Month: January 2017

How the Women’s March, One Day Without Women participants, and The Dissatisfied With The Establishment can seize the opportunity of P. Trump’s promise to “drain the swamp” and “transfer power from the Establishment to the people”, and his nomination of a judge to the Supreme Court to set in motion an investigation of connivance between politicians and the wrongdoing judges that they nominate and confirm, whose findings can so outrage the public as to provide the necessary impetus for the Women and The Dissatisfied to “move forward” to a new constitution under which they need not march to beg for permits from the Establishment, but rather in which they assert all the rights of the sovereign source of all political power: We the People

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://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org
Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net,
DrRCordero@Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org

[NOTE: If you agree with this open letter and its supporting article below, copy and email them to the Women’s March co-chairs at tamika@womensmarch.com, carmen@womensmarch.com, Linda@womensmarch.com, bob@womensmarch.com, sisters@womensmarch.com, and share and post them widely.]

Ms. Tamika D. Mallory
Ms. Carmen Perez
Ms. Linda Sarsour
Ms. Bob Bland
Women’s March Co-Chairs and
National Committee Members

Dear Misses. Bland, Sarsour, Perez, Mallory, and Committee Members,

I would like to praise your values and objectives, as expressed by Ms. Perez and Ms. Bland in their interview on PBS Newshour on January 20; your superb organization of the January 21 Women’s March; and the principles that you have stated on your website.

We have harmonious interests that make us advocates of a common cause: to enjoy, assert, and acquire the rights of women, of The Dissatisfied With The Establishment, in general, and of the dissatisfied with the judicial and legal system, in particular, and of everybody else who makes up We the People.

Therefore, I want to join forces with you.

To that end, I bring to the table a concrete, realistic, and feasible answer to the question that you asked on your website:

We are confronted with the question of how to move forward in the face of national and international concern and fear.

I respectfully submit this answer: We “move forward” to a new constitution.

This answer is realistic: 34 states have demanded Congress since April 2014, to convene a constitutional convention.

A new constitution is a concrete rallying cry.

More importantly, a new constitution is the embodiment of an inspiring ideal as well as of the foundational terms of a new relation between the people and their government to emerge after breaking with the Establishment:

We “move forward” to a new constitution under which people need not march to beg the Establishment for permits, but rather in which We the People assert our status as the sovereign source of all political power and as such the masters of government, who hire public servants to safeguard and facilitate our enjoyment of what are our rights, and who retain and exercise the power to hold our servants accountable and liable to compensate the victims of their wrongdoing.

The “move forward” to a new constitution is feasible by applying the inform and outrage strategy. I developed it in my study of judges in connivance with politicians, 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 number up to ol:393

† Volume 2: http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf >from ol2:394

The inform and outrage strategy is non-partisan, non-denominational, and non-violent.

It is the product of strategic thinking: We analyze the interests of people and entities to determine who has harmonious and conflicting interests(†>ol2:465§1), which if strengthened or weakened can allow us to form or break up explicit or implicit alliances so that we may become stronger or clear the way to advance our cause(*>ol2:445§B, 475§D).

Strategic thinking allows us to obtain in practice support from unwitting sources that we need not approve and are not part of.

A public dominated by The Dissatisfied With The Establishment; a President who has promised to “drain the swamp of corruption of the Establishment” and to transfer power from the self-enriching Establishment to the people, whom it has harmed; and the two thirds of the states that have formally demanded Congress to call a constitutional convention, are our main ‘allies’. Their interests are harmonious with ours. They render us stronger; render the concrete goal of the “move forward” to a new constitution realistic; and render the inform and outrage strategy to attain it all the more feasible.

I offer to make a presentation on the “move forward” and the strategy to you and your colleagues here in New York City or at a video conference or elsewhere on a paid trip.

The article below previews my presentation. It shows that my answer to your question is indeed concrete, realistic, and feasible. Just as my above-mentioned study, it also shows my thoughtful commitment to our common cause and the value that I can add to your effort to advance it. We are implicit allies; my presentation can contribute to turning us into explicit allies.

Consequently, I look forward to hearing from you at your earliest convenience, for the most opportune occasion for launching the strategy to “move forward” to a new constitution is during the investigation of the justiceship nominee that the media will naturally launch upon President Trump announcing his or her name on January 31.

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

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

Sincerely,

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

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

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

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

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.

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

How the Women’s March and The Dissatisfied With The Establishment
can “move forward”
thanks to a concrete, realistic, and feasible strategy
in the context of P. Trump’s justiceship nomination
by informing the public about
two unique national stories
of swamp politicians conniving with
life-tenured federal judges ‒who
are the most established of the corrupt Establishment and
unaccountable and consequently engage risklessly in
routine, widespread, and grave wrongdoing‒
and so outraging the public as to
increase the ranks of Marchers and The Dissatisfied and
make them strong enough to
force Congress to call the constitutional convention that
has been demanded by 34 states since April 2014, and
to emerge therefrom with
a new constitution
under which people need not march to beg the Establishment for permits,
but rather in which We the People
assert our status as the sovereign source of all political power and
as such the masters of government,
we hire public servants
to safeguard and facilitate our enjoyment of what are our rights, and
we retain and exercise
the power to hold our servants accountable and
liable to compensate the victims of their wrongdoing

By
Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Judicial Discipline Reform
New York City
Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net,
DrRCordero@Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org
http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org

[NOTE: If you agree with this article and its cover letter above, copy and email them to the Women’s March co-chairs at tamika@womensmarch.com, carmen@womensmarch.com, Linda@womensmarch.com, bob@womensmarch.com, sisters@womensmarch.com, and share and post them widely.]

A. The “move forward” toward a new constitution that We the People living today give ourselves for a radically different world

  1. Proposing that the Women’s March and The Dissatisfied With The Establishment “move forward” to a heavily amended or formally new constitution may appear right now inconceivable, the product, not of strategic thinking, but rather of wishful thinking.
  2. However, hundreds of years ago, the 13 colonies also deemed inconceivable having a constitution. But they managed to give themselves one. It required them to wage a war.
  3. Giving ourselves a new constitution that corresponds to the demands of a radically different world requires us to devise and implement a reasonable strategy. Its objective is not to take up arms or become partisan supporters of a person or an entity. Rather, it aims to form or break up explicit or implicit alliances of result that in effect advance our cause.
  4. More importantly, the objective of the strategy requires a justification, that is, a theoretical explanation of why we need a new constitution. The justification must convince the mind and inspire people so profoundly that they commit their soul and body to achieving the objective. It must motivate people to coalesce into a movement that they energize and that energizes them. Reason and passion are indispendable to realize a great objective. That way it becomes an inspiring ideal.
  5. Without the inspiring ideal of freedom and self-determination that found its expression in the motto ‘not taxation without representation’, we would be paying taxes to the queen of England for the tea that we drink.
  6. We, Women’s Marchers and The Dissatisfied With The Establishment, also need and want an ideal: We want a country where instead of having to march with our hands stretched out begging the King-like Establishment to give us permits , we “move forward” to give ourselves a constitution that is the expression of the rights that we the living today, assemble in a constitutional convention, decide that we have in today’s radically different world.
  7. We want to give ourselves a constitution where we assert and which reflects the fact that:

a. We are the People in reality, not merely a character in a bookish description of democracy.

b. We are the sovereign source of all political power. We do not draw our power from any constitution. We are not subservient to the constitution that we received from the past. We are not bound to preseve its future existence at the cost of the life that we want to live in the present. We hold the sovereign power, not Congress or the states, to decide when the time has come for us to change or do away with an old constitution in order to give ourselves a new constitution.

c. In our new constitution, we will assert our status as masters. We will exercise the fundamental right to hire public servants to safeguard our rights and facilitate our enjoyment of them. As masters of all our public servants, we will retain the right and provide for the way to hold all our servants accountable for the service that they render and fail to render and everything else that they do that affects the service for which we hired them, and therefore, we will hold them liable to compensate the victims of their wrongdoing.

  1. By giving ourselves a new constitution, we will throw over board a constitution imposed upon us by the male Establishment of 228 years ago, i.e. 1789, when

a. women could not even read, never mind vote on a constitution, and could only live to raise children and work in the kitchen or their husbands’ farms;

b. only white men with property could vote; and

c. nobody could or would have dare think of rights concerning abortion, illegal immigration, universal health care, gun violence, same sex marriage, minorities voting, LBTG, equal pay, criminal reform, campaign financing, environmental protection, public education, big corporations, indigenous people, stalking, consumers, emancipation of slaves, workplace safety job security, drugs, living wages, overincarceration, feminism, deceptive advertising, truth in lending, balanced budget, reverse discrimination, admission quotas, equal opportunity employment, anticompetitive practices, overregulation, redistricting, entitlements, term limits, social security, the Internet, digital profiles, unaccountable judges’ consequent riskless wrongdoing, etc.

  1. As a result, since then nine unelected, Establishment-appointed, politicized, and unaccountable justices form a standing constitutional convention where even as few as five of them routinely amend that constitution of the past for a long gone world by reading into it whatever they fancy necessary to adapt it to a radically different world and protect the privileges of the faction of the Establishment that they represent.
  2. That is why We the People living today want to give ourselves a new constitution where we assert the rights by which we want to live our lives in today’s world.

B. A demand by 34 states for a constitutional convention is before Congress, whose members have disregarded it in the interest of preserving their power and privileges and avoiding accountability and liability for their wrongdoing

  1. Realistically, we can “move forward” toward a new constitution given that since April 2014, the constitutional requirement of Article V that a constitutional convention be demanded by two thirds of the states -currently 34- has been met.
  2. But the members of Congress have disregarded that demand because the Establishment abhors a process that is bound to escape its control and strip it of its privileges and, worse yet, expose its wrongdoing. Only if forced to will politicians cause Congress to vote to convene a convention.
  3. That is the justification for the inform and outrage strategy: the public, informed of the routineness, extent, and gravity of politicians’ and judges’ wrongdoing, will be so outraged that it will be stirred up to “move forward” in an unconventional, imaginative way to force politicians to do what they and Congress abhor.
  4. To that end, the inform and outrage strategy provides that we should confront politicians with the only “concern and fear” that they respond to, i.e., that the public, informed of, and outraged at, public wrongdoing, may vote those politicians out of, or not into, office, if they fail to condemn, investigate, expose, and punish such wrongdoing. We play on politicians’ paramount “concern and fear”: their political survival.
  5. The precedent for this tactical element is the “concern and fear” that caused politicians in the 2012 presidential campaign to reject reasonable compromises and embrace extremist positions, lest they be terminated politically by the Tea Party supporters.
  6. The confirmation of this “concern and fear” came in the 2014 mid-term primaries in Virginia when no less prominent a politician than House Republican Majority Leader Eric Cantor was defeated by a newcomer, Dave Brat, for supporting positions on immigration and other subjects that though seemingly reasonable, outraged the Tea Party.
  7. Consequently, from now on, we “move forward” to generate in politicians “concern and fear” that they may not survive next year’s mid-term election if they do not support our demands in their public statements, in practice, and effectively.

C. Informing and outraging the public by taking advantage of President Trump’s nomination of a justice on February 2

     1. This is the most opportune time for implementing the strategy

  1. The inform and outrage strategy takes advantage of the fact that Trump ran his presidential campaign on the promise to “drain the swamp of corruption of the Establishment”.
  2. What is more, in his inaugural speech, he berated both Republicans and Democrats as abusers of their position for self-enrichment at the expense of the people; and promised to transfer power from Congress to the people. Thereby he announced that he does not feel committed to protecting and covering up corrupt politicians even if they are Republican. He will govern in effect as the president of a third party: the Trump Populist Party.

     2. Informing of wrongdoing through the investigation of two unique national stories of politicians’ and judges’ wrongdoing that can outrage most intensely

  1. The first step of the inform and outrage strategy is for us:

a. to seize the opportunity of P. Trump’s nomination of a justice to the Supreme Court and the investigation of the nominee by the media that will naturally follow;

b. to call a press conference and/or discreetly make private presentations to journalists to persuade them to investigate the two unique national stories of President Obama-Justice Sotomayor and Federal Judiciary-NSA, described below, which will reveal politicians conniving with judges engaged in wrongdoing(ol:154¶3; jur:5¶3) so that:

c. the public:

1) composed of:

a) the millions who participated in the historic and indepensable Women’s March on January 21, 2017;

b) the scores of millions of The Dissatisfied With The Establishment who elected Trump president;

c) the segment thereof that is dissatisfied with the judicial and legal system and made up of:

(1) the more than 100 million people that every year go or are taken to court(jur:8fn4,5);

(2) plus the scores of millions who are parties to lawsuits pending or deemed to have been wrongly or wrongfully decided,

(3) plus the scores of millions of related people, such as their family, friends, peers, employees, customers, employers, etc.; and

d) the rest of We the People;

2) informed through the media and us of:

a) politicians who for the benefit of their own political careers and the avoidance of judges’ retaliation, have condoned and held unaccountable

b) “their men and women on the bench”, who for their own gain and convenience abuse their power to dispose of the property, liberty, and all the rights that litigants and the rest of the public have;

(1) To understand judges’ abuse consider this: If you had power to dispose of the property, liberty, and all the rights and duties that shape the life of everybody in the Women’s March, would you be tempted to abuse it for your benefit if you could do so risklessly? If instead you were so abused by the co-chairs of the March, would you be dissatisfied?

(2) Federal judges do wrong because they know that they are unaccountable: Whereas 2,293 of them were in office on September 30, 2015, the number of them impeached and removed in the last 228 years since the creation of the Federal Judiciary in 1789 is 8!(jur:22fn13, 14). This historic record shows that once a person becomes a member of that Judiciary, he or she can do any wrong without risking any adverse consequences. They do wrong with the assurance of impunity. This makes it understandable why judges dare wield abusively their decision-making power.

3) outraged, the public is stirred up to take further action.

  1. The second step is for us to lead an outraged public to force Congress and the Department of Justice, and/or persuade the media themselves ‒which is unheard of but would be no less effective‒ to hold nationally televised hearings on those two unique national stories, in general, and on judges’ wrongdoing experienced or witnesses; and thereby

a. the public is

1) further informed of such depth and breadth of the swamp of corruption of the Establishment, especially of its most established and powerful segment, the life-appointed federal judges, that the public

2) becomes further outraged at conniving politicians and wrongdoing judges and so convinced that politicians cannot legislate against their own wrongdoing and that judges cannot apply the law against themselves; so that the public is stirred up to take further action.

  1. The third step is for us to lead the public in:

a. demanding that politicians call a constitutional convention as the only process that will enable We the People to assert our status as masters who hold all our public servants accountable for rendering honest service and liable to compensate the victims of their wrongdoing; and

b. generating the “concern and fear” in politicians that they will be punished at the polls unless they satisfy the demand.

  1. The fourth step is to:

a. develop a draft new constitution(cf. jur:158§§6-8);

b. present it to the public;

c. persuade, organize, and raise funds for, Women’s Marchers and The Dissatisfied to run for delegation to the constitutional convention; and

d. lead our delegates so that we become the dominant bloc that causes the most provisions of our constitution to be adopted.

  1. This “move forward” will benefit from any disruptive chaos and aggravated dissatisfaction generated by President Trump. We must be able to turn them into transformative chaos and the necessary passion and commitment to convert what is unthinkable and inconceivable now into what is inevitable and unavoidable: a constitutional convention where We the People give ourselves a new constitution.
  2. Implementing the inform and outrage strategy is the first step and cannot be skipped: We must begin by exposing the depth and breadth of the swamp of corruption so that the drastic measures necessary to drain it become apparent and unavoidable. Drafting a new constitution now is inopportune. A full diagnose of the gravity of the ailment is a precondition to the acceptance of drastic treatment.

D. The “move forward” to a new constitution must from the beginning expose the scope of wrongdoing, and cause the resignation, of swamp judges, lest they declare it “unconstitutional” or interpret it protect their interests

  1. In the same vein, if the swamp of the most established of the Establishment, the life-appointed federal judges, remain in place, they will strike down the new constitution as “unconstitutional” or apply it to ensure the preservation of their status as Judges Above the Law and the continuation of their consequent riskless wrongdoing for grabbing benefits.
  2. Therefore, as many of those judges as possible must be forced to resign, removed or fired (see as precedent the Midnight Judges confirmed under the Judiciary Act of 1801 but removed by the Judiciary Act of 1802).
  3. That is the objective of investigating the two unique national stories (see below): just to show, rather than prove, that judges have violated Canon 2 of their Code of Conduct, which enjoins them to “avoid even the appearance of impropriety”(jur:68fn123a) by acting:

a. either as principals who have engaged in wrongdoing;

b. as accessories after the principals’ wrongdoing that they learned about but in self-interest covered up through their silence(jur:88§§a-c), whereby they violated Canon 1 requiring them to “uphold the integrity of the judiciary”; or

c. as accessories before their peers’ next wrongdoing that they encouraged with their explicit or implicit promise of silence.

  1. Accessories are as culpable as principals, for instead of upholding the integrity of the Judiciary and judicial process by exposing or preventing their peers’ wrongdoing, they too have contributed to the festering of such wrongdoing. Due to them as much as the principals, the Judiciary operates as the safe haven of wrongdoers.
  2. Swamp judges must leave the Judiciary, whether by resigning because the outrage at them makes their holding on to their office untenable –the precedent for this is the resignation of Supreme Court Justice Abe Fortas on May 14, 1969(jur:92§d)‒ or because they are impeached and removed; otherwise, they will turn the “move forward” to a new constitution into Sisyphus’s uphill climb of futility.

E. The immediate steps that we can take to “move forward” together to a new constitution

1. My offer to make a presentation to you

  1. I offer to make a presentation on this strategy for you to “move forward” to you and your colleagues here in New York City or at a video conference or elsewhere on a paid trip.

2. Share and post this email

  1. You can share and post this email in its entirety and its recipients and readers can do likewise so that many Women’s Marchers, the Dissatisfied With The Establishment, the dissatisfied with the judicial and legal system, those given hope by Trump, his supporters, and the rest of the People may join in the implementation of the inform and outrage strategy and the “move forward” to our new constitution.

3. Our presentation at a press conference and privately to journalists

  1. You can take advantage of the clout of the Women’s March to call the media to a press conference or individual journalists to a private and discreet presentation by us of, in general, the goal of the new constitution, and, in particular, the two unique national stories(§4 next) for implementing the inform and outrage strategy.
  2. The nomination of a new justice on February 2, will focus public debate on everything judicial. As a result, these stories can be of considerable interest to media outlets and journalists because through their investigating some of them will be able to:

a. offer a different angle on the subject that attracts audience away from their competitors and to themselves;

b. win a Pulitzer Prize;

c. enhance their reputation in the industry; earn a higher salary; receive a promotion in their corporate hierarchy; or secure a job at a more prestigious media outlet; and

d. attain the status that every ambitious journalist aspires: to become this generation’s Washington Post Reporters Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein, and Editor Benjamin Bradlee. They broke the story of what appeared to be a mere “garden variety burglary by five plumbers” at the Democratic National Committee Headquarters at the Watergate complex in Washington, D.C., on June 17, 1972. They were most instrumental in pursuing the story until it developed into a generalized media investigation that provoked a historic scandal(*>jur:4¶¶10-14). It led to the resignation of President Nixon on August 8, 1974. Subsequently, Congress passed laws to increase public accountability and transparency(jur:65fn107d).

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


4. Our demand for the investigation of the two unique national stories of President Obama-Justice Sotomayor and Federal Judiciary-NSA

  1. By making a presentation on those two unique national stories (§§F, G below), the Women’s March and I can set rolling a Watergate-like investigative bandwagon that can propel us through the steps laid down in §C above. This can afford us the opportunity to keep the objective of a new constitution on the frontpages and the top of newscasts for a long time while growing our membership, assertiveness, and reputation.
  2. We all can demand at the press conference, the private presentations, and when sharing and posting this email:

a. that President Trump, the media, and citizen and professional journalists(jur:xxxvi§§H,I) expand the investigation of the justiceship nominee to include the operation of the Supreme Court(jur:47§c) and the rest of the Federal Judiciary(jur:21§§1-3), and do so pin-pointedly and cost-effectively by investigating the two unique national stories of President Obama-Justice Sotomayor and Federal Judiciary-NSA;

1) The investigation of these stories can work as Trojan horses into the circumstances(*>ol:190¶¶1-7) of unaccountability, secrecy, coordination, and risklessness that enable wrongdoing by appointed judges in connivance with their appointing politicians to attain such routineness, extent, and gravity that wrongdoing has become the Federal Judiciary’s modus operandi.

2) Congress receives annually and disregards in self-interest the official statistics on the federal courts’ caseload showing that the circuit courts dispose of 93% of appeals in decisions on “procedural grounds, by consolidation, unpublished, unsigned, without comment”(†>ol2:455§§B-E) so “perfunctory”(jur:44fn68) or wrongful that the judges deprive them of precedential value…in a common law legal system based on precedent. The majority of those decisions are issued on a 5¢ summary order form and/or marked “not precedential”, mere ad hoc, arbitrary, reasonless fiats of the judicial swamp.

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

b. that P. Trump release the three secret FBI vetting reports on Nominee Sotomayor(§G below) to the district, circuit, and Supreme courts so that the public may be informed of what the FBI, exercising its power of subpoena and search and seizure, and President Obama(jur:77§5) and Senators Chuck Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand, who shepherded her through the confirmation process(jur:78§6), knew or learned about her wrongdoing before and after the series of articles in The New York Times, The Washington Post, and Politico(jur:65fn107a) that suspected Then-Judge Sotomayor of concealment of assets(jur:65fn107c);

c. that Congress and the Justice Department and/or the media hold nationally televised hearings on how the Establishment has allowed federal judges to abusively self-exempt from any liability by dismissing without investigation 99.82% of complaints against judges, which must be filed with their peers, and deny up to 100% of petitions for review of those dismissals(jur:24§§b-c).

1) Establishment politicians have been informed of, but have disregarded, such grab of impunity for over 35 years since 1980, when politicians passed and enacted the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act(jur:24fn18a) authorizing complaints against federal judges and requiring the annual publication of statistics(jur:10-14) on their nature and handling. Connivingly, politicians have allowed the illegal abrogation in effect of an act of Congress intended for the first time in history to bring relief to complainants and bring down Judges Above the Law;

d. that Congress, the Justice Department, and the media investigate the Federal Judiciary-NSA story(§H below), which can lend credence to P. Trump’s distrust of the security Establishment if it reveals the interception(†>ol2:425) by the NSA of communications of critics of federal judges and/or the use of its Information Technology expertise and network to conceal assets of, and launder money for, judges in exchange for the judges granting 100% of the NSA’s secret requests for secret orders of surveillance(ol:5fn7).

1) The precedent for government interception of communications of its critics is the current case of Former CBS Reporter Sharyl Attkisson, who broke the Fast and Furious gun-running debacle story; and revealed embarrassing details about the killing of the American ambassador and three other officers at Benghazi in Libya. She is suing the Department of Justice for hacking her office and home computers; and demanding $35 million in compensation(*>ol:346¶131; †>ol2:396§3).

  1. These investigations can give rise to a constitutional crisis among the three branches and a crisis of trust between government and We the People. The crises can dominate the headlines for months or years to come, as the investigations of the Watergate scandal and 9/11 did.

    F. Requested action

  2. Therefore, I respectfully request a meeting with you either here in New York City, at a video conference, or elsewhere on a paid trip, so that I may present to you my strategy for the Women’s March to “move forward” and answer your questions.
  3. I look forward to hearing from you at your earliest convenience, keeping in mind that P. Trump announced his nominee to the Supreme Court on January 31.

Visit the website at, and subscribe to its series of articles thus:
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

Sincerely,

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

Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net, DrRCordero@Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org, Dr.Richard.Cordero.Esq@cantab.net, RicCordero@verizon.net, 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.

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

The Two Unique National Stories of
President Obama-Justice Sotomayor and
Federal Judiciary-NSA

that through journalistic and official investigations can inform the public of judges’ wrongdoing and so outrage it as to stir it up to demand that Congress heed the states’ call for a constitutional convention where We the People can give ourselves a new constitution in which we are the masters who hold all our judicial public servants accountable and liable for their wrongdoing

By Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Judicial Discipline Reform
New York City
Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net,
DrRCordero@Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org
http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org

[NOTE: The following two unique national journalistic stories have as their background the article and cover letter above. You are kindly invited to read them too, and if you agree with them, to copy and email them to the Women’s March co-chairs at tamika@womensmarch.com, carmen@womensmarch.com, Linda@womensmarch.com, bob@womensmarch.com, sisters@womensmarch.com, and to share and post them widely.]

G. The President Obama-Justice Sotomayor story and the Follow the money! investigation

What did President Barak Obama(*>jur:77§5),
Sen. Chuck Schumer and Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand(jur:78§6),
and federal judges(jur:105fn213b)
know about the concealment of assets
by his first Supreme Court nominee, Then-Judge, Now-Justice Sotomayor
(jur:65§§1-3) –suspected by The New York Times, The Washington Post, and Politico(jur:65fn107a) of concealing assets,
which entails the crimes(*>ol:5fn10) of tax evasion(jur:65fn107c)
and money laundering–
and when did they know it?

  1. This story can be pursued through the Follow the money! investigation(jur:102§a; ol:194§E).
  2. Its investigation can determine whether they covered up for Then-Judge Sotomayor and lied(ol:64§C) to the American public by vouching for her honesty because President Obama wanted to ingratiate himself with the people petitioning him to nominate to the Supreme Court another woman and the first Hispanic to replace Retiring Justice Souter and from whom he expected in exchange support for the passage of the Obamacare bill in Congress.
  3. The investigation includes a call on President Donald Trump to release unredacted all FBI reports on the vetting of J. Sotomayor as federal district, circuit, and Supreme Court nominee, as well as on J. Sotomayor herself to request that she ask him to release those reports.
  4. The release of those FBI vetting reports can set a precedent for the vetting of judges and other candidates for office.
  5. The investigation can reveal how routine(jur:21§1), grave(jur:27§2), and widespread(jur:28§3) wrongdoing(ol:154¶3) by federal judges is(jur:71§4); and the circumstances(ol:190¶¶1-7) of unaccountability, secrecy, coordination, and risklessness that enable their wrongdoing(jur:5§3).
  6. It can expose wrongdoing so outrageous as to force justices and judges to resign(jur:92§d), or be impeached and removed, for having violated their own Code of Conduct, which enjoins them both to “avoid even the appearance of impropriety”(jur:68fn123a) and “uphold the integrity of the judiciary”.
  7. ‘Showing the appearance of impropriety’, not the commission of a crime, thus becomes the standard for the investigation and the publication of articles. Responsible, unbiased, and ambitious journalists can easily meet it.
  8. Only in a criminal case in court is it required that the jury apply the most exacting standard of ‘proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt’ to reach its verdict. But even there the introduction of each piece of evidence by the prosecutor is not subject to that standard; and the jury can base its verdict on circumstantial evidence, the totality of circumstances, and reasonable inferences drawn from them.
  9. The Follow the money! investigation is a journalistic activity; it is not a prosecutorial effort to obtain a conviction. By ‘showing the appearance of impropriety’ by a justice or a judge it can bring about his or her resignation. That is how the investigation of Supreme Court Justice Abe Fortas by Life magazine provoked such public outrage at his improprieties that he resigned on May 14, 1969(jur:92§d).
  10. Judicial resignations will open the door for the Federal Judiciary to be ‘packed’(jur:23fn17a) with people transparently found capable of rendering honest services and worthy of being entrusted with the power to dispose of our property, liberty, and all the rights and duties that shape our lives.

All (blue text references) are keyed to Dr. Cordero’s 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 number up to ol:393

† Volume 2: http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf >from ol2:394

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

To what extent do established, life-tenured federal judges
abuse their vast computer network and expertise
–which handle hundreds of millions of case files(*>Lsch:11¶9b.ii)–
either alone or with the quid pro quo assistance of the NSA
(National Security Agency)
–up to 100% of whose secret requests for secret orders of surveillance
are rubberstamped(ol:5fn7)
by the federal judges of the secret court established under
the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act
(50 U.S.C. §§1801-1811; ol:20fn5)–:

a) to conceal assets –a crime under 26 U.S.C. §§7201, 7206(ol:5fn10), unlike surveillance– by electronically transferring them between declared and hidden accounts(ol:1) in a money laundering operation intended to wash money of the taint of its illegal source; and

b) to cover up their interception of the communications –also a crime under 18 U.S.C. §2511(ol:5a/fn13, 14)– of critics of judges to prevent them from joining forces to expose the judges’ wrongdoing?

  1. This story can be pursued through the Follow it wirelessly! investigation(jur:105§b; ol:194§E).
  2. At stake in it is contents-based interception, that is, activity aimed at finding out what the participants in the communication said to each other so that the interceptor may determine whether to interfere with, or prevent, that and future communications.
  3. Contents-based interception constitutes a deprivation of the 1st Amendment rights to ‘freedom of speech, of the press, to assemble peacefully, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances’(jur:130¶276b).
  4. A statistical analysis(ol:19§Dfn2) of a large number of communications critical of judges and a pattern of oddities(†>ol2:395, 405) give probable cause to believe that contents-based interception is going on(ol2:425).
  5. It is reasonable to assume that the people who have the most to lose due to such criticism and the most to gain by interfering with it, namely, judges, are the ones conducting or who have instigated others to conduct on their behalf such interception.
  6. The revelation of contents-based interception will provoke graver outrage than that resulting from Edward Snowden’s leaked documents revealing the NSA’s illegal dragnet collection of only contents-free metadata of scores of millions of communications, that is, only telephone numbers, names of callers and callees, calls’ time, duration, frequency, and location, etc.
  7. Public outrage will be driven to its paroxysm if it is shown that judges are behind the contents-based interception, not in “the national security interest”, but rather in the crass self-interest of preventing the exposure of their wrongdoing and preserving the flow to them of illegal or improper material, professional, and social benefits(ol:173¶93).

H. Judges’ wrongdoing and abuse of power with the connivance of politicians warrants the People giving themselves a new constitution

  1. Routine, widespread, and grave wrongdoing and abuse of power will constitute evidence that honest service by judges cannot be obtained either by giving them self-disciplining power under the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act of 1980(jur:21§1), which judges have abused by self-exempting from liability(jur:24§§b, c), nor by Congress and the president exercising constitutional checks and balances on the Judiciary, a function that they have failed to perform in the self-interest of avoiding retaliation from judges(jur:23fn17a).
  2. As a result, judges harm litigants and the rest of the public by wrongfully and abusively disposing of their property, their liberty, and all the rights and duties that shape their lives. Connivingly, politicians have condoned and covered up their harmful conduct.
  3. Consequently, the People are justified in demanding that a constitutional convention be called where they can give themselves a new constitution in which they assert their status as the sovereign source of all political power and as such, the masters in “government of, by, and for the people”(jur:82fn172) who hire public servants, including judicial public servants, and hold them accountable(jur:158§§6-8) and liable to compensate the victims of their wrongdoing.

Dr. Cordero offers to make a presentation to you and your colleagues here in New York City or at a video conference or elsewhere on a paid trip, on these two unique national stories and his inform and outrage strategy, set forth in the email above and on his website‡, for the Women’s March to “move forward” to a new constitution.

‡ Visit the website at, and subscribe to its series of articles thus:
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

Sincerely,

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

Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net, DrRCordero@Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org, Dr.Richard.Cordero.Esq@cantab.net, RicCordero@verizon.net, 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.