articles offered to them under a rubric, or in a syndicated column or newsletter, or reported on a TV or radio show(jur:2fn1) dealing with judicial unaccountability, riskless abuse, and reform.

C. Subjects of the articles and reporting to inform about, and outrage at, judges’ abuse

1. The following is a sample of the subjects of the proposed paid series of articles and joint further investigation, research, and reporting:

a. judges’ unaccountability(*>OL:265) and their consequent riskless abuse of power(jur:5§3; OL:154§3);

b. statistical analysis for the public(^†>OL2:455§§B-E, 608§A) and for researchers(jur:131§b);

c. significance of federal circuit judges disposing of 93% of appeals in decisions “on procedural grounds [i.e., the pretext of “lack of jurisdiction”], unsigned, unpublished, by consolidation, without comment”, which are reasonless, ad-hoc, arbitrary, and in practice unappealable(OL2:453);

1)  to receive “justice services”(OL2:607) parties pay courts filing fees, which constitute consideration, whereby a contract arises between them to be performed by the judges, who know that they will in most cases not even read their briefs(OL2:608§A), so that courts engage in false advertisement, fraud in the inducement, and breach of contract(OL2:609§2);

d. Justiceship Nominee N. Gorsuch said, “An attack on one of our brothers and sisters of the robe is an attack on all of us”: judges’ gang mentality and abusive hitting back(OL2:546);

e. fair criticism of judges who fail to “avoid even the appearance of impropriety”(jur:68fn123a);

f. abuse-enabling clerks(OL2:687), who fear arbitrary removal without recourse(jur:30§1);

g. law clerks’ vision at the end of their clerking for a judge of the latter’s glowing letter of recommendation(OL2:645§B) morally blinds them to their becoming executioners of judges’ abuse;

h. the statistics of judges’ dismissing 99.82% of complaints against them(jur:10-14; OL2:548): how judges arrogate to themselves impunity by abusing their statutory self-disciplining authority(*>jur:21§a);

i. escaping the futility of suing judges, who are exonerated by other judges to mutually assure their survival(^†>OL2:609§1): the out-of-court inform and outrage strategy to stir up the public into holding judges accountable(OL2:581);

j. how law professors and lawyers act in self-interest to cover up for judges so as to spare themselves and their schools, cases, and firms retaliation(*>jur:81§1): their system of harmonious interests against the interests of the parties and the public(OL2:635, 593¶15);

k. turning insiders into Deep Throats(jur:106§C); outsiders into informants(OL2:468); and judges into criers of ‘MeToo! Abusers’(682¶¶7,8) that issue an I accuse!(jur:98§2) denunciation of judges’ abuse: thinking and acting strategically(OL2:635, 593¶15) to expose judges’ abuse by developing allies who want to become Workers of Justice(OL2:687);

l. two unique national stories, not to replace a rogue judge, but to topple an abusive judiciary:

1) Follow the money! as judges grab(OL2:614), conceal(jur:65fn107a,c), and launder(105fn213) it;

2) The Silence of the Judges: their illegal, warrantless, 1^st Amendment-violative interception of their critics’ communications(OL2:582§C);

a) made all the more credible by Former CBS Reporter Sharryl Attkisson’s $35 million suit against the Department of Justice for its illegal intrusion into her computers to spy on her ground-breaking investigations onto its Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms Bureau’s disastrous Fast and Fury gunrunning operation and the killings at Benghazi, Libya, and embarrassing her reporting thereon(612§b);

b) the exposure of such interception can provoke a scandal graver than that resulting from Edward Snowden’s revelations of NSA’s gmassive illegal collection of only non-personally identifiable metadata(583§3);

c) the exposure can be bankrolled as discreetly as Peter Thiel, co-founder of PayPal, bankrolled the suit of Hulk Hogan against the tabloid Gawker for invasion of privacy and thereby made it possible to prosecute and win a judgment for more than $140 million(OL2:528);

d) principles can be asserted and money made by exposing judges’ interception;

m. a Harvey Weinstein-like generalized media investigation into judges’ unaccountability and riskless abuse of power keeps the issue alive(jur:4¶¶10-14); amortizes the investment in the joint investigation(OL:194§E) by reporters and me; and makes a higher return on investment possible;

n. the documentary Black Robed Predators(OL:85), produced as an original video content by an investigative show, a cable company, an Indy, or journalism students, with the testimony of judges, their victims, clerks, lawyers, faculty, and students; and crowd funding to attract to the documentary’s making and viewing the crowd that advocates honest judiciaries;

o. turning judges’ abuse into a key mid-term elections issue with the unprecedented holding by the media of nationally and statewide televised public hearings(OL2:675§2, 580§2): the media as We the People’s loudspeaker;

p. parties’ joint search in their cases for communality points that permit detection of the most convincing evidence of abuse: patterns of abuse by a judge, the judges of a court, or those of a judiciary(OL:274-280; 304-307);

q. the development of this website, http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org, into:

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

2) a research center for, the public(OL2:575); and

3) the precursor to the institute of judicial accountability reporting and reform advocacy(jur:130§5) that begins as a multidisciplinary academic and business venture(jur:119§§1-4);

r. a tour of presentations(OL:197§G) by me sponsored by you on:

1) judges’ abuse(*>jur:5§3; OL:154¶3);

2) a novel way of conducting statistical, linguistic, and literary analysis of their decisions and other writings(jur:131§b) -including by developing advanced software that applies artificial intelligence and forensic fraud accounting- in search of evidence of bias and disregard of due process(OL:42, 60);

3) promoting the participation of the audience in the investigation and research(OL:115); and

4) announcement of a Continuing Legal Education course, a webinar, a seminar, and a writing contest(*>ddc:1), all of which can turn the audience into clients and followers;  and even active members of a civic movement(*>jur:164§9);

5) development of local chapters of investigators/researchers into judges’ abuse that coalesce into a Tea Party-like single issue, civic movement(*>jur:164§9) for holding judges accountable and liable to their victims: the People’s Sunrise(*>OL:201§J);

s. a multimedia, multidisciplinary public conference(jur:97§1; dcc:13§C) on judges’ unaccountability and abuse at a top university(OL2:452) to pioneer the reporting thereon in our country and abroad;

t. a constitutional convention(OL:136§3) and judicial reform unthinkable today, but rendered unavoidable by an informed and outraged People that has become intolerant of abuse(jur:158§§6-8).

D. A versatile writer communicates through laughter, fiction, and education

1. Entertaining skits that politicians, corporate VIPs, and comedians can use in an imaginative way to drive a message with laughter and prepare an audience’s mood at a rally before they take the stage:

a. How Secretary Clinton stole the show at the charity gala, causing Mr. Trump to concede that “She’s such a naspy, naspy woman”, and the strategy that she devised to turn “naspy” into the theme that would win her the election(OL2:491);

b. Trump and the Four Chicks (starring the four co-chairs of the Women’s March; OL2:530);

c. Punting on the Digital River(*>cw:32), an infomercial video that uses an entertaining story to promote investment in the sponsoring entity’s high technology and prestige project;

d. Behind the Black Robe Wall(*>cw:58), an excerpt from a legal drama;

e. the synopses of eight movie scripts and two novels that reveal my capacity to entertain an audience with an intriguing and inspiring story with a topical message, e.g., against insidious bias and discrimination and in support of personal self-assertion and civil courage(*>cw:3);

f. The DeLano Case Course: a week-by-week syllabus for a hands-on, role-playing, fraud investigative and expository multidisciplinary course for students at law, journalism, business, and Information Technology schools(*>dcc:1), which I or other professors can teach.

E. Your publishing and reporting to inform the People and your associates in their and your own interest

1. These and similar articles and reporting can empower We the People to assert our status as the sovereign source of political power, the masters of all our public servants, including our judicial public servants. We hire them when we vote them in; are entitled to hold them accountable for their performance and liable to compensate the victims of their abuse of power; and can vote them out of office.
2. For your contribution to empowering the People to assert their status, you can be commercially rewarded(OL:3§F) and become one of their nationally recognized Champions of Justice(OL:201§K).
3. To that end, time is of the essence: The primaries and the campaigning for the mid-term elections have already started.
4. So let’s discuss the proposal of this query letter. Use the contact information provided below and in my study.
5. Should you and your associates deem that you and others would benefit from my holding on your premises a fee + expenses paid presentation(cf. OL:197§G) or one-day seminar(cf. OL:191, 202; OL2:622, 623; 694§2) of the proposal made here or any subject discussed in, or related to, my study, please let me know.

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

Put your money where your informed outrage and your passion for justice are.
Donate here.

or

at the GoFundMe campaign

https://www.gofundme.com/expose-unaccountable-judges-abuse

Visit the website at, and subscribe for free to its articles thus:
http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org> + New or Users >Add New

Dare trigger history!(*>jur:7§5)…and you may enter it.
* http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf

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

(If a link does not open a webpage, copy and paste it into your browser’s web address box, and click ‘enter’.)

Sincerely,

Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
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 retain Dr. Cordero’s law consulting, research and writing, and representational services or request that he hold a presentation or seminar for your group, see his model letter of engagement(*>OL:383; ^†>OL2:667).

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