Judicial Discipline Reform

Proposal to Reuters, WSJ, WP, and all other media outlets
for a joint venture at the most propitious time:
when the Supreme Court’s leaked abortion draft opinion
has set the mood for national outrage to explode as a result of
the exposure of justices’ and judges’ participation in
abuse of power and financial criminality
so coordinated and widespread as to amount to
their running the Federal Judiciary as a racketeering enterprise:
“Scandal sells” and can win Pulitzer Prizes by leading to
the serial resignation of justices, judges, and courts;
the loss of public trust in the Federal Judiciary that brings it down;
the calling of the constitutional convention already petitioned by 34 states;
and a new constitution by today’s We the People
http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_from_abortion_decision_to_new_constitution.pdf

By

Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Ph.D., University of Cambridge, England
M.B.A., University of Michigan Business School
D.E.A., La Sorbonne, Paris
Judicial Discipline Reform
New York City
http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org

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

NOTES: i. To subscribe to articles similar to the one hereunder:

a. go to <left panel ↓Register:    or
b. click + New  or  Users  >Add New; or
c. fill out the New User form at https://www.judicial-discipline-reform.org/wp-admin/user-new.php .

ii. This article had a consistent format when posted. If it shows irregularities when displayed here, they crept in and are beyond my control. Kindly overlook them. A pdf version of this article -as such likely to be free of irregularities- is found here and downloadable through the next link

A. The foundation for exposing judges’ and justices’ abuse of power and financial criminality

1. The leaked draft opinion by Supreme Court Justice Samuel A. Alito revealing that a majority of the Court favors overturning Roe v. Wade has caused national jubilation but even more outrage.
   .
2. That outrage would pale by comparison to that which can be provoked and overcome much jubilation by a series of responsible and principled articles, such as those already written and available for review(Appendix 6§A) or that can be written on commission(Appendix 6§B), exposing how the justices, who are unaccountable and not even held to any ethics code, run and condone the running of the Federal Judiciary as a racketeering enterprise.
   .
3. There is solid basis for raising these charges against justices and judges. To begin with, there is the series of articles that The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) began to publish on September 28, 2021, under the initial title “131 Federal Judges Broke the Law by Hearing Cases Where They Had a Financial Interest”.
   .
   …….a. Another article in the series was published on November 2, 2021, titled “Hidden Interests – Federal Judge Files Recusal Notices in 138 Cases After WSJ Queries. [U.S. Chief District Judge of the Eastern District of Texas] Rodney Gilstrap initially argued he didn’t violate financial-conflicts law”; James.Grimaldi@wsj.com, Joe.Palazzolo@wsj.com, Coulter.Jones@wsj.com, Michael.Siconolfi@wsj.com.
   .
   …….b. The judges who failed to recuse themselves in order to grab money necessarily engaged, lest they incriminate themselves, in inside trading, fraud, concealment of assets, tax evasion, and money laundering. Those are crimes. They are complex and require coordination. When judges committed them as principals or condoned them as accessories, they became the judicial class that turned the Federal Judiciary into a ‘racketeer influenced and corrupt organization’(Cf. Title 18 of the U.S. Code of federal law, section 1961 (18 U.S.C. §1961)).
   .
   …….c. When a chief judge engages in such systematic abuse of power and financial criminality, how strongly do his fellow judges feel justified and encouraged by his example in committing any and all sorts of abuse and crimes so that abuse and criminality become their judiciary’s institutionalized way of doing business?
   .
   …….d. Today journalists must ask the famous question that Sen. Howard Baker, the ranking minority member of the Senate Watergate Committee, asked of every witness at the Watergate hearings to find out what President Nixon knew about the Watergate affair(paragraph 14 infra), adapting it so:

1) What did Supreme Court Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., know about the abuse and criminality of his fellow judges, whom he is supposed to supervise, and when did he know it?

2) What did Justice Samuel A. Alito, the circuit justice assigned under 28 U.S.C. §42, to, and with supervisory duties over, the Fifth Circuit, which includes Texas, know about it, and when did he know it?

3) What did Justice Clarence Thomas know about his wife’s effort to overturn the 2020 election results; and when did he know it? Let him “deal with it” and with his failure to report in his annual financial disclosure reports her earnings(jur:72§b).

4) What did Then-Judge, Now-Justice Sonia Sotomayor know about the DeLano case, over which she presided and which so clearly “beyond a reasonable doubt” incriminated her in a cover-up of a bankruptcy fraud scheme that it was suppressed from the documents on her submitted to the Senate Committee on Judicial Nominations dealing with her confirmation to the Supreme Court; and when did she know it(jur:65§§1-3).

5) What did President Joe Biden know through the FBI secret vetting reports about the participation in judges’ abuse and criminality, or their cover-up, by former Chief Judge Merrick Garland of the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, now his Attorney General, and Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson, who sits in that Circuit; and when did he know it?

4. Thomson Reuters, on the strength of its 2,500+ journalists and 600+ photojournalists, can scoop the story of the justices’ abuse and criminality. It already dare publish on June 30, 2020, the first of its three-part report “The Teflon Robe” on its massive investigation of state judges led by John.Shiffman@thomsonreuters.com and Michael.Berens@thomsonreuters.com. It found that “hardwired judicial corruption” intertwines state judges and the state commissions on judicial performance that are duty-bound to supervise and discipline them.
   .
   a.   a. Reuters asked readers to send it their stories of abuse by judges…and it was “inundated” with them. This goes to showing that people who have suffered or witnessed judges’ abuse want to tell their story to the largest public possible.
   .
5. The mood for exposing the justices’ unaccountability and their consequent riskless abuse of power and financial criminality is manifest in Congress. This is shown by The Hill, in its article “House panel to explore impeachment [of Justice Clarence Thomas], judicial ethics in wake of Ginni Thomas texts” by Emily Brooks, published on April 2, 2022. It reported that:
   .
          a. “Representative Hank Johnson (D-Ga.), the chairman of the House Judiciary courts subcommittee, …last year introduced the Supreme Court Ethics Act to implement a judicial code of conduct that applies to the Supreme Court. Jones co-led the Twenty-First Century Courts Act, which would similarly implement a code of conduct for the justices.
   .
   b.b. b. “He said, “Recent reports that the text messages of a justice’s spouse urging the overturning of a free and fair election may have been at issue in a case in front [sic] the Supreme Court — but that the justice did not recuse himself from the case — is just the latest and particularly egregious example in an unfortunately long list of illustrations as to why Supreme Court justices need to follow a formal code of ethics,” Johnson told The Hill. “I have been calling for this sort of reform for years, and I am encouraged to see a large, bipartisan majority of the public in favor of this long overdue legislation…Johnson called for Thomas’s resignation.”
   .
   6. Strickland v. U.S., no. 21-1346, is a civil case where a decision was handed down by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4^th Circuit on April 26, 2022. It is unprecedented, for it holds that the Federal Judiciary and its officials are suable on grounds of the 5^th and 14^th Amendments due process and equal protection of the law clauses, as well as specific acts of Congress. Hence, it reversed the outright dismissal by the trial court, which had invoked judicial immunity –a doctrine self-servingly conjured up by judges themselves in defiance of the Constitution– and remanded for further proceedings.
   .
   …….a. Strickland opens the door for all abusees joining forces to collectively demand compensation from the Federal Judiciary and the justices themselves. Imagine the amount of business generated if Thomson Reuters, I, and other media outlets showed the abusees how to demand such compensation.

B. What I bring to the joint venture

7. I established Judicial Discipline Reform. Its website is at http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org. There I post articles with law research findings and legal strategy to which the national public has access. Those articles have attracted so many webvisitors and appealed to them so positively that as of June 8, 2022, the number of them who had become subscribers was 44,206+.(Appendix 3)
   .
   …….a. Do you know of any law firm, let alone a lawyer, that has so many subscribers to their website?
   .
8. The subscribers to my site have found my articles appealing although the articles are intellectually demanding and written in long form. It is reasonable to assume that the subscribers are mostly the type of highly educated and well-off readers of such top publications as The New York Times and its Sunday Edition, The Washington Post, The New Yorker, TIME Magazine, The Atlantic, The Boston Globe, etc.
   .
9. These subscribers can afford the books and services of Thomson Reuters and other publishers, just as their lawyers can.
   .
   10. The general public too, including pro ses, is attracted to the website and can patronize its sponsor’s advertisement there thanks to the concrete, reasonable, and feasible ways in which I have proposed that people take action in their own interest; e.g.:
   .
   …….a. the two-phase method for writing their own story;
   .
   …….b. how to use legal sources of information for brief writing(see a list of them at Appendix 6§C);
   .
   …….c. the folly of pro ses improvising themselves as lawyers;
   .
   …….d. how to seek free legal assistance.
   …
   11. Judicial Discipline Reform, its articles, and site rely on a three-volume study of judges and their judiciaries, the product of professional law research and writing, and strategic thinking. It holds the materials corresponding to the (blue references) herein; and is titled and downloadable thus* ^{† ♣}:

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

 Open the downloaded files using Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available for free.

^♣ Volume 3: http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL3/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates3.pdf >from OL3:1144-1484+

112. Moreover, I bring to the joint venture a plan of also concrete, realistic, and feasible actions that media outlets and I can undertake right away and that is reasonably calculated to be financially and reputationally beneficial for all venturers. It includes an investigative plan with an abundance of leads(OL:194§E).

C From judicial resignations, an institutional crisis, a constitutional convention, to a new constitution by today’s We the People

113. Reuters, WSJ, The Washington Post (WP), and all other media outlets can do so much better than merely sit back and watch as spectators how other publishers and Congress scoop the exposure of judges’ and justices’ commission or condonation of abuse of power and financial criminality, just as Politico scooped the abortion draft opinion. They have the means of taking the reins of the investigative bandwagon and set out towards Pioneering the news and publishing field of judicial unaccountability reporting.
.
114. The Washington Post published with courage and persistence a series of articles that set in motion a generalized media investigation of the crimes that President Nixon and ‘All his Men’ committed by organizing and covering up the break-in at the Democratic National Committee headquarters at the Watergate building in Washington, DC, on June 17, 1972, to commit political espionage. WP was instrumental in forcing Nixon to resign and causing ‘All his Men’ to go to jail. For that, WP became the symbol of excellence in journalism in the public interest, in general, and investigative journalism, in particular.

115. Today, Reuters, WSJ, WP, and all other media outlets can do much more than just bring down a group of men who went rogue. Rather, they can expose how a whole branch of government, the Federal Judiciary, has gone rogue to become a racketeering enterprise.

116. They can inform the national public about, and so outrage it at, judges’ and justices’ abuse and criminality as to stir up the public, having lost its trust in their integrity and honesty, to demand the resignation of judges, justices, and even a whole court, such as the Supreme Court.

117. This inform and outrage strategy is realistic, for the public is strongest during primaries and in view of elections. Then it wields its enormous power to donate money, volunteer as campaign workers, spread positive word of mouth, and vote.

a. Ironically, this strategy is unintentionally validated by Justice Thomas, who recognized the dire impact on the Supreme Court of the loss of trust in it when he said in connection with the leaked abortion draft opinion: “”When you lose that trust, especially in the institution that I’m in, it changes the institution fundamentally. You begin to look over your shoulder…What happened at the court was tremendously bad,…I wonder how long we’re going to have these institutions at the rate we’re undermining them. And then I wonder when they’re gone or destabilized, what we’re going to have as a country.” Clarence Thomas says Supreme Court leak has eroded trust in institution; Robert Barnes; The Washington Post; May 14, 2022.

b. The likely answer to his rhetorical question is ‘we are going to have a summer of rage’. That is precisely the mood that can fuel the series of events leading to those discussed hereunder.

118. There is also precedent for the inform and outrage strategy in the forced resignations of(OL3:1423§c):

…….a. Supreme Court Justice Abe Fortas on May 14, 1969;

…….b. Former Ninth Circuit Chief Judge Alex Kozinski on December 18, 2017;

…….c. Circuit Judge Maryanne Trump Barry, the sister of President Donald Trump, who resigned from the 3rd Circuit on February 11, 2019;

…….d. Circuit Judge Robert Bork of the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit had his resignation preempted by the Senate’s rejection on October 23, 1987, of his nomination to the Supreme Court. He was doomed by the public outrage that he had provoked more than a decade earlier when he carried out President’s Nixon’s order to fire Special Watergate Prosecutor Archibald Cox in the Saturday Night Massacre on October 20, 1973.

119. Public outrage is a powerful force very difficult to resist. The outrage unleashed by the exposure of justices’ and judges’ abuse and criminality can set off an institutional crisis: Which of the other two branches would dare hold judges accountable, who could retaliate by holding their laws and even their electoral programs unconstitutional or interpret them so expansively or restrictively as to render them ineffective?(jur:23fn17a)

220. That crisis can force the occurrence of what 34 states have petitioned Congress to do since April 2, 2014, but its members will not do voluntarily, lest they lose their privileges and power: call a constitutional convention in accordance with the amending provisions of Article V of the Constitution.

221. A constitutional convention ran away with its mandate and instead of reforming the Articles of Confederation that the Second Continental Congress had approved on November 1, 1777, cast them aside. The convention, likewise made up only of white landed Christian free men, drafted the current Constitution, which was ratified by the 13 states in 1789.

122. Public outrage has been building up since the eruption of the MeToo! and BLM movements, the protests against social and economic inequality, the resentment against the Covid mandates and discrimination of Asian and Pacific Islanders communities, the fast-intensifying animosity among supporters and opponents of the leaked abortion draft opinion.

.23. That outrage can reach its paroxysm and clear the way to the irrepressible will of the living today to break free from the now dead hands of those who wrote the Constitution 233 years ago. Never conceived to deal with a world that their heads could not even imagine, that Constitution is twisted to read one way at one time and the opposite way at another time by nine unelected justices…who even unaccountably and risklessly participate in, or cover up, their and their colleagues’ abuse of power and criminality.

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

224. Their outrage casting aside the current Constitution even before they become assembled in a constitutional convention, today’s men, women, and LBGTQs, rich and poor, those of faith and no faith, of any color, whether in cities, suburbs, rural areas, and Indian land, workers at desks or with tools in their hands, from young adults to senior citizens, all of them can choose for themselves as the sovereign source of all public power the fundamental rules by which they want to live. They can author the Code of Governance of Today’s We the People.

D. First steps toward the key objectives of the business venture

225. The media outlets that are instrumental in launching this chain of events can become for generations the symbol of excellence in journalism and its power to bring about transformative change in the public interest. Such recognition can begin with winning Pulitzer Prizes and making money, for “Scandal sells”.

226. You all and I can in our own financial and reputational interest take the lead by Pioneering the news and publishing field of judicial unaccountability reporting. Our audience will be, in general, the national public in voting mood, and, in particular, the scores of millions of people who have suffered or witnessed judges’ abuse of power and financial criminality.

227. The first steps of the joint venture consist in both the serial publication by you of the following articles that I have written and can edit upon your review of them(Appendix 6§A); and others that I can write on commission, whether along the lines of my sample of subjects(Appendix 6§B) or a subject proposed by you; and the further investigation to follow the leads that they contain; e.g.:

…….a. judges’ interception of people’s emails and mail to detect and suppress those of their critics; and its investigation by forensic Information Technology experts;

…….b. the mathematical demonstration that the overwhelming majority of briefs are not read by judges, but rather are disposed of to lighten their workload by their having clerks rubberstamp reasonless, unresearched, fiat-like 5¢ dumping forms; and its further statistical strengthening by auditing judges’ decisions, most of which they post to their courts’ websites, whose addresses can be found through the federal court finder;

…….c. the development of advanced statistical, linguistic, and literary research software to analyze all sorts and vast amounts of writings to detect the most persuasive kind of evidence: patterns and schemes of abuse;

…….d. the Follow the Money! and Follow the Wire! investigations that apply forensic research techniques, e.g., Fraud and Forensic Accounting(jur:102§a; OL:194§E) to discover assets that judges have grabbed, concealed, evaded taxes on, and money laundered(OL:1); and determine their illegal use to do so of government property, such as the Federal Judiciary’s vast, national digital network and expertise; cf. CM/ECF (Case Management/Electronic Case Filing) and PACER (Public Access to Court Electronic Records);

…….e. judges’ abuse of the congressional grant to them of self-discipline authority under the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act of 1980(28 U.S.C. §§351-364) by dismissing 100% of complaints filed against any federal judge and denying 100% of petitions to review those dismissals, thus institutionalizing judges’ implicit or explicit complicit agreement for reciprocal exoneration from all complaints: ‘Today I exempt you from the complaint against you, and tomorrow you exempt me and my friends from any complaint against us, no matter the nature, extent, and gravity of the abuse complained-about’;

…….f. the investigation of Supreme Court justices and congressional leaders, which can benefit from the abundance of leads that I have collected(OL:194§E; jur:65§B).

228. The business venture can also enhance my site technologically into a clearinghouse and a research center. This will allow people to post their stories of abuse by judges that they have suffered or witness as well as their complaints against judges already or to be filed; and to research them for patterns and schemes of abuse of power and financial criminality that but for coordination among judges and between them and their cronies would not have been organized and become operational.

229. The venture can enable people to tell their stories to the national public at unprecedented citizens hearings. The latter will be organized by Reuters, WSJ, WP, other media outlets, their journalists, and professors and students. They will be held at university auditoriums, media stations, and via video conference to make it inexpensive for the largest number of people to tell their stories and virtually attend the citizens hearings.

…….a. Those hearings will be a source of invaluable leads for researchers to further their investigation of justices’ and judges’ abuse and criminality. The hearings can be expected to become a self-reinforcing research mechanism that makes any investment in mounting the learning curve pay off and become long-term financially and reputationally profitable.

E. My offer to make a presentation on this proposal for a joint venture

330. I offer to present this proposal for a joint venture via video conference and, if in NY City, in person. Preview its key features by reviewing my webinar and its slides.

331. To schedule the presentation use my contact information below.

332. To invite people to attend the presentation and send you their complaints and stories of judges’ abuse that they have suffered or witnessed  you can as widely as possible share this article with all your friends, relatives, workmates, etc., and post it to social media, such as:

Facebook,   YouTube,   LinkedIn,   Instagram,   Google Plus,   Pinterest,   Reddit,   Snapchat,   WhatsApp

 Tweet: Tell journalists your story of justices’ & judges’ abuse, which can lead to citizens hearings, their resignations, the Federal Judiciary’s fall & Today’s We the People constitution http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_from_abortion_decision_to_new_constitution.pdf

333. To encourage the investigation of justices and judges by top journalists(OL3:1452§1) and the law professors who were members of the Biden Commission on the Reform of the Supreme Court, place each of the following blocs of email addresses in the To: and the cc: box, respectively, of this email so that they too receive this article. Then  every day go to your “Sent” folder, where a copy of the emails that you sent is found, open it, click “Reply All” and “Send“.

To: [journalists]

James.Grimaldi@wsj.com, Coulter.Jones@wsj.com, Joe.Palazzolo@wsj.com, michael.siconolfi@wsj.com, kate.davidson@wsj.com, john.shiffman@thomsonreuters.com, michael.berens@thomsonreuters.com ,blake.morrison@thomsonreuters.com, tips@thomsonreuters.com, contact@go.reuters.com, newstip@globe.com, patricia.wen@globe.com, brian.mcgrory@globe.com, spotlight@globe.com, dbiscobing@abc15.com, adam@abcactionnews.com, iteam@abcactionnews.com, assignmentdesk@abc15.com, iteam@abc.com, cmartel@thehill.com, erik.ortiz@nbcuni.com, Anna.Brand@nbcuni.com, Tim.Perone@nbcuni.com, Jessica.Simeone@nbcuni.com, Jaquetta.White@nbcuni.com, adenney@alm.com, pam.spector@law360.com,  insiders@icij.org, tips@publicintegrity.org, gryle@icij.org, ginger.thompson@propublica.org, andrea@americanthinker.com, marketresearch.thomsonreuters@thomsonreuters.com, drew@americanthinker.com, contact@icij.org, fshiel@icij.org, investigations@icij.org, charles.ornstein@propublica.org, newsletters@abovethelaw.com, email@washingtonpost.com, Lisabennett418@gmail.com, mderienzo@publicintegrity.org, watchdog@publicintegrity.com, emily.holden@theguardian.com, tips@latimes.com, ryan.grim@theintercept.com, tips@propublica.org, info@AP.org, corderoric@yahoo.com, mcnulaj@nytimes.com, communication@lexisnexis.com, info@mail.huffpost.com, aturturro@alm.com, support@washposthelp.zendesk.com, Opencourt@cnn.com, aj.cameron1@gmail.com, wpmagazine@washpost.com, Evan.Allen@globe.com, Brendan.McCarthy@globe.com, colorofmoney@washpost.com,

cc: [professors]

robert.bauer@nyu.edu, cristina.rodriguez@yale.edu, dana.fowler@pcscotus.gov, caroline.fredrickson@georgetown.edu, kandrias@law.columbia.edu, jack.balkin@yale.edu, baude@uchicago.edu, madams@yu.edu, charles@law.duke.edu, acrespo@law.harvard.edu, jgoldsmith@law.harvard.edu, bross@law.virginia.edu, wdellinger@omm.com, levi@law.duke.edu, ecb95@law.rutgers.edu, justin.driver@yale.edu, development@naacpldf.org, rfallon@law.harvard.edu, heather.k.gerken@yale.edu, tgrove@law.ua.edu, ngertner@harvard.edu, tgriffith@law.harvard.edu, bhuang@law.columbia.edu, mkang@northwestern.edu, ojohns@law.columbia.edu, awhite36@gmu.edu, lacroix@uchicago.edu, lemos@law.duke.edu, trevor.morrison@nyu.edu, cnelson@law.virginia.edu, rick.pildes@nyu.edu, d-strauss@uchicago.edu, mramsey@SanDiego.edu, tribe@law.harvard.edu, krooseve@law.upenn.edu, kewhitt@princeton.edu, michael.waldman@nyu.edu, Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net,

334. This is an opportunity for you and the rest of the media, so unjustly denigrated as “the enemy of the people”, to redeem yourselves by informing the people and channeling their outrage so as to enable them to assert their status as the Masters of all public servants, including justices and judges, entitled to exercise their authority as such to hold them accountable for their abuse of the public power entrusted to them and liable to compensate the victims of their abuse.

335. By so doing, we can become financially and reputationally rewarded not only with Pulitzer Prizes, but also by being nationally recognized by a grateful People as their Champions of Justice.

F. Every meaningful cause needs resources for its advancement;
none can be continued, let alone advanced, without money

336. Lip service advances nothing; but it continues to enable the abusers.

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

337. Support the professional law research and writing, and strategic thinking at:

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

338. DONATE by making a deposit or an online transfer through either the Bill Pay feature of your online account or Zelle

from your account

to TD Bank account # 43 92 62 52 45, routing # 260 13 673;

or Citi Bank account # 4977 59 2001, routing # 021 000 089.

Dare trigger history!…and you may enter it.

Sincerely,

Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Judicial Discipline Reform
2165 Bruckner Blvd.
Bronx, NY 10472-6506
tel. +1(718)827-9521

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

WEBINAR
at the most propitious time for
exposing judges’ abuse of power, financial criminality, and cover-up:
precisely when the confirmation of a justice nominee and
top media outlets’ reports on judges’ wrongdoing
have drawn public attention to everything judicial and
primarying politicians
need to appear responsive to public outrage;
and
WORKSHOP
for learning to write in up to 500 words your story
of judges’ wrongdoing that you have suffered or witnessed,
and promoting the holding by journalists, professors, and students of
unprecedented citizens hearings
where people can tell their stories to the national public and
so inform and outrage the public as to stir it up to take action,
such as collectively demanding compensation
from judges and their judiciaries
by applying judges’ own decisions that have held
churches, universities, and sports organizations
liable for their handling of
sexually abusive priests, pastors, and officers.

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

As of March 10, 2022, the number of subscribers to this website, Judicial Discipline Reform at http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org, was 43,454 and counting. (See Appendix 3.)

You are invited to subscribe. Simply go <left panel ↓Register   or   + New   or   Users   >Add New.

The scores of articles posted here are the product of professional law research and writing, and strategic thinking.

They analyze current events and propose concrete, reasonable, and feasible actions that webvisitors can take in their own interest in:

1. 1. 1. exposing judicial abuse of power and financial criminality;
      2. collectively demanding compensation; and
      3. setting in motion reform of the justice system ‒as opposed to only the Supreme Court, the narrow target of the Biden Commission‒ through transformative change, i.e., what goes into the process of change comes out transformed into a different entity.

Hence, the articles, far from being entries for a law debating society, have a pragmatic purpose for journalists and their audience, lawyers and their clients, and pro ses. You will benefit from reading them.

The articles are supported by the three-volume study of judges and their judiciaries, titled and downloadable thus:

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

Open the downloaded files using Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available for free.

• 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 OL2:394-1143

^♣ Volume 3: http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL3/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates3.pdf >from OL3:1144-1455+

SLIDES

for

The Webinar
on exposing judges’ unaccountability and
consequent riskless abuse of power and financial criminality

and

The Workshop
on writing in up to 500 words your story of abuse by judges
and prepare to tell it to the national public at
unprecedented citizens hearings;
see hereunder a detailed description of
the two-phase method for writing your story
presented by
Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.,
of
Judicial Discipline Reform
http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org

A. The Webinar

1. 1. Abuse of power by judges on their turf: their courts

a. Government officials, who appoint judges, will not expose their appointees

b. Attorney General Judge Merrick Garland will not expose other judges

c. expository reports in The Wall Street Journal, Thomson Reuters, Boston Globe, International Consortium of Investigative Journalists, ABC, NBC, The Center for Public Integrity, and The Washington Post.

1. 2. Out-of-court inform and outrage strategy for exposing judges’ abuse

a. Using your stories to persuade journalists and students and professors

1) they are numerous and have expertise, means, and sources

2) can audit many stories and detect patterns of coordinated abuse

3) can inform the national public of their findings and outrage it

1. Outraging the national public before the primaries of the mid-term elections

a. hold unprecedented citizens hearings at media stations & universities

b. help organize local chapters for collectively demanding compensation^♦

1) apply decisions holding Catholic Church liable for pedophilic priests

1. Outraged public turning judges’ abuse and criminality into key electoral issue

a. principled and opportunistic politicians pay attention to voters’ concerns

b. politicians can use subpoena and contempt power to investigate judges

B. The story-writing Workshop

5. Two-phase method for writing your story of abuse by judges

a. in up to 500 words

b. a story that is accurate, significant, and verifiable

1. Phase 1: creative, allows the free flow of dots of information, such as:

a. dots of What!? Who? Where? When? How? Why? What now?

1) names of people and entities: titles and relationships

2) events: eviction, belongings removed, auction announced & held

3) property: location; and before and now ownership and value

4) documents: titles, docket numbers, citations to laws and rules

5) terms, concepts, phrases, causes of action, claims

6) dates: deadlines, statute of limitations, payments, filing, trial

b. start organizing the dots chronologically; ask “then what?”

c. connect the dots by jotting words or phrases describing or explaining

1. Phase 2: critical, requires checking dots, grammar, logical flow of story

2. Send your story using the two blocs of email addresses of:

a. the members of the Biden Commission on reforming the Supreme Court

To: [box of your email containing your story] cristina.rodriguez@yale.edu, robert.bauer@nyu.edu, kandrias@law.columbia.edu, jack.balkin@yale.edu, baude@uchicago.edu, madams@yu.edu, charles@law.duke.edu, acrespo@law.harvard.edu, wdellinger@omm.com, ecb95@law.rutgers.edu, justin.driver@yale.edu, rfallon@law.harvard.edu, heather.k.gerken@yale.edu, ngertner@harvard.edu, jgoldsmith@law.harvard.edu, tgriffith@law.harvard.edu, tgrove@law.ua.edu, bhuang@law.columbia.edu, mkang@northwestern.edu, ojohns@law.columbia.edu, lacroix@uchicago.edu, lemos@law.duke.edu, levi@law.duke.edu,  staff@pcscotus.gov, trevor.morrison@nyu.edu, cnelson@law.virginia.edu, rick.pildes@nyu.edu, mramsey@SanDiego.edu, krooseve@law.upenn.edu,  bross@law.virginia.edu, d-strauss@uchicago.edu, tribe@law.harvard.edu, awhite36@gmu.edu, kewhitt@princeton.edu, michael.waldman@nyu.edu,  caroline.fredrickson@georgetown.edu,  development@naacpldf.org,  Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net,

b. journalists; students and professors of journalism, law, business, IT

cc: [box of your email]  James.Grimaldi@wsj.com, Coulter.Jones@wsj.com, Joe.Palazzolo@wsj.com, contact@icij.org, fshiel@icij.org, investigations@icij.org, newstip@globe.com, insiders@icij.org, tips@thomsonreuters.com, john.shiffman@thomsonreuters.com, contact@go.reuters.com, tips@publicintegrity.org, michael.berens@thomsonreuters.com, blake.morrison@thomsonreuters.com, gryle@icij.org, ginger.thompson@propublica.org, andrea@americanthinker.com, marketresearch.thomsonreuters@thomsonreuters.com, drew@americanthinker.com, help@washpost.com, patricia.wen@globe.comrs.com, <brian.mcgrory@globe.com>, spotlight@globe.com, charles.ornstein@propublica.org, tracy.weber@propublica.org, Thehill@email.thehill.com, newsletters@abovethelaw.com, tips@propublica.org, mderienzo@publicintegrity.org, watchdog@publicintegrity.com, emily.holden@theguardian.com, tips@latimes.com, ryan.grim@theintercept.com, info@AP.org, corderoric@yahoo.com, mcnulaj@nytimes.com, MCoyle@alm.com, communication@lexisnexis.com, inytletters@nytimes.com, info@mail.huffpost.com, aturturro@alm.com, support@washposthelp.zendesk.com, Opencourt@cnn.com, letters@nytimes.com, Matt.Rocheleau@globe.com, oped@nytimes.com, Jackie.Botts@thomsonreuters.com, wpmagazine@washpost.com, hello@propublica.org, Jaimi.Dowdell@thomsonreuters.com, letters@washpost.com, Evan.Allen@globe.com, Vernal.Coleman@globe.com, Brendan.McCarthy@globe.com, national@washpost.com, colorofmoney@washpost.com, email@washingtonpost.com, oped@washpost.com,

c. ask that they hold unprecedented citizens hearings

d. share and post Dr. Cordero’s email/article on these webinars and two-phase story writing method.

C. Advancing a common cause

1. Donating

1. Every meaningful cause needs resources for its advancement;
   none can be continued, let alone advanced, without money.

2. Support the common cause of advocating honest judiciaries. That is what  Judicial Discipline Reform  has done by engaging in professional law research and writing, and strategic thinking.

3. That is how it has produced the webinar and
   workshop, and their underlying 3-volume study of judges and their judiciaries, which is titled and downloadable thus:

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

^♣ Volume 3: http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL3/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates3.pdf >from OL3:1144-1397+.

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

1. Donate by making a deposit or an online transfer using the Bill Pay feature of your online banking account or through Zelle to:

Citi Bank, routing # 021 000 089, account # 4977 59 2001;
TD Bank, routing # 260 13 673, account # 43 92 62 52 45

2. Investing capital to advance the common cause

1. 13.  There are many activities that can advance the common cause of advocating honest judiciaries by holding judges accountable for their performance and liable to compensate the victims of their abuse and financial criminality. They can be financed also by capital investment in Judicial Discipline Reform, as described in its business plan.
   14. Among those activities are the following, which can help to:a. continue the professional law research and writing, and strategic thinking, which has produced a three-volume study of judges and their judiciaries, titled and downloadable thus:

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

 b. develop the website at http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org, whose articles(Appendix 6§A) have attracted countless webvisitors and elicited in them such a positive reaction that 43,448+ have become subscribers as of March 9, 2022(App.3). The website can be developed from an informational platform into:

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

2) a research center for fee-paying clients auditing judges’ decisions and searching many other writings from many sources that through computer-assisted statistical, linguistic, and literary analysis can reveal the most persuasive type of evidence: judges’ patterns, trends, and schemes of abuse of power, e.g.; their interception of people’s emails and mail to detect and suppress those of their critics; and

3) the digital portal of the multidisciplinary academic and business venture leading up to the Institute of Judicial Unaccountability Reporting and Reform Advocacy attached to a university or news network;

c. organize and embark on a tour of webinars and workshops to you and your group of guests, organizations, and students and professors at law, journalism, business, Information Technology, and social sciences schools; media outlets; etc., via video conference or, if in NY City, in person. To assess my capacity to present view my video and follow it on its slides;

d. hold together with academics, journalists, and media outlets the proposed unprecedented citizens hearings, where people will have a chance to tell the national public their stories of judges’ abuse of power and financial criminality;

e. organize the first-ever, and national, multidisciplinary and multimedia conference on judges’ abuse in connivance with politicians, who fearing their power of retaliation allow them to be unaccountable, where the report on the citizens hearings will be presented;

f. publish as a sequel to the hearings report an academics/journalists multidisciplinary Annual Report on Judicial Unaccountability and Consequent Riskless Abuse of Power, which can become the citizens’ version of what judges have fiercely and successfully opposed: an independent inspector general of the judiciary;

g. launch a generalized media investigation into judges and their judiciaries because Scandal sells & wins Pulitzer Prizes;

h. promote the formation of a national, single issue, apolitical, non-denominational civic movement for judicial abuse of power exposure, compensation of abusees, and reform through transformative change(¶77); etc.(¶48).

1. 15. To explore capital investment opportunities, contact Dr. Cordero.

Dare trigger history!…and you may enter it.

Sincerely,

Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Judicial Discipline Reform
2165 Bruckner Blvd
Bronx, New York City 10472-6506
tel. +1(718)827-9521
Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net, DrRCordero@Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org, CorderoRic@yahoo.com

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. and ^† >OL2:1114§G, 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 WORKSHOP’S
TWO-PHASE METHOD FOR WRITING YOUR STORY

Using your story for demanding that
the Biden Commission on Supreme Court reform
hear your testimony at its “public meetings”; and
asking universities and the media,
such as the news agencies The Wall Street Journal, Thomson Reuters, The Boston Globe, International Consortium of Investigative Journalists,
The Washington Post, TIME, The New Yorker, Propublica, and
The New York Times,
to let the national public hear your story by holding the proposed
unprecedented citizens hearings
http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_method_for_writing_your_story.pdf

By

Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Ph.D., University of Cambridge, England
M.B.A., University of Michigan Business School
D.E.A., La Sorbonne, Paris
Judicial Discipline Reform
New York City
http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org
Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net , DrRCordero@Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org , CorderoRic@yahoo.com

A. Telling your story at the most opportune time: when people want to hear it

1. 1. This article lays out a two-phase method for you to write in up to 500 words the story of the abuse of power by judges and guardians that you have suffered or witnessed.
   2. Your effort in writing your story will pay off, for you will be doing so at the most opportune time: when the public, journalists, universities, and even many politicians want to hear about those stories in the context of what will soon dominate the national debate: the Commission nominated by President Biden on April 9, 2021, to study ways of reforming the Supreme Court; and the desire attributed to him and his party “to pack the Supreme Court”, that is, to increase the number of justices from 9 to 15 and reduce their life-appointment to a term of years.

B. Composing an informative and brief story to be read, heard, and investigated

1. 3. You want to tell the national public your story of judges’ abuse of power and make the public share your outrage at it. You also want your story to be investigated by journalists.
   4. But nobody is going to read the scores, never mind hundreds, of pages generated by your case in court to figure out what your story is all about.
   5. Moreover, at a hearing you will have only 5 minutes to tell your story…a rambling account will not hold the attention of the audience even that long.
   6. In addition, journalists will not investigate a story that is confusing and missing key pieces of information so that it fails to pique their curiosity and makes them feel that it would not interest their own audience.
   7. Therefore, you will benefit from applying the method set forth below for writing an informative and brief story. You will use it to rehearse your oral delivery of it at a hearing.

C. Not a professionally written story, but written after doing your homework

1. 8. Research your own documents and cite them so that your story is accurate and verifiable.
   9. Write a story that is significant to the audience: You are not writing a diary for your private reading. You are writing a story to be read by others, your audience. Organize it chronologically so that it can be easily followed by people who are totally unfamiliar with you and it.
   10. Highlight the most outrageous events and avoid getting bogged down in details unimportant to the story even if they are important to you. After reading it, your audience should be able to exclaim: ‘The judge in this story did A, B, and C. How outrageous!”
   11. Edit your writing to make it as grammatically correct as you can so that the audience’s attention is concentrated on your story without grammatical mistakes distracting it and reflecting poorly on your degree of education and attention to detail.
   12. Your objectives are clear: Your accurate and verifiable story earns you the respect and trust of your audience. Its significance to them earns you their gratitude. All this may makes you attain your most important objective: your audience’s action in support of your cause.
   13. Your audience’s support will be more likely and stronger if you apply to the writing of your story a principle of strategic thinking: “People never listen so attentively and react so positively as when they listen to avoid harm to themselves and their loved ones.”
   14. Make your audience feel that the abuse by judges that you suffered or witnessed can happen to them too. They can fall prey to the abusers. “No! That is unacceptable. That is outrageous! I must support this victim to end this abuse before it gets me!”

D. You need intermediaries to bring your story to the national public

1. 15. That must be the reaction of your ultimate audience: the national public. Only that public, informed about, and outraged at, judges’ unaccountability and riskless abuse of power, can force the reform not only of the Supreme Court, but also the lower federal court and even the state courts. Your story alone will not attain that objective, but it must contribute to attaining it.
   16. To tell your story to the national public you need the Biden Commission as well as journalists and universities to become interested in it and let you use their means for publicizing it.
   17. So, it is shortsighted and counterproductive to disparage the media. They are not your enemies. They are your loudspeakers. They do not form a monolithic entity. There are thousands of media outlets and tens of thousands of journalists. Not all of them have the same point of view, means, or standing: The New York Times and The Washington Post do not behave the same way as a new outfit with a handful of journalists trying to breakthrough in the world of digital investigations.
   18. Yet, they share a common interest: their commercial and reputational advancement. In addition, they can pick and choose among the scores of millions of people who have been abused by judges. You need journalists more than they need you. Treat all of them with respect. That is required by ethical considerations, professional standards, and strategic thinking.

E. Advice on story writing tested and applied successfully

1. 19. I have applied the advice given here to produce my three-volume study of judges and their judiciaries. The study rests on professional law research and writing, and strategic thinking. It is titled and downloadable thus:

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

^♣ Volume 3: http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL3/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates3.pdf >from OL3:1144-1397+ (This article is at OL3:1329.)

1. 20. This article is also posted to my website Judicial Discipline Reform at http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org. It and similar ones have attracted so many webvisitors and the latter have reacted to them so positively that 43,448+ have become subscribers to it as of March 9, 2022(Appendix 3).
   21. How many law firms, never mind lawyers, do you know who have a website with so many subscribers?
   22. You can join the subscribers thus: go to http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org <left panel ↓Register or + New   or   Users   >Add New.

F. The two-phase writing method

1. In phase one, use your unrestrained creative spirit to draft your story

1. In the end you want to produce a story that flows smoothly into your audience’s mind and that is accurate, significant, and verifiable. But at the beginning, there is the big bang of story creation: The story bursts out of your mind chaotically onto a computer page (or paper). Anything makes its way out. Nothing is subjected to critical thought controls. If it pops up, jot it down.

2. Sit at your computer and write on a word processing page whatever word, term, or phrase identifies a person, event, place, document, thing, idea, concept, etc., apparently associated with your story. They are your story’s informational dots. Each opens a crack in your mind and lets other escape.

3. You are not yet trying to write grammatically correct and complete sentences. You only want to get started telling your story. Blurt anything and everything onto the page.

4. Let your stream of consciousness bubble out unrestrained by your thinking mind so that it sprinkles dots of your story all over the page. As related words, terms, and phrases flow out of your mind, keep adding them to or between the other dots on the page.

5. Widen and multiply the cracks in your mind by asking yourself about your story the journalists’ W-questions: What!? Who? Where? When? How? Why? What now?

6. Keep asking of every word, term, phrase, and sentence concerning an event: “then what happened?…and then what did they say?…and then what did I do?…and then…?” They are alive in your mind. They can hear and answer you. They can even ask you questions.

7. If informational dots or you ask questions that you cannot answer right away, only jot them down. Do not interrupt the fireworks of dots. Let it rip! Enjoy. Search for answers and evaluate their significance in phase two. Gradually questions will become more complex:

a. What was the name of the opposing party’s attorney?…and her law firm?

b. Did the judge issue an oral order from the bench or did he read one that he had written? Did he cite any law or rule?

c. Why did the judge order me to pay rent because the landlord had fixed the plumbing? I never told him; and the landlord never filed an answer! So how did the judge know? Did she confused me with another tenant? How many times has this landlord or his lawyer appeared before this judge?…Mmm. I’ll have to look into this later on.

1. When you have about ten informational dots, move them up and down in a rough chronological order of appearance in your story. As you do so, add to them any other words, terms, and phrases that enlarge their meaning, identify them more narrowly, or should be inserted between them.

2. Keep reading the dots, even aloud. Put them in a jingle, make them rhyme even if they make no sense…and they will come alive!, dancing in your mind and inviting to dance other words, terms, and phrases that are also dots. Let them jump onto the stage of your page.

3. Something like sentences will begin to appear. Keep ordering them chronologically and inserting more dots between them or enlarging them with details.

4. Painting by numbers, using stars to draw a constellation, you are connecting the dots into the sketch of a figure. It seems to be telling a story…your story! You can do this. You did it! You are telling your story!

5. Use a ‘balancing test’ to compare the dots’ weight of outrageousness for the story to make sense and be significant to them: the ones who do not know you or your story. Remove to another page dots that feel of ‘lighter’ significance. You are starting to recognize a hierarchy among the dots. That will help you stay within the 500-word limit. Combine the dots into rough sentences.

6. HOURS later you will feel that you have told your story from beginning to end. Let it sit for a day. You are not done, not even close: You only wrote your first draft. But you did!

2. In phase two, use your critical judgment to edit your story

1. Come back to your draft and read it through. Only thereafter start moving around and connecting the sentences in a way that will make sense to a person who does not know anything about it.

2. Avoid confusing your audience: Use the same word to refer to the same person, idea, event, object, etc. Double check your dates; the names of places, people, and their titles. Make sure who said what to whom. Do not trust your memory. Case and other documents. Research the law to provide citations. Journalists will check them and you must ensure that they can verify them. Be accurate.

3. Right now you are writing for an audience of journalists. They are knowledgeable, critical, and demanding. But they do not know anything about your story. Do not assume that they can fill in the details that you left out that are necessary for your story to make sense to them.

4. Try to the best of your ability to tell them a story that persuades them of the outrageousness of unaccountable judges’ riskless abuse of power. But do not be melodramatic; do not exaggerate.

5. Never make up details. Always make a clear distinction between facts, opinion, and impressions. Admit that you do not know what you do not know. You may be able to tell a lie as to a dot here or there. But journalists look at the whole picture and realize how false dots do not fit in. Lie-ridden mouths are not invited to tell their story. Even if you did not intend to provide false details, as when lying, but your details are incorrect for failure to check them against documents and other sources, you become an unreliable storyteller. You lose credibility. Never compromise it.

6. Self-editing means revising and rewriting your draft story; and correcting your grammar and the position of paragraphs, sentences, and clauses. It will take longer than drafting it: Dots were connected into a sketch. Now you are painting the sketch with the colors of accuracy, verifiability, and significance that reveal the outrageousness of the abuse of power of the judges in your story.

a. What to omit

1. Abstain from outbursts intended to elicit pity and appeal for commiseration. Do not appear emotionally fragile, unstable, or hypersensitive. Do not come across as a basket case.

2. Do not dilute your story’s significance with trivial details and petty grievances. A barrage of charges betrays incapacity to identify what is legally relevant. Do not diminish the credibility of your story with unfounded accusations, speculation, and extravagant claims. Trying to turn your experience into a nightmare does not make for a serious story; you are not scripting a horror movie.

3. Do not impair your story’s verifiability by making unprovable claims. Fantasy allegations make your story a fairy tale. Let independent investigators reveal what coming from a party –and as such biased toward her side of the story− sounds preposterous. Turn ‘reality that is stranger than fiction’ into a question that becomes a lead for investigative journalists:

a. Did the judge put his kids on food stamps although he earns a judges’ salary?!
b. Did he have his niece hired by the winning party to have her pay his gambling debts?
c. Does he tell his law clerks that if at the end of their clerkship when they search for a job they want him to write them a glowing letter of recommendation, which can earn them a substantial sign-up bonus from the hiring employer, they have to decide the cases assigned to him and write the decisions, which explains why the style of the decisions signed by him is so oddly different every year after the start of the new clerkship?

1. Also leave out anything on which honest people can reasonably hold different opinions. It falls within the judges’ wide margin of discretion. Your opinion is not entitled to more credibility than the judges’, especially since you are not a lawyer, but rather a biased party, as all parties are.

b. What to include

1. Focus on the judges’ violation of criminal law, which their fellow judges will not want to appear defending, lest they dirty their own image: e.g.,

a. denial of due process and equal protection of the law;
b. conflict of interests;
c. abuse of public office and confidential information for self-enrichment;
d. bribery;
e. bankruptcy fraud, concealment of assets, tax evasion, and money laundering;
f. interception of people’s mail and emails to detect and suppress those critical of judges; disregard of rules of conduct;
g. cronyism;
h. cover-up;
i. ethnic, racial, socio-economic, gender, or religious bias;
j. physical or sexual abuse;
k. arbitrariness; and
l. what offends the common sense of decency and propriety.

1. Provide pieces of information, e.g., names and dates, that can be treated as data: They can be scanned into a database to find the most convincing type of evidence: patterns of abuse by judges and their cronies, formed by their recurrence in the stories separately provided by different people.

2. Let your story sit for a day or two. Come back to it for another phase-two session. You are writing your story to tell it first to journalists; and if it passes muster, they will bring it to the national public. Eventually it will be the basis for your claim for compensation. What you say now binds you later on. Do what it takes to get your story right. It must be accurate, verifiable, and significant.

G. Title, subtitle, and theme of the story

1. After writing your story, you will recognize a theme running through it. Turn it into the title that expresses the nature of your story and its main takeaway.

2. In general, the theme of your story and that of the other witnesses is “judges’ unaccountability and consequent riskless abuse of power”. In particular, emphasize, whether in the title and certainly throughout the story, the judges’ three most outrageous acts. “If the most cannot do it, the lesser need not try.” There follow sample titles that summarize their respective story in a sentence:

How a judge failed to recuse himself
from a case where he approved the foreclosure on an apartment building, the eviction of all the tenants, and
its conversion into an office building by a development company
in which he is a shareholder

How a judge once more
declared another wealthy senior citizen incompetent and
appointed as her guardian a person to whom he regularly entrusts guardianships, who squeezed every penny from her, and
then dumped her onto the state welfare system as an indigent

How a bankruptcy judge allowed the same bankruptcy trustee
to hold yet another unannounced auction
where only one and the same bidder showed up,
bought the debtor’s assets for pennies on the dollar,
flipped the assets, and made a killing…
leaving me as the financial corpse

Bonfire of integrity at the penthouse:
Judges attending a judicial conference
boasted about how they cut corners on the law,
use parties’ information to enrich themselves and their partners, and
have clerks fudge documents; and
were overheard by
the apparently invisible waiters and waitresses serving them,
who reported them to their chief circuit judge; and
although the chief deemed their reports complaints,
she dismissed them
without the waiters and waitresses ever being interviewed as part of any investigation

H. Additional information in links embedded in text and as endnotes

1. It is assumed that you will email your story. Attachments to them are risky because when opened they can release a virus into the recipient’s computer. As a result, some email computers (servers) do not accept for delivery emails with attachments. Do not send them.

2. Instead, turn a reference to a person, event, place, document, etc., into a linking blue keyword, which holds embedded in it a ‘hidden’, not visible, link to a supporting document: Click on the keyword >in the dropdown menu click on the word Hyperlink >in the box type in the hyperlink >click enter. The keyword should turn blue indicating that it has an embedded link.

3. Be reasonable: do not mar your story with dozens of blue words. Use your good judgment to identify the documents whose links should be embedded. If readers need more supporting documents, they can ask you for them. Store the linked documents either on your website, DropBox, Google Plus, Academia, or any other cloud storage facility.

4. If need be, you may provide at the end of your story a “List of links to supporting documents”. Add a brief description of what the corresponding document deals with.

5. Include in the list the documents of the opposing party and the decisions of the judges in your case. Be fair. Let them ‘talk’ too. Be helpful: spare journalists and other readers the need to search for those documents, which should be at your fingertips because you received them and should have read them. Do not give the impression that you are hiding the other side of the story or that you are so self-centered and small-minded that you think your story only has one side: yours.

I. Sign and date your story

1. If your address, telephone number, and email address were not stated at the top of your story, state that information at the end of it. Show that you take responsibility for your story.

2. Moreover, your contact information will facilitate getting in touch with you to ask for any needed clarification or additional information.

3. Provide the date when you submit your story. That information is useful, in general, to order documents chronologically and, in particular, to establish your story’s currency, i.e., its ‘as of date’.

J. Advocates’ reciprocal revision of their stories, checklist, and chapters of story writers to demand collective compensation

1. Before submitting your story, share it with the Advocates of Honest Judiciaries to whom I send my articles –see the To: and cc: boxes of my emails and OL2:1140¶28–. Ask that they provide feedback on it just as you offer to do the same if they share with you their story.

2. A competition for the title of “Protagonist of the Worst Abuse by Judges Ever” or the attitude “My story is more importan that yours cuz it effects more people” does not improve any story. They are egocentric and wasteful of everybody’s effort, goodwill, and time.

3. Cooperate to identify and rephrase, eliminate, or correct what is inaccurate, insignificant, or unverifiable; ambiguous; inconsistent; contradictory; digressive; repetitive; pretentious; self-aggrandizing; defamatory; a poor word choice; trite; in bad taste; foul language, which is impermissible; misspelled; unidiomatic; wrong syntax (word order); ungrammatical; etc.

4. All of you can draw up a “Checklist and Evaluation Form for Stories of Abuse of Power by Judges”. It can be used when composing the proposed Annual Report on Judicial Unaccountability and Abuse of Power in America.

5. Reciprocal revisions will afford you the opportunity to know each other. You and others can form a chapter of Advocates who promote in turn the formation of a national, civic, single issue movement for judicial abuse of power exposure, compensation of victims, and reform.

K. Blocs of email addresses where to send your story

1. When you are ready to send your story, copy the bloc of email addresses below and paste it in the corresponding box of your email:

To [for the commissioners of the Biden Commission]:  cristina.rodriguez@yale.edu, robert.bauer@nyu.edu, kandrias@law.columbia.edu, jack.balkin@yale.edu, baude@uchicago.edu, madams@yu.edu, charles@law.duke.edu, acrespo@law.harvard.edu, wdellinger@omm.com, ecb95@law.rutgers.edu, justin.driver@yale.edu, rfallon@law.harvard.edu, heather.k.gerken@yale.edu, ngertner@harvard.edu, jgoldsmith@law.harvard.edu, tgriffith@law.harvard.edu, tgrove@law.ua.edu, bhuang@law.columbia.edu, mkang@northwestern.edu, ojohns@law.columbia.edu, lacroix@uchicago.edu, lemos@law.duke.edu, levi@law.duke.edu,  staff@pcscotus.gov, trevor.morrison@nyu.edu, cnelson@law.virginia.edu, rick.pildes@nyu.edu, mramsey@SanDiego.edu, krooseve@law.upenn.edu,  bross@law.virginia.edu, d-strauss@uchicago.edu, tribe@law.harvard.edu, awhite36@gmu.edu, kewhitt@princeton.edu, michael.waldman@nyu.edu,  caroline.fredrickson@georgetown.edu,  development@naacpldf.org,  Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net,

cc [for journalists]:   James.Grimaldi@wsj.com, Coulter.Jones@wsj.com, Joe.Palazzolo@wsj.com, contact@icij.org, fshiel@icij.org, investigations@icij.org, newstip@globe.com, insiders@icij.org, tips@thomsonreuters.com, john.shiffman@thomsonreuters.com, contact@go.reuters.com, tips@publicintegrity.org, michael.berens@thomsonreuters.com, blake.morrison@thomsonreuters.com, gryle@icij.org, ginger.thompson@propublica.org, andrea@americanthinker.com, marketresearch.thomsonreuters@thomsonreuters.com, drew@americanthinker.com, help@washpost.com, patricia.wen@globe.comrs.com, <brian.mcgrory@globe.com>, spotlight@globe.com, charles.ornstein@propublica.org, tracy.weber@propublica.org, Thehill@email.thehill.com, newsletters@abovethelaw.com, tips@propublica.org, mderienzo@publicintegrity.org, watchdog@publicintegrity.com, emily.holden@theguardian.com, tips@latimes.com, ryan.grim@theintercept.com, info@AP.org, corderoric@yahoo.com, mcnulaj@nytimes.com, MCoyle@alm.com, communication@lexisnexis.com, inytletters@nytimes.com, info@mail.huffpost.com, aturturro@alm.com, support@washposthelp.zendesk.com, Opencourt@cnn.com, letters@nytimes.com, Matt.Rocheleau@globe.com, oped@nytimes.com, Jackie.Botts@thomsonreuters.com, wpmagazine@washpost.com, hello@propublica.org, Jaimi.Dowdell@thomsonreuters.com, letters@washpost.com, Evan.Allen@globe.com, Vernal.Coleman@globe.com, Brendan.McCarthy@globe.com, national@washpost.com, colorofmoney@washpost.com, email@washingtonpost.com, oped@washpost.com,

1. Post the article to social media, such as: Facebook,   Youtube,   LinkedIn,   Instagram,   Google Plus,   Pinterest,   Reddit,   Snapchat,   WhatsApp, Twitter.

2. Send this tweet:

Request that the Biden Commission on Supreme Court reform hold public meetings & journalists and universities hold citizens hearings where people can tell their story of judges’ abuse of power; http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_method_for_writing_your_story.pdf

1. Precede your story with this professional letterhead and introduction (which have 483 words and should give you an idea of the length of your story):

Your name and address,
phone number; email address

The Biden Commission on Supreme Court reform;
Investigative journalists; and
Advocates of Honest Judiciaries

Dear Commissioners, Journalists, and Advocates,

Kindly find below my story of the abuse of power by judges that I have suffered and/or witnessed.

I am sending it to support my request that you hear me and similarly situated abusees at the “public meetings” that the Commission is mandated to hold. You should allow your “meetings” and your report to inform the national public of how justices and judges behave in practice, abusing their power for their gain and convenience because they are unaccountable and their abuse is riskless.

By contrast, if you limit yourself to a mere discussion of the theory of constitutional law on the Supreme Court, you will have allowed yourselves to be manipulated as a pretext for implementing the foregone political decision to “pack the Court”.

I also request that you journalists join forces with journalism, Information Technology, and business academics to expose judicial abuse of power at the unprecedented citizens hearings proposed by Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.

At those hearings, multidisciplinary panels of journalists and academics can take the testimony of abusees. They can do so life at media stations and university auditoriums across the country as well as via video conference to make it inexpensive and convenient for them and the public to attend. This can launch a MeToo!-like trend of public accountability here and abroad.

It is overdue: In the 233 years since the creation of the Federal Judiciary in 1789, the number of federal judges impeached and removed is only 8! For comparison, the number of federal officers on the bench on September 30, 2020, was 2,341. Federal judges need not fear losing their jobs. In practice, they have turned public power entrusted to them into the power of a State above the state.

The “meetings” and the citizens hearings can expose the nature, extent, and gravity of judges’ abuse. On that factual basis, the reform can be undertaken of not only the Supreme Court, where in the October 2019-September 2020 fiscal year only “73 cases were argued and 69 were disposed of in 53 signed opinions”, but also the lower federal courts, which terminated 1,103,337(page 10) in the year to September 30, 2020.

The citizens hearings can be expanded to take the testimony of victims of state judges, who are just as outrageous in their abuse of power.

The hearings can thus lead to a reform that takes from judges the unaccountability that they have arrogated to themselves and gives back to We the People, the Masters of all public servants, what is our birthright: government by the rule of law where the People exercise their right to hold also their judicial public servants accountable for entrusted power and liable to compensate the victims of their abuse.

Therefore, I request the opportunity to be heard also at the citizens hearings.

Date and location:                                   Name:

L. My offer to present this articles

1. I offer to make a presentation on this article to you and your group of guests followed by a Q&A session. It can take place via video conference and, if in New York City, in person.

2. To ascertain the quality of my presentation, watch my video and follow it on its slides.

3. To schedule it and agree on its terms, use my contact information below.

M. Every meaningful cause needs resources for its advancement;
none can be continued, let alone advanced, without money

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

Donate

to support the professional law research and writing, and
strategic thinking of

Judicial Discipline Reform

 by making a deposit or an online transfer using the Bill Pay feature of your online banking account or through Zelle to:

Citi Bank, routing # 021 000 089, account # 4977 59 2001;
TD Bank, routing # 260 13 673, account # 43 92 62 52 45

or by mailing a check to the address below.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely,

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

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

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

Dare trigger history!…and you may enter it.

NOTE: Given the interference with Dr. Cordero’s email and e-cloud storage accounts described at *>ggl:1 et seq. and †>OL2:1114§G, when emailing him, copy the above bloc of his email addresses and paste it in the To: line of your email so as to enhance the chances of your email reaching him at least at one of those addresses.

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

By

Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Ph.D., University of Cambridge, England
M.B.A., University of Michigan Business School
D.E.A., La Sorbonne, Paris
Judicial Discipline Reform
New York City
http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org
Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net , DrRCordero@Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org , CorderoRic@yahoo.com

A. How commissioners compromised by conflict of interests render necessary unprecedented citizens hearings

1. The formation by President Biden of his Commission to study ways of reforming the Supreme Court was announced on April 9, 2021 (discussed in an article hereabove and also downloadable). The biographical note on each of the 36 commissioners shows that they are former law clerks to judges and justices (herein “judges” includes “justices”, unless the context indicates otherwise), and/or current law professors.

2. As former law clerks, the commissioners are bound by the confidentiality agreements that they signed with the judges in order to be allowed to clerk for them. While clerking, they did whatever the judges asked them to do because that was the only way of obtaining the one thing that mattered to them more than anything else: a glowing letter of recommendation that would determine whether they could get any of the jobs for which they would apply at the end of their clerkship.

3. As current law professors, who are employees or officers of their respective law school, they cannot afford to expose by themselves or through the witness of third parties any illegal or unethical acts or improprieties (hereinafter referred to as abuse of power) committed by judges individually or as a class. Doing so would make the professors and their schools run the risk of becoming the target of judges’ power of retaliation.  Wielded by judges with a life-appointment, it is devastating, for it arises from both a very long memory for holding grudges and their position to judge each other, which allows them to execute their implicit or explicit mutual exoneration agreement.

4. It follows that the commissioners are compromised by a conflict of interests. It prevents them from doing what is indispensable for any study intended to provide the basis for reforming the Supreme Court: the findings of fact of how the justices conduct themselves in the Court and in dealing with lower court judges, as opposed to the theory of constitutional law that describes their job.

5. Consequently, it is all but certain that the commissioners will not hold public hearings to allow the national public to bear witness to the abuse of power by judges that they have suffered or witnessed.

6. The commissioners’ interest in protecting themselves and their law schools justifies the proposal for holding unprecedented citizens hearings.

a. They are supported by the findings and arguments presented in my three-volume study* ^{† ♣} of judges and their judiciaries, the product of professional law research and writing, and strategic thinking. The study is titled and downloadable thus:

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

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

 ^† Volume 2: http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates2.pdf >from OL2:394-1143

^♣ Volume 3: http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL3/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates3.pdf >from OL3:1144-latest article

i.  Open the downloaded files using Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available for free.

b. I  have also presented findings and arguments in the articles that I have written and posted to my website Judicial Discipline Reform at http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org. They have attracted so many webvisitors and the latter have reacted to them so positively that 40,242+ have become subscribers to it(Appendix3) as of November 12, 2021.

1) How many law firms, never mind lawyers, do you know who have a website with so many subscribers?

2) You can join the subscribers thus:
go to http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org <left panel ↓Register or
+ New   or   Users   >Add New.

B. Salient features of the unprecedented citizens hearings

1. The proposed citizens hearings are unprecedented because they will not be the traditional public hearings held in Congress or by another government entity, such as the Biden Commission.

2. Politicians are the very ones who after recommending, endorsing, nominating, and confirming judicial candidates to judgeships and justiceships, have connivingly protected them as ‘our men and women on the bench’ regardless of their abuse of power. Their sham hearings are pre-determined not to expose judges’ abuse and provoke their retaliation.

a. President Biden and the Democrats in the Senate nominated and confirmed, respectively, Judge Merrick Garland of the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, a former chief judge thereof, to become Attorney General. This fact provides probable cause to belief that they are committed to preventing any exposure of abuse of power by him and his fellow judges that could impair his authority and even lead to his resignation, e.g.:

b. Judge Garland abusively dismissed 100% of complaints filed under the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act of 1980(28 USC §§351-364) by anybody against any judge in his Circuit, as shown by the official statistics of his own Court submitted as a public document to Congress, as required under 28 USC §604(h)(2), in the Annual Report of the Director of the  Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts(§604(a)(3-4)), who is an appointee of the Supreme Court chief justice(§601).

c. Through such systematic dismissal of complaints and abusive abrogation in practice of that Act of Congress, Judge Garland covered up the abuse by his fellow judges complained about. He left complainants without any relief or compensation, and subjected litigants and the rest of the public to the riskless abuse of judges, thus assured of their unaccountability.

d. The chief judges of the other circuits do likewise;  their abuse is condoned by Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr. They grab gain and convenience for themselves risklessly in reliance on their tacit or implicit mutual exoneration agreement.  By so doing, they intentionally inflict injury in fact on the public, for a principle of the law of torts states that “a person is deemed to intend the reasonably expected consequences of their acts and omissions”. They ‘take with notice’ the liability resulting from their conduct…which the class of self-exonerating judges take off their shoulders.

1. The citizens hearings will also be unprecedented because it will not be the media that will tell the national public how judges abuse their power in fact. Instead, it will be citizens who will at the hearings tell the rest of the public how the most powerful officers in our nation have abused their power at the expense of its citizens.

2. To that end, the proposed unprecedented citizens hearings will be:

a. organized by journalists, media outlets, and universities;

b. conducted by panels of journalists and multidisciplinary professors and experts in Information Technology; electronic transfer of money; asset concealment; bribery involving credit and debit cards; tax evasion; off-shore tax heavens; money laundering; banking, securities, and bankruptcy fraud; white collar crimes; breach of the oath of office and the implied contractual covenant and official duty of good faith and “traditional notions of fair dealing and substantial justice”; etc.;

c. held onsite but mostly via video conference so that they do not involve expensive travel and room and board away from home;

d. transmitted to the national public live, through multimedia, and interactively so as to allow the receipt of the public’s feedback in real time; and made available on the citizens hearings website for later viewing and through podcasts;

e. focused on taking the testimony of victims of, and witnesses to, judges’ abuse of power, including current and former court/law clerks;

f. broad enough to expose the abuse committed and/or covered up by judges as well as the Supreme Court justices, whether the latter did so as lower court judges and/or are doing so as justices and circuit justices(28 USC §42) allotted to the several circuits for supervisory purposes;

g. affording the opportunity to advertise the formation of local chapters of abusees to jointly demand compensation from judges and their judiciaries for the abuse that they have committed as principals or enabled as accessories and as complicit supervisors; and

h. so outrage-provoking that the public will demand the formation of, and popular representation in, a grand jury-like commission to investigate, with subpoena, contempt, and indictment power, unaccountable judges and what they have turned into ‘their court system’: the State within a state.

C. Outrageous forms of abuse by judges that the citizens hearings will reveal

1. The stories told by citizens at their hearings will reveal abuse of power of such nature, extent, frequency, and gravity that it can only be the product of coordination among judges for use as their institutionalized modus operandi to run their judiciary as a racketeering enterprise.

2. Some forms of abuse will reveal that judges:

a. run a bankruptcy fraud scheme together with their “cronies”(*>jur:32§2) in the bankruptcy system;

b. according to none other than Sen. Elizabeth Warren, who dare reveal this form of abuse in her “I have a plan for the Federal Judiciary too”, its judges engage in ‘abusive self-enrichment‘ by failing to recuse themselves from cases in which they have a financial interest and resolving the ensuing conflict of interests in their favor to protect and/or increase the value of their interest. Sen. Warren attributes this abuse to judges’ unaccountability;

c. count a case involving a pro se –a person not represented by a lawyer– as one third of a case(>OL2:455§B) thus giving the case one third of the attention, research, and time that they normally give a case. Thereby judges deny pro ses “Equal Justice Under Law”. Nevertheless, they require pro ses to pay 100% of the cost of gathering facts through discovery, such as by deposing witnesses and consulting experts, researching the law, writing a brief,  printing, binding and filing it in court, serving it on the parties, presenting their case in court, etc.;

d. require parties to file case and motion briefs but fail to read most of them, as shown by “the math of abuse”, which entails the breach of the contract for adjudicatory services; fraud; and compensable waste;

e. dump 93% of appeals(>OL2:457§D) out of the circuit courts through orders in forms filled out by their clerks that are “on procedural grounds [mostly the one-fit-all pretext of ‘lack of jurisdiction’], unsigned, unpublished, without comment, and by consolidation;

f. intercept people’s emails and mail to detect and suppress their critics’, thus depriving We the People of our most cherished rights, namely, those guaranteed under the 1^st Amendment to:

“freedom of speech, of the press, the right of the people peaceably to assemble [through the Internet and on social media too], and to petition the Government [of which judges are the third branch] for a redress of grievances [including compensation for abuse]”

g. abuse their congressionally granted self-disciplining authority to ensure their own unaccountability by dismissing 100% of complaints against them and denying 100% of petitions to review their dismissals.

D. Some economic and institutional consequences of the citizens hearings

1. Judges’ abuse has harmed the parties that have appeared and that are currently appearing in their courts. Their abuse provides the basis for those who have appeared before the same judge or in the same court to form local chapters to jointly demand to be compensated by judges and their judiciaries.

2. As things stand now, any suit for such compensation will be dismissed summarily by application of the doctrine of judicial immunity that judges have conjured up in abusive self-interest, while holding accountable and liable priests, doctors, lawyers, politicians, police officers, their institutions, and everybody else.

3. However, the national outrage provoked by the testimony given at the citizens hearings will provide journalists and media outlets a professional and commercial incentive to further investigate judges’ abuse; their findings will exacerbate the outrage. A self-reinforcing cycle will ensue. The issue of compensation will become one at the center of the national debate. Ever more abusees will keep pressing for a resolution favorable to them.

4. The citizens hearings can become an annual event for the People to monitor the performance of the judges, to whom they have entrusted public power;  and for the organizing journalists and universities to publish The Annual Report on on Judicial Unaccountability and Abuse of Power in America(*>jur:126§3).

5. Those hearings can shake public trust in the judiciary so profoundly as to stir up the public to demand and force the resignation of judges and justices, who depend on public trust to have their decisions respected and obeyed. Reliable precedent therefor is the resignation of:

a. Justice Abe Fortas on May 14, 1969, for ‘improprieties’ in taking income from an outside source in addition to its judicial salary and benefiting from relations with former clients;

b. Former Ninth Circuit Chief Judge Alex Kozinski on December 18, 2017, to avoid an investigation of sexual harassment assigned to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals by Chief Justice Roberts under pressure from the MeToo! outrage provoked by the publication by The New York Times and The New Yorker on October 5 and 10, 2017, respectively, of their exposés on Harvey Weinstein’s sexual predation; and

c. Circuit Judge Maryanne Trump Barry, the sister of President Donald Trump, on February 11, 2019, upon learning that she and other family members were being investigated for tax evasion in connection with a scheme to avoid inheritance tax through the use of a complex system of shell companies.

E. Citizens hearings leading to a constitutional convention, thus setting in motion transformative change that results in a new form of government

1. The citizens hearings can be an opportunity for their organizers, witnesses, and the national public to form physical and virtual (on the Internet) groups in the guise of Tea Party local chapters to demand the calling of a constitutional convention.

2. That is the kind of convention that since April 2, 2014, 34 states, constituting the two thirds of states required by the amending provisions of Article V of the Constitution, have petitioned Congress to convene.

3. However, the congressional leaders will never convene it because the convention is all but certain to upset the status quo and diminish the power and privilege that they have accumulated over the 232 years since the adoption of the current Constitution in 1789.

4. The citizens hearings can take on a life of their own: People and local chapters may coalesce into a runaway national civic movement for a new People-government relation. It can transform itself into a constitutional convention that drafts a new constitution…as can a courageous Biden Commission(§A).

5. Outrage and compensation are the forces that can provide the citizens hearings transformative capacity: They can turn the system of justice that went in into one that comes out as a qualitatively and functionally different system of governance. The tandem of those forces was or is lacking in the chaos of the presidential campaign;  the challenges to the electoral results; and the conflict of interests pervading the Biden Commission and predetermining its final report.

6. The citizens hearings can set in motion the transformation of the People/government relation that has been in place for centuries.  They can have transformative capacity because the MeToo!, Black Lives Matter, LBTG, and Asian/Pacific Islander movements, and the protests against police brutality and for socio/economic equality have made the mood of the People ripe for it. That popular mood is expressed in the common self-assertive rallying cry:

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

1. The transformation can consist in a new form of government where the People assert their status as the sovereign source of all political power. As Masters of all their public servants, including their judicial public servants, the People can hold them accountable for the power entrusted to them and liable to compensate the victims of their abuse of it.

F. How you can promote the holding of the citizens hearings

1. This proposal for holding unprecedented citizens hearings is timely. It shows strategic thinking. It can have a practical impact on exposing judges’ abuse of power…but only if it reaches people as opposed to being intercepted on its way to them or if their positive replies to it are intercepted.

2. Hence, it is in your own interest to distribute this article so widely and repeatedly that it has a chance of overwhelming any interception and going viral.

a. Share it with all your friends, relatives, and colleagues.

b. Post it to social media, such as:

Facebook, Youtube, WhatsApp, LinkedIn, Instagram, Google plus, Pinterest, Reddit, Snapchat, and Twitter:

Send this tweet:

Tell your story of judges’ abuse & ask for compensation at unprecedented citizens hearings; the Biden Commission on SCt reform will not let you do it; invite your audience, the People; http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_citizens_hearings_outrage_compensation.pdf

c. Organize a presentation on this article followed by a Q&A session by me to you, your colleagues, students, and other guests. It can be held via video conference and, if it is here in New York City, in person.

28.  To assess my capacity to make that presentation you may watch my video and follow it on its slides.

1. To set its terms and scheduling you may get in touch with me using my contact information below.

G. Every meaningful cause needs resources for its advancement; none can be continued, let alone advanced, without money

1. Lip service advances nothing; but it continues to enable the abusers.

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

DONATE

to support the professional law research and writing, and

strategic thinking

of

Judicial Discipline Reform

by making a deposit or an online transfer

through the Bill Pay feature of your online account or Zelle,

to Citi Bank, routing # 021 000 089, account # 4977 59 2001;

or TD Bank, routing # 260 13 673, account # 43 92 62 52 45

or
by mailing a check to the address below.

Dare trigger history!…and you may enter it.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely,

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

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. and †>OL2:1114§G, 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.

 A. An investigation by you that launches a generalized media investigation

B. From a reform of the system of justice to a commission only to enlarge the Supreme Court and limit its justices’ terms

11. The Republicans argued that the general election in November 2016 was so close that it should be left to the American voters to elect the president who would nominate a justice to a life-appointment office. On that basis, they denied Judge Garland even a hearing. Shortly after taking office, President Trump nominated and the Senate confirmed to the Supreme Court Judge Neil Gorsuch of the Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit.

C. AG Judge Garland’s conflict of interest was resolved to protect his interest in avoiding any investigation into judges

D. Public outrage’s role in energizing a generalized media investigation into judges and their judiciaries

E. Leads to investigate abusive judges and their racketeering Judiciary

F. Unprecedented citizens hearings for the People to reform the system of justice

H. Every meaningful cause needs resources for its advancement; none can be continued, let alone advanced, without money

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

By

Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Ph.D., University of Cambridge, England
M.B.A., University of Michigan Business School
D.E.A., La Sorbonne, Paris
Judicial Discipline Reform
New York City
http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org
Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net , DrRCordero@Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org , CorderoRic@yahoo.com

U.S. Senior District Judge Robert W. Pratt
U.S. District for the Southern District of Iowa
123 East Walnut Street, Suite 300
Des Moines, IA 50309
https://www.iasd.uscourts.gov/content/senior-district-judge-robert-w-pratt
https://www.iasd.uscourts.gov/contact

Mr. Michael Messina
Judicial Assistant
tel. (515)284-6254
[Human Resources: 515-284-6392]

Mr. Ryan Foley, reporter; and
Mr. Ron Nixon, international investigations editor
Associated Press
tel. +1(202) 281-8604; +1(202) 641-9000
https://www.ap.org/contact-us/contact-newsroom
info@AP.org

All other journalists and media outlets

Dear Judge Pratt, Mr. Foley, Mr. Messina, Mr. Nixon, journalists, media outlets, and Advocates of Honest Judiciaries,

1. You, Judge Pratt, made your views on the pardons granted by President Trump in December 2020 known to Associated Press (AP) reporter Ryan J. Foley, who wrote the article referring to you and titled “Federal judge in Iowa ridicules Trump’s pardons”, published on December 30.

2. AP reporter Foley explained that “Pratt made the remarks when asked for comment on pardons granted to two former top aides for Ron Paul’s 2012 presidential campaign, who were convicted in a corruption scheme related to the Iowa caucuses”.

3. AP Foley quoted you as saying, “It’s not surprising that a criminal like Trump pardons other criminals”.

4. This is an appeal for you to be consistent and honest by applying to yourself and your fellow judges that very same principle to expose judges’ pardons of each other. Doing that requires more integrity and therefore is riskier than being flippant in ‘ridiculing Trump’s pardons’. However, you can do that on the solid basis of the facts discussed hereunder, which are known to you given that you have dealt as an insider of the judicial class for the more than your 20 years on the bench.

5. By exposing judges’ reciprocal pardons, you can set off in the administration of justice, not only by the Federal Judiciary, but also by its state counterparts, transformative change: what goes into the process of change comes out transformed into a different system of justice, one where judges are held accountable for their conduct and liable to compensate their victims.

6. If you can muster the necessary consistency, honesty, and integrity, you can exit the judiciary into retirement, not as yet another judge among thousands. Rather, you can bring down, not merely a top official and all his aides, as occurred in the Watergate scandal, which forced President Nixon to resign and sent all his White House men to prison in 1974, but a whole branch of government that judges, rendered unaccountable through reciprocal pardons, risklessly run, as shown below, as a criminal enterprise.

7. That is how instead of ridicule as a hypocrite, you can earn praise as the main character of the bestseller and protagonist of the blockbuster movie/documentary ‘All the judges’ exposer’.

A. Federal judges pardon each other by dismissing 100% of complaints against them

8. The Annual Report of the Director of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts (AO; 28 USCode §§601-613; here with bookmarks added to facilitate navigation) is submitted to Congress and made available to the public (§604(a)(3, 4)), e.g., on AO’s website. The Director is appointed by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and can be removed by him and the other members of the Judicial Conference of the U.S., which includes, among others, all the chief judges of the 13 federal circuits and two national courts (§331). They are imputed with knowledge and approval of the Annual Report.

9. The 2019 Report is the latest version available, covering the fiscal year October 1, 2018-September 30, 2019. If the norm holds, the 2020 Report will be published in March 2021.

10. The Report contains the official statistics of the U.S. courts, titled Judicial Business [year]; e.g., Judicial Business 2019.

11. Some of AO’s official statistics (§604(h)(2)) deal with the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act of 1980, (the Act; §§351-364).

12. The Act entrusts federal judges with the exclusive authority to self-discipline. This means that any complaint against a federal judge must be filed with the respective chief judge, whose decision is reviewable only by the circuit’s judicial council, composed of the chief and circuit and district judges. They are not independent and unbiased. By definition, the chief judges and the judges on the judicial councils are the peers, colleagues, and friends of the complained-against judges.

13. In fact, their own official statistics contained in the Annual Report show that federal judges abuse their self-disciplining authority year after year by dismissing 100% of complaints against their fellow judges and denying 100% of petitions to review those dismissals.

14. These are the pardons that federal judges grant each other. They are not only the product of unprincipled friendship or of the gang mentality(>OL2:569¶¶13-16) that causes judges to conceive of themselves as ‘we against, and regardless of, the rest of the world’. These pardons are the means by which judges bribe and extort each other: ‘Today I pardon you and tomorrow you do likewise by dismissing any complaint against me or my friends…or else!’

B. Federal judges pardon each other preemptively, sparing each other any conviction

15. When judges pardon their fellow judges by dismissing 100% of the complaints against them, their effect is as that when “a criminal like Trump pardons other criminals”. However, the nature of their pardons is significantly more harmful to the administration of justice, for it entails evading its administration:

16. When Trump pardons anybody, there has already been a conviction. The pardonee underwent an adversarial confrontation with The People, represented by the prosecutor, in open court before, in most cases, a jury acceptable to the prosecutor too. This in turn occurs only after discovery of evidence, whose production the prosecutor has power of subpoena, search and seizure, and contempt to compel. And this takes place after the defendant receives a complaint to which he must answer by filing a response as a public document, which he must serve on the prosecutor.

17. That is essentially the same procedure followed in a civil case, which is started by the plaintiff filing a complaint and serving it on the defendant, who must also answer her through a written response; both are public documents. The plaintiff has the right to obtain discovery by compelling the production of evidence. At trial, she can call the defendant and cross-examine witnesses

18. By contrast, judges pardon each other before there was ever a conviction because they simply dismiss the complaint and do not allow the complainant any discovery. Worse yet, the complaint is not made public by the chief judge who receives it, who need not transmit it to the complained-against judge at all. This is what the Act provides:

§352. Review of complaint by chief judge

(a) EXPEDITIOUS REVIEW; LIMITED INQUIRY.—The chief judge shall expeditiously review any complaint received under section 351(a) or identified under section 351(b). In determining what action to take, the chief judge may conduct a limited inquiry for the purpose of determining—

(1) whether appropriate corrective action has been or can be taken without the necessity for a formal investigation; and

(2) whether the facts stated in the complaint are either plainly untrue or are incapable of being established through investigation.

19. For this purpose, the chief judge may request the judge whose conduct is complained of to file a written response to the complaint. Such response shall not be made available to the complainant unless authorized by the judge filing the response.

a. Imagine Trump’s pardonees filing a response that they do not authorize the court to make available to the prosecutor. Would you trust it to be truthful and complete?

20. The chief judge or his or her designee may also communicate orally or in writing with the complainant, the judge whose conduct is complained of, and any other person who may have knowledge of the matter, and may review any transcripts or other relevant documents. The chief judge shall not undertake to make findings of fact about any matter that is reasonably in dispute.

(b) ACTION BY CHIEF JUDGE FOLLOWING REVIEW.—After expeditiously reviewing a complaint under subsection (a), the chief judge, by written order stating his or her reasons, may—

(1) dismiss the complaint—

If the chief judge does not dismiss the complaint, §352(a)(1) provides that the “chief judge shall promptly (1) appoint himself or herself and equal numbers of circuit and district judges of the circuit to a special committee to investigate the facts and allegations contained in the complaint [but not those made by the complained-against judge so as not to cast doubt on the word of a fellow judge]”.

21. The committee must file a report with the circuit’s judicial council; but has no authority to send the complainant a copy. The council can dismiss that report without serving a copy of it on the complainant. It may do anything and nothing else without giving notice to the complainant.

22. Actually, the complainant can only have a review of the chief judge’s order disposing of the complaint. To that end, the complainant must file a petition with the judicial council. Section 352(c) provides that “The denial of a petition for review of the chief judge’s order shall be final and conclusive and shall not be judicially reviewable on appeal or otherwise”.

23. So why would chief judges bother to transmit complaints to complained-against judges, appoint special committees, or pay any attention to their reports, given that they know that complained-against judges need not even respond to complaints?

24. If they do, they may tell ‘a bunch of lies and nonsense’ because their responses will not be transmitted to complainants, who will consequently not have the opportunity that any plaintiff has, namely, to scrutinize and challenge a defendant’s response, whether in the plaintiff brief known as the reply or in the courtroom.

25. In fact, years go by without a single special committee being appointed to investigate any complaint. It is the norm for judicial council members not to read petitions to review chief judges’ complaint dismissals.

26. The councils deny 100% of review petitions by the clerk of court rubberstamping a 5¢ form that dumps the complaint out of court without giving any reason. Its only operative word is “denied”. Criminals’ gang mentality is never to incriminate one of their own, for a violation of their conspiracy of silence is deemed treason and punished with treatment as a pariah or worse.

27. Complainants are limited to filing a complaint that launches from the outside the secret procedure of a star chamber, which they cannot enter. They are not allowed to compel the production of evidence, let alone call the judge to the stand and cross-examine her witnesses, to rebut what protects all fellow judges, the presumption of impunity, and dispute what it confers: unaccountability.

28. It follows that complainants are deprived of what all other plaintiffs and prosecutors are entitled to: the administration of justice through an adversarial proceeding that takes place in public because “Justice should not only be done, but should manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done” (Ex parte McCarthy, [1924] 1 K. B. 256, 259 (1923). Cf. “Justice must satisfy the appearance of justice”, Aetna Life Ins. v. Lavoie et al., 475 U.S. 813; 106 S. Ct. 1580; 89 L. Ed. 2d 823 (1986)).

29. Complainants are denied due process of law while judges are afforded undue protection from process(28 USC §358(a)). Thereby judges place themselves beyond prosecution. As a matter of fact, they become Judges Above the Law.

30. Unlike Trump’s pardonees, complained-about judges remain with their reputation unblemished given that the complaint is kept secret. There is no register of judges who have ever been complained-against, the equivalent of the sex offender register.

a. Their names are as unknown as were those of the pedophilic priests that the Catholic Church transferred from diocese to diocese without ever warning churchgoers and the rest of the public that there were brought into their midst predators that would again abuse their power and trust and harm them too.

31. Judges have had no qualms about finding pedophilic priests and their complicit Church liable to compensate their victims. What an outrageous double standard applied in flagrant self-interest by hypocrites! By so doing, judges have breached their oath of office (28 USC §453) to “do equal right to the poor [in ties to them] and to the rich [in power to reciprocally dismiss complaints].

32. With their silence before and after dismissals of complaints and denials of review petitions, and about the underlying conduct complained-about, judges provide accessorial aid to their fellow ‘priests’ even if they, just as Then-Judge Amy Coney Barrett, have never dismissed or denied any, for they too have a legal (18 U.S.C. §3057) and ethical (Code of Conduct for Judges, Canon 3B(6)) duty to speak up to denounce their brethren and sisters so as to safeguard the integrity of the Judiciary and of judicial process.

33. If “a criminal like Trump [and the] other criminals” had the sole authority to process complaints against any of them, would they dispose of those complaints in any way different from that in which judges dismiss 100% of complaints against themselves and deny 100% of review petitions?

C. Sources of evidence of judges’ criminality

34. Through their preemptive reciprocal pardoning, federal judges ensure that they wear “The Teflon Robe”. That is the title of an informative and outrage-provoking 3-part report that beginning on June 30, 2020, was published by Thomson Reuters, a major news agency, with more than 2,500 reporters and over 600 photo journalists. On the strength of its manpower and concomitant financial resources, it conducted a nationwide investigation of judges. It found “hardwired judicial corruption”.

35. “Hardwired” are also judges’ pardons of each other upon complaint filing, for they have become part of their institutionalized modus operandi. They are integral to their interpersonal relations and provide the insurance upon which they rely to risklessly commit crimes.

36. In the same vein, Boston Globe, the main newspaper in Massachusetts and a reputable one, published on September 30, 2018, its report “Inside our secret courts”, in whose “private criminal hearings [conducted even by clerks with no law degree], who you are –and who you know– may be just as important as right and wrong”.

37. Evidence of federal judges’ criminality is also discussed briefly in the blurbs hereunder; in more detail in a general article thereon; and in even greater detail in the specific articles that form part of my three-volume study of judges and their judiciaries.

38. Based on professional law research and writing, and strategic thinking, the study* ^{† ♣} is titled and downloadable thus:

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

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

 ^† Volume 2: http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates2.pdf >from OL2:394-1143

^♣ Volume 3: http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL3/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates3.pdf >from OL3:1144-latest article

Open the downloaded files using Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available for free.

39. Some of those articles have been posted to my website:

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

40. They have attracted so many webvisitors and elicited from them such a positive reaction that 38,561 [as of May 23, 2021] and counting (>Appendix 3) have become subscribers.

41. You can subscribe for free to its articles, such as this one, thus:

go to http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org <left panel ↓Register   or
+ New   or   Users   >Add New.

D. Examples of judges’ criminality

1. Abusive self-enrichment

42. Under their ‘Teflon Robe’, federal judges hide their own criminality. The latter finds a revealing example in a daring denunciation by a person as knowledgeable about financial matters as former presidential frontrunner Sen. Elizabeth Warren, who is still a member of the Senate.

43. In her “I have a plan for the Federal Judiciary too”, she stated that federal judges fail to recuse themselves from cases in which they own stock in one of the companies that is a party to the case before them in order to resolve the ensuing conflict of interests in their favor so as to protect or increase the value of their stock. Sen. Warren refers to such practice throughout the Federal Judiciary as its judges’ abusive self-enrichment. She attributes it to federal judges’ unaccountability.

44. To engage in such self-enrichment, federal judges necessarily commit the crimes of fraud on parties; concealment of assets; tax evasion; money laundering; fraud on, or collusion with, banks through misrepresentation of funds’ provenance; and breach of contract for judicial services, of the oath of office, and of public trust.

2. Fraudulent filing and approval of financial disclosure reports

45. To conceal assets and evade taxes, federal judges file fraudulent annual financial disclosure reports required under the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 (5 U.S. Code, Appendix).

46. While their reports are public documents, they are filed pro forma (*>jur:65fn107c, d; jur:65§§1-3) with, and approved as a matter of course by, not an independent reviewing body, but rather other judges, who are their peers, colleagues, and friends; and depend for their survival on reciprocal approval of their own reports since they too commit and cover up crimes as principals and accessories.

47. The unaccountability resulting from the fraudulent dealing with those reports removes the moral reins on greed and allows it to run amok throughout the Federal Judiciary.

3. Judges’ bankruptcy fraud scheme

48. People who go bankrupt by definition do not have enough money to meet their needs. The vast majority of them cannot afford a lawyer and must appear without one (pro se) in court. They are overwhelmed by the mindboggling complexities of bankruptcy law and procedure.

49. As a result, they fall prey to judges’ bankruptcy fraud scheme. Its spread to Covid-caused bankruptcies will allow judges and their cronies in the bankruptcy industry to take advantage of people’s financial and emotional distress, thereby harming them even more grievously.

4. Interception of emails and mail

50. Judges intercept people’s emails and mail to detect and suppress those of their critics. This is a crime under 18 U.S.C. [Federal Criminal Code] §2511. Their interception is enabled by the Federal Judiciary’s nationwide computer network, vast expertise, and devastating power to retaliate against even the largest recalcitrant mass communication entities.

51. This judges’ crime is likely to set off the most intense national outrage because it affects directly the largest number of We the People and deprives us of our most cherished rights, to wit, those guaranteed by the 1st Amendment of :

“freedom of speech, the press, and assembly [on the Internet or by letter] to petition the government [of which judges constitute the third branch] for a redress of grievances [which includes compensation, similar to the more than $2.5 billion that the Catholic Church has had to pay to the victims of its pedophilic priests and its covering up of their crimes]”.

52. The exposure of judges’ interception can provoke the gravest institutional and national crisis, for which of the other two branches will dare exercise constitutional checks and balances to hold the Federal Judiciary and its judges accountable? Only an informed and outraged People can so disregard their rulings and shame them as to deprive them of any moral standing and force them to resign.

5. Failure to read the overwhelming majority of briefs

53. The official statistics of the federal courts show that federal judges dump 93% (>OL2:457§D) of appeals to the circuit courts through orders that are “on procedural grounds [mostly the one-fit-all pretext of ‘lack of jurisdiction’], unsigned, unpublished, without comment, and by consolidation”.

54. “The math of abuse” demonstrates judges’ failure to read most briefs. Yet, judges advertise that upon a party filing a brief, which costs $Ks and even $10Ks to produce, and paying the filing fee of $505, they will provide the service of determining the appeal by applying the law to the facts of the case. Instead, they have their clerks dispose of the corresponding case or motion by rubberstamping a 5¢ dumping form that neither discusses the facts nor applies to them the law. It contains only an unresearched, unreasoned, arbitrary, and fiat-like order.

55. This constitutes fraud in the advertising inducement and in the performance; breach of a service contract; intentional causation of emotional distress; and compensable intentional waste. The call for parties to jointly demand that they be compensated for such waste and fraud will attract a large segment of the national public.

6. Sham hearings on the Rules for Processing Complaints

56. To implement the Act, the judges adopted the Rules for Processing Judicial Conduct and Disability Complaints. Initially, they adopted rules in each circuit; thereafter, they adopted and amended nationally applicable ones in 1986, 2000, 2008, 2015, and 2018.

57. The Rules have changed nothing, for the judges have kept dismissing 100% of complaints against them.

58. On each occasion, they have held a public hearing on the proposed new rules to pretend compliance with that requirement (28 USC §358(b)), but they held it in bad faith, for they had no intention of applying the new rules to hold each other accountable. The judges’ public hearings on the rules have been a sham.

59. Their sham constitutes fraud on the public that has caused foreseeable and thus intentional injury:

a. The judges have made witnesses write and submit comments; prepare to deliver them orally; and spend, just as the audience have had to, on travel to a single place in the nation and on room and board to attend the hearing.

b. They have frustrated the reliance interest that they created in witnesses, the audience, and subsequent complainants, all of whom reasonably expected that the judges would apply the new rules fairly and impartially.

60. The judges have caused these members of the public compensable injury in fact.

E. Proposed plan of concrete, reasonable, and feasible actions for exposing judges’ crimes

61. You, Judge Pratt and reporter Foley, can take the lead in exposing judges’ “bad Behaviour”, to which the Constitution refers in Article III, Section 1, as the basis for terminating judges’ holding office. Their “bad Behaviour” includes their crimes as well as abuse of power, unethical behavior, and their failure to abide by the injunction of Canon 2 of their Code of Conduct, which requires judges to “avoid impropriety and even the appearance of impropriety”.

62. You should undertake that exposure to be consistent with your views and values, as reported by Mr. Foley: “[Pratt] said those who abuse positions of public trust for personal gain must face severe consequences, in order to deter misconduct and promote public confidence. Otherwise, he warned, “political corruption will slowly corrode the foundations of our democracy until it collapses under its own weight”.

63. For the sake of your integrity and that of our democracy, you can proceed alone or together; with fellow judges, journalists, or me; whether openly and notoriously or as a discreet informant, to:

64. publish in a national newspaper or magazine the equivalent of the famous open letter I accuse! of French writer Emile Zola to the President of the French Republic to expose the military’s anti-Semitic conspiracy against Jewish Lt. Alfred Dreyfus, except that yours would be addressed to President elect Joe Biden as he prepares to establish the commission for the reform of the judicial system that he announced in an interview with CBS newsanchor Norah O’Donnell on October 22, 2020.

a. Your letter can be the first step in transformative change, just as the exposés by reporters Jodi Kantor and Megan Twohey of The New York Times and journalist Ronan Farrow writing for The New Yorker informed the public on October 5 and 10, 2017, respectively, about Harvey Weinstein’s sexual abuse, and thereby set off within a week here and abroad the MeToo! movement, which has transformed society.

b. That constitutes a reliable and repeatable precedent for the reasonable expectation that your I accuse! letter can lunch a national and international movement for judicial abuse of power exposure, compensation of victims, and reform through transformative change;

65. present your letter at a press conference;

66. ask that President Trump and President elect Biden release the secret FBI vetting reports on judicial candidates and nominees, which are apt to contain incriminating information about them and others, obtained in part by the FBI exercising powers that the media lack, e.g., of subpoena, search and seizure, contempt;

67.  approach national publishers to request that they publish one or a series of my articles (App:6) exposing unaccountable judges risklessly running the Federal Judiciary as a criminal enterprise;

68. ask that AP, Reuters, Boston Globe, and other media join forces to investigate with me judges’ “bad Behaviour”, which they can start and conduct cost-effectively by using the abundance of leads that I have gathered (*>OL:194§E);

69. endeavor to hold unprecedented citizens hearings on judges’ “bad Behaviour”, to be conducted by multidisciplinary panels of journalists, professors, and experts; at media stations and university auditoriums; where the victims of, and witnesses to, judges’ “bad Behaviour” can tell their story to the national public; and do so mostly through interactive video conference to reduce travel expenses; reach the largest life audience possible; and receive their feedback in real time;

70. encourage the formation of local chapters of parties who have appeared before the same ‘badly behaving’ judge or in the same court that covers up for them, to demand collectively compensation for the abuse and waste that they have suffered;

71. promote the holding of the first-ever, and national conference on judges’ “bad Behaviour”, where the report of the citizens hearings will be presented;

72. advocate the calling of the constitutional convention that since April 2, 2014, Congress has been petitioned to convene by 34 states, a number that satisfies the amending provisions of Article V of the Constitution. A runaway convention may fashion a new constitution that enables We the People, the Masters of all public servants, to hold our judicial public servants accountable and liable to compensate their victims.

73. foster the development of the website of Judicial Discipline Reform, as proposed in my business plan, to turn it from an informational platform into:

a. a clearinghouse for complaints against judges uploaded by anybody;

b. a research center for fee-paying clients auditing judges’ decisions and searching many other writings from many sources that through computer-assisted statistical, linguistic, and literary analysis can reveal the most persuasive type of evidence: judges’ patterns, trends, and schemes of “bad Behaviour”; and

c. the digital portal of a multidisciplinary academic and business venture, which should be the precursor to the creation within a top university or think tank of the institute of judicial unaccountability reporting and reform advocacy.

F. My offer to present this article and its proposals

74. I offer to make a presentation of this article and its proposals to you and your guests followed by a Q&A session. To set its terms and scheduling you may get in touch with me using my contact information below.

75. The presentation can take place via video conference on short notice. In fact, there is already an agenda, to which can be added the elements particular to this article.

76. To decide whether to organize the presentation you may watch my video and follow it on its slides.

77. To consult with others on this article and/or interest people in attending the presentation you may widely share this article and post it to social media, such as:

Facebook, Youtube, WhatsApp, LinkedIn, Instagram,

Google plus, Pinterest, Reddit, Snapchat, and

Twitter:    An appeal to US Judge Robert Pratt & Associated Press Ryan Foley to dare expose judges’ criminality, not only P. Trump’s; and hold unprecedented citizens hearings for victims of their crimes to tell their story; https://judicial-discipline-reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-JudgeRPratt.pdf

G. Every meaningful cause needs resources for its advancement;
none can be continued, let alone advanced, without money

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

Donate to

Judicial Discipline Reform

by making a deposit or an online transfer to
Citi Bank, routing number 021 000 089, account 4977 59 2001;

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

or

by mailing a check to the address below.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Dare trigger history!…and you may enter it.

Sincerely,

Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Judicial Discipline Reform
2165 Bruckner Blvd
Bronx, New York City 10472-6506
tel. +1(718)827-9521
Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net, DrRCordero@Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org, Corderoric@yahoo.com

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. and ^†>OL2:1114§G; when emailing him, copy the above bloc of his email addresses and paste it in the To: box of your email so as to increase the chances of your email reaching him at least at one of those addresses.

Reuters, a major news organization,
investigated state judges,
found “hardwired judicial corruption”, and
asked readers to send it their stories of abuse by judges

To write a story of outrageous abuse that may be further investigated and reported, apply the two-phase method for writing it provided below

Ask that Reuters together with universities and
other media outlets, such as Boston Globe and LexisNexis,
hold unprecedented citizens hearings
via video conferences and interactive multimedia
where you too may have the opportunity
to tell the national public your story of abuse by judges
and cause the public to feel in its bones
the total impotence and vulnerability
of your piercing cry:

“The judges had all the power…and I was nothing!“

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

By
Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Ph.D., University of Cambridge, England
M.B.A., University of Michigan Business School
D.E.A., La Sorbonne, Paris
Judicial Discipline Reform
New York City
http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org
Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net , DrRCordero@Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org , CorderoRic@yahoo.com

To join the 35,207+ subscribers to articles like this one,
go <left panel ↓Register
or    + New   or   Users   >Add New.

Abstract

Reuters is a major U.S. news organization with some 2,500 journalists and some 600 photojournalists. In “The Teflon Robe”, it reported “hardwired judicial corruption”: corruption that is an integral element of state judiciaries and that intertwines their judges and the conniving entities duty-bound to supervise them but in practice covering up their abuse of power by not investigating, let alone punishing, them, not even disclosing the names of complained-about judges. Reuters asked readers to send it their stories of abuse by judges. That is what victims of, and witnesses to, judges’ abuse of power have always wanted: to tell journalists their stories.

Likewise, Boston Globe published “Inside our secret courts”, in whose “private criminal hearings, who you are –and who you know– may be just as important as right and wrong”.

LexisNexis is Reuters’s main competitor in computer-assisted law research. It and similar companies may be presumed not to want to cede to either Reuters or Boston Globe the “pioneering of the news and publishing field of judicial unaccountability reporting”.

In this article, Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq., provides his creative/editing two-phase method for you to write your story for these media outlets: ask yourself the journalists’ W-questions to answer with informational ‘dots’; ask ‘Then what?’ of the ‘dots’; and connect them into a story that consists of the relevant and verifiable facts most capable of outraging the reader and the rest of the national public at judges’ unaccountability and consequent riskless abuse of power.

Dr. Cordero proposes that these and all other media outlets jointly investigate federal judges, who are life-tenured, in practice irremovable regardless of what they do, and the models for their state counterparts. They can publish one or a series of articles on judges and their judiciaries that Dr. Cordero has written and made downloadable for them to review. They together with universities can hold unprecedented citizens hearings. Conducted via video conferences before a national public with access to them through interactive multimedia, the hearings will enable people to testify to the abuse by judges that they have suffered or witnessed.

Thanks to your stories, the investigation, the articles, and the citizens hearings, the issue of judges’ abuse of power can be inserted into the 2020 campaign and the confirmation of a Supreme Court nominee, which will focus the attention of the national public on all things judicial. These sources of information will make it possible to inform that public about, and outrage it at, how federal judges risklessly grab gains and convenience by coordinating their individual and collective abuse as their modus operandi to run the Federal Judiciary as a racketeering enterprise.

Until and on Election Day and thereafter, an informed and outraged public can hold accountable the politicians who recommended, endorsed, nominated, and confirmed judicial candidates and since then connivingly protect them as ‘our men and women on the bench’ regardless of the harm that they inflict upon parties in court and the rest of the public nationwide.

That is how transformative change in the judicial and legal system can be set in motion by you, the media, and universities. It can lead to a new form of “government of, by, and for” We the People in the United States and the rest of the World. In that government, the People will for the first time in history assert their status as the sovereign source of all political power, entitled and empowered as masters of all their public servants, including their judicial public servants, to hold them accountable for their performance and liable to compensate the victims of their abuse of power.

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

Introduction

1. For decades, parties to lawsuits, whether represented by lawyers or without legal representation, i.e., pro ses, and other people have complained that journalists do not pay attention to their stories of abuse by judges that they have suffered or witnessed. But presently you and each of them have the opportunity to provide your respective story to a major news organization: Reuters. Last June 30, it published the first of its three-part report “The Teflon Robe” on its massive investigation of state judges. It found “hardwired judicial corruption”. Reuters asked readers to send it their stories of abuse by judges.
2. You endured judges’ abuse and fought back alone. That was a losing battle. Now you can fight back with Reuters on your side. That can be a winning battle. Endure the effort to read on, learn how to write your story, and send it to Reuters.
3. If you find it unreasonable to be asked to read an article written by a lawyer to help victims of, and witnesses to, judges, who are unaccountable and risklessly abuse their power, you did not suffer or see any abuse; the abuse was less painful than having to read; or you do not want to be compensated. Or maybe it is that you do not care that when you have to go to court, you will not be administered Equal Justice Under Law, but rather will be abused by “hardwired judicial corruption”.

Seize this opportunity to tell your story to Reuters and
through it perhaps to the rest of the world!

Table of Contents

    [¶¶1-3] Introduction

A. [¶¶4-6] The failure to read dooms pro ses to being disregarded and abused

B. [¶¶7-8] On being yet another lawyer or a historic Champion of Justice

C. [¶¶9-11] References to the paragraphs¶¶ that address readers’ frequent concerns

D. [¶¶12-13] What you and all Advocates stand to gain by reading on and writing your story

E. [¶¶14-17] Reuters has been “inundated” with stories; make yours light to float to the top

F. [¶¶18-22] Free aids to researching and writing your story

G. [¶¶23-24] Instructions for writing your story of unaccountable judges’ riskless abuse of power

1. 1. 1. 1. [¶¶25-31] Length of your story for Reuters: 500-words
         2. [¶¶32-36] The risk of opening an attachment and how to deal with its content
         3. [¶¶37-40] Subject, addressees, email addresses, and introductory paragraphs
         4. [¶¶41-49] The contents of your story: kind and quality of its information
         5. [¶¶50-55]  The two-phase method for writing your story
         6. [¶56]          Title and subtitle of a story of unaccountable judges’ riskless abuse of power
         7. [¶¶57-62]  Additional information in links embedded in text and as endnotes
         8. [¶63-65]    Sign and date your story

H. [¶¶66-69]  Advocates’ reciprocal revision of their stories, checklist, and chapter

I. [¶¶70-76]  Proposals to the media outlets and how they can benefit them

J. [¶¶77-81]  Offer of a presentation that can lead to forming a national movement

K. [¶¶82-84] Unique opportunity arising from the concurrence of circumstances

L. [¶85]         Every meaningful cause needs resources for its advancement; none can be continued, let alone advanced, without money

A. The failure to read dooms pro ses to being disregarded and abused

4. The questions that some pro ses have asked, the concerns that they have expressed, and the way they wrote their story and sent it to me rather than to Reuters, make me wonder whether they read the article hereunder or received only part of it.
5. Failure to read invites abuse. Most pro ses go to court, Congress, or state legislatures without having read even the brief of the opposing party, never mind the record of the case, court decisions, not even those on appeal!, treatises, law journals, the law that they want to apply or have amended, its legislative reports, history of enforcement, etc. Judges, politicians, and opposing counsel pick up in a second that they have no idea what they are talking about and take advantage of their ignorance to disregard and abuse them. Their abuse of pro ses as well as of represented parties and their lawyers is totally wrong. But pro ses went to court ignorant of the law and came out ignorant of their case. Theirs was willful ignorance…and laziness too, for one need not be college-educated to realize that if one is sent papers as part of a process in which one is a key participant, one needs to read them. What they got in court, they had it coming! If a lawyer goes in so unprepared, he or she is in addition liable to a malpractice suit.
6. There is self-contradiction in expecting many pro ses to read this article since it criticizes their failure to read. My criticism is born of tough love and practical considerations. So I share the article with everybody else. At least I do not waste all my effort and time writing it and encourage others to read and derive the benefit of reading: KNOWLEDGE IS POWER.

B. On being yet another lawyer or a historic Champion of Justice

7. If you are a lawyer, you too are abused by judges, who risklessly abuse their power for their gain and convenience, as shown by the official statistics^‡ of the federal courts submitted annually to Congress as a public document.
   ^‡ http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_judicial_accountability_presentation.pdf >OL2:455§§B, D

8. You can continue to go to court as one of the scores of thousands of lawyers in our country to argue yet another case. Or you can out of court expose the judges for the public to see their abuse of power. If you choose the latter, you will set in motion transformative change in the judicial and legal system. The public will recognize you here and abroad as a historic Champion of Justice. It is your choice.

C. References to the paragraphs¶¶ that address readers’ frequent concerns

9. You need not be proficient at writing. Simply follow the instructions in “The two-phase method for writing your story”, ¶¶50-55
10. Include in, or omit from, your story the kind of information stated in ¶¶41-49 to make it relevant, verifiable, aTnd illustrative of judges’ outrageous conduct.
11. Send your story to the writers of the Reuters and Boston Globe reports and to LexisNexis to their addresses in ¶37 using the subject set forth there.

D. Reuters has been “inundated” with stories; make yours light to float to the top

12. When Reuters published its “Teflon Robe” report on state judges, its reporters asked that people send them their stories of abuse by judges. Since scores of millions have been abused, many must have written to them. In fact, those reporters have stated that they have been “inundated” with their readers’ stories.
13. Thus, if you want your story read, you have to send it to Reuters written in only 500 words. The effort is more than worth it, considering the significant impact that your story and those of other people can have by limiting your story to 500 words.

E. What you and all Advocates stand to gain by reading on and writing your story

14. Underlying the sharing of this article and the asking of others to do likewise is enlightened self-interest: When we continue on our stubborn, self-centered way by “doing the same thing while expecting a different result”, which Einstein said “is the hallmark of irrationality”, and do so by going it alone in court, judges pick off each of us one at a time and wipe us out!
15. But thanks to the light that shines upon us when we inform ourselves by reading and think strategically, we recognize that only We the People, informed about, and outraged at, judges’ abuse of power, can compel politicians to take a stand on the issue at their every public appearance. Thereby the issue can be inserted into the 2020 campaign so that it becomes a decisive one on Election Day.
16. Such insertion will advance your, our, and the People’s interest in asserting our status as the masters of all our public servants, including judicial ones, entitled to hold all of them accountable and liable to compensate the victims of their abuse.
17. It is in our enlightened self-interest to make this email go viral. It can thus cause many victims of, and witnesses to, judges’ abuse to send their stories to the Reuters reporters. Those stories can convince Reuters and the reporters that they can advance their commercial and reputational interests by investigating federal judges, as proposed briefly infra §I and in detail at:
    http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-Reuters_judges_investigation.pdf and
    http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-Boston_Globe_judges_investigation.pdf

    F. Free aids to researching and writing your story

18. I offer various aids for you to write your story. The main one is my two-volume study* ^† of judges and their judiciaries, the product of professional law research and writing, and strategic thinking:

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. Open the downloaded volume using https://acrobat.adobe.com/us/en/acrobat/pdf-reader.html.

19. I also offer access to the website of Judicial Discipline Reform at http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org. The articles posted there have so positively impressed its countless webvisitors that it has turned 35,207 and counting into subscribers. You too can subscribe for free thus:

go to [here http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org]
<left panel ↓Register
or    + New   or   Users   >Add New.

20. Moreover, I offer advice herein on how to make your stories relevant, verifiable, and newsworthy because they inform the Reuters reporters –and through them possibly the national public too– of judges’ conduct that is outrageous. To benefit from it, you must, to begin with, read this article.
21. Actually, to EMPOWER YOURSELF WITH KNOWLEDGE read and reread and read again what follows until you understand it and can apply it to write your most relevant and verifiable story of judges’ outrageous abuse of power. This is your chance to tell your story to a major news organization, Reuters, that wants to hear it. Do your best job!
22. Any additional assistance from me can be obtained at the rate of my attorney’s fee of $350 per hour to be deducted together with all necessary and incidental expenses from a retainer paid in advance, whose amount is determined in light of the assistance that I am asked to provide.

G. Instructions for writing your story of unaccountable judges’ riskless abuse of power

23. You are not expected to write a story of publishable quality as if you were a professional journalist. But if you do your homework of research, writing, and editing to provide a relevant, verifiable, and outrageous story of unaccountable judges’ riskless abuse of power, you will appear honest and your story will sound credible. It may lead the Reuters “Teflon Robe” reporters to investigate and report it.a. Apply this strategic thinking principle: “People never listen more carefully than when they listen to avoid harm to themselves”. Make your story personal…to your readers. Let it be moving enough to cause them to take action to protect themselves; protest judges’ unaccountability and consequent riskless abuse of power; and join forces with you in a national movement to hold them accountable for their performance and liable to compensate their victims.
24. The “Teflon Robe” reporters are your most knowledgeable, demanding, and important readers: the ones who decide whether your story is representative of the suffering of millions of people abused by unaccountable judges so that it is worth investigating, editing, and publishing it. You are writing for them. They are your audience.

1. Length of your story for Reuters: 500 words

25. The “Teflon Robe” reporters have stated that they have been “inundated” with the stories of abuse by judges sent them by readers of their report. Therefore, do not expect them to read scores, let alone hundreds, much less thousands, of pages of documents and other papers relating to your one single story.
26. “Less is more” effective in causing those reporters to read, understand, and be outraged by the abuse committed by the judges in your story. Hence, limit your story to 500 words.
27. Make each of the 500 words count. If you cannot outrage readers with the most outrageous elements of your story told in 500 words, you will not outrage them by adding less outrageous details in the next 500+ words.
28. You know your story better than anyone else. Do not shift onto the Reuters reporters the task of figuring out what happened during the years of your struggle in court. Be the one to choose what is most relevant, verifiable, and outrageous.
29. Consider rewriting your story to reduce it to 500 words following these instructions and resubmit it to the Reuters reporters. If they need more information than what you provided in your word-limited story, they will contact you to ask for it.
30. A 500-word story that outrages readers at judges’ conduct takes more effort to write than page after page of rambling blather; but causes a more undiluted, concentrated, and memorable impact. Similarly, slapping a whiner’s tale onto the back of a napkin and without a second look sending it is not the sign of a great writer that states his message fast and concisely: It is what lazy people do.
    .
              a. If a victim of, or a witness to, a judge’s abuse takes the easy way out in writing her story, she is bound to make all sorts of grammatical, contents, and format mistakes. She will come across as a careless person, driven by the impulses of the moment, and unreflective. Her character will increase the plausibility that the way judges treated her was because ‘The paper that she filed in this court wasn’t a brief of legal arguments, but rather a personal, incoherent anecdote that she cobbled together, with all sorts of inconsistencies, absurd charges, and trivia that nobody could make heads or tail. Now she’s acting up as another disgruntled loser!’
31. “A genius”; said Thomas Alba Edison, the inventor, among many things, of the incandescent bulb that sheds light, “is 5% talent and 95% sweat”. Hard work is what turns the scribblings of the first draft into a piece of writing so significant that readers pay attention to it…and even act on it.

2. The risk of opening an attachment and how to deal with its content

32. An attachment is a security risk. By opening it, you may release into your computer malware that is hidden in the attachment as a Trojan horse, which can roam through your computer, steal private information, and delete files.

33. This explains why people who know anything about the Internet and the dangers lurking in it do not open attachments. Some email servers are configured not to accept and to bounce back emails with attachments.
34. It follows that you cannot tell your story by taking the easy way out of attaching a bunch of files to an email and sending it. “Lazy doesn’t work.”
35. If you have a file that you want to attach, copy its content and paste it to the body of a regular email.
36. In any event, today people receive an enormous amount of reading materials. Hence, it is much more effective for you to provide the attachment’s title and summarize its content. But you can do so much better for your story and yourself if you write it out in up to 500 words.

3. Subject, addressees and their email addresses, and introductory paragraphs

37. In the Subject: line of your email, use the subject used by all other victims of, and witnesses to, judges’ abuse. This will help the Reuters reporters realize that many people have not only appreciated their investigation of state judges, but also are requesting that they extend it to federal judges. You hinder the consideration of your story when you appear as the self-centered, odd man out, seeking  only your personal benefit without any regard for the interests of Reuters –which would bear the cost of any investigation– its audience, and the rest of the national public.

Subject: Reuters investigated state judges’ abuse of power and requested victims to share with it their stories. How you can write a newsworthy story for Reuters and ask that it investigate federal judges

To: michael.berens@thomsonreuters.com, john.shiffman@thomsonreuters.com, blake.morrison@thomsonreuters.com, tips@thomsonreuters.com

cc: tyler.duke@lexisnexis.com, austin.dunn@lexisnexis.com, Lane.Okney@lexisnexis.com, john.caminiti@lexisnexis.com, communication@lexisnexis.com, todd.wallack@globe.com, spotlight@globe.com, patricia.wen@globe.com, brian.mcgrory@globe.com, mark.morrow@globe.com, comments@globe.com, newsletters@email.bostonglobe.com, newstip@globe.com

38. Provide the information normally found in the letterhead of a business letter:

Your full name
address,
phone number,
email address, and,
if any, the link to your website.

39. Identify your addressees thus:

Reporters Michael Berens and John Shiffman, and editor Blake Morrison,
Reuters
victims of, and witnesses to, judges abuse of power,
lawyers, and Advocates of Honest Judiciaries

Dear editor Morrison, Messrs. Shiffman and Berens, victims, witnesses, lawyers, and Advocates,

40. Establish the connection between your story and the Reuters reporters. These introductory paragraphs do not count toward the 500 word of your story:

I read with interest your investigative report “The Teflon Robe”, published by Reuters on June 30, 2020. You reported having found “hardwired judicial corruption” among state judges. You invited your readers to submit a brief statement of their stories of abuse by judges. Kindly find mine hereunder.

My story took place first in state court and has now moved, or is likely to move, to federal court.

The federal rules of procedure and evidence have been adopted by all the states. What federal judges allow themselves to do, the state judges feel confident to do likewise. ‘As the federal judges, so their state counterparts’.

Frequently, state judges are elevated to the federal bench. Once there, they are not going to incriminate their former state peers, colleagues, and friends, whereby they would run the risk of incriminating themselves. It follows that removing a case to federal court does not provide a victim of an abusive state judge with any effective recourse.

Federal judges are the only ones with national jurisdiction. What they do or not do affects everybody in our country. Accordingly, it interests your current and potential audience.

Their abuse of power is even more outrageous than that of state judges because they are the only officers in the U.S. with a life appointment. In the 231 years since the creation of the Federal Judiciary in 1789, the number of them impeached and removed is 8! Their irremovability in practice explains why they abuse their power: It is riskless and profitable. Such abuse is what awaits those who file in federal court by removal or originally.

Moreover, federal judges dismiss 100% of complaints filed against any one of them, which by law must be filed with the respective chief circuit judge; and deny 100% of petitions to review those dismissals. They ensure their own unaccountability! http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_complaint_dismissal_statistics.pdf

Thus, I respectfully request that you extend your investigation to federal judges and expose their abuse of power. In this vein, I suggest that you examine the proposals for such extension made by Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq., in his article addressed to you at http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-Reuters_judges_investigation.pdf.

4. The contents of your story: kind and quality of its information

41. What is outrageous is not what goes outside the realm of reality or seems implausible or contrived, but rather what oversteps the bounds of moral and ethical standards and reasonable expectations of care, sense of duty, and decency. Outrageous is what a person does who has no shame . Your story must be based on relevant and verifiable information that outrages readers and stirs them up to protest.

42. Write a sober story: Avoid epithets, exaggerations, and self-serving ratings like ‘this is the most corrupt judge ever and done the most terrible abuse you can imagine in your dreams’. You do not have the breadth of knowledge needed to justify such baseless and pompous claim, most likely never having read anything other than your story. You are an abusee; the experts are the Reuters reporters, who have read thousands of cases. ‘Just give ‘em the facts’ and let them assess your story’s outrageousness from the judges’ conduct. They can draw comparative conclusions, if warranted.

43. What to omit. Abstain from emotional outbursts intended to elicit pity and appeal for commiseration. Do not appear emotionally fragile, unstable, or hypersensitive. You should not come across as a basket case.

44. Do not dilute your story’s relevance with every conceivable insignificant detail and petty grievance. A barrage of charges betrays incapacity to identify what is legally relevant. Do not diminish the credibility of your story with unfounded accusations, speculation, and extravagant claims. The account of a nightmare does not make for a serious story; it belongs in a horror movie.

45. Do not impair the verifiability of your story by making unprovable claims. Fantasy allegations turn your story into a fairy tale. Let professional investigators reveal what coming from a party, and as such biased toward her side of the story, sounds preposterous. Turn ‘reality that is stranger than fiction’ into a question:
.
a. Did he put his kids on food stamps although he earns a judges’ salary?!
.
b. Did the judge have the winning party hire her nephew only to have him pay her gambling debts?’
.
c. Does he tell his law clerks that if at the end of their clerkship when they search for a job they want him to write them a glowing letter of recommendation, which can earn them a substantial signing-up bonus from the hiring employer, they have to decide the cases assigned to him and write the decisions, which explains why the style of the decisions signed by him is so oddly different every year after the start of the new clerkship?
.

46. Also leave out anything on which honest people can reasonably hold different opinions. It falls within the judges’ wide margin of discretion. Your opinion is not entitled to more credibility than the judges’, especially since you are not a lawyer, but rather a biased party.

47. What to include.  Focus your story on the judges’ gross disregard for duty and the rule of law, especially their own violation of criminal law: e.g., denial of due process and equal protection of the law; conflict of interests; abuse of public office for self-enrichment; breach of confidential information; bribery; concealment of assets; tax evasion; money laundering; other violations of criminal laws; disregard of professional and ethical rules; cronyism; cover-up; ethnic, racial, socio-economic, gender, or religious bias; physical or sexual abuse; arbitrariness; and what offends the sense of decency and propriety of the man or woman in the street.

48. Provide pieces of information that can be treated as data: They can be scanned into a database to find the most convincing type of evidence: patterns of abuse by judges and their cronies, formed by the recurrence of the same information in the stories separately provided by different people.

49. You were an actor when almost everything happened and know almost everybody else who was involved. Do not expect the Reuters reporters to scramble for those pieces of information. Do the necessary research to find them. State them accurately. Indicate the source of the information whenever possible. What matters is, not the amount, but rather the quality of the information: relevant, verifiable, outraging, and useful as leads for journalists to conduct a professional investigation. So include the following:
.
a. the names of judges, parties, prosecutors, companies, government officers and offices, etc.
.
b. any meaningful, suspicious, or bias-inducing relation to each other:

1)  X and Y were former partners at Jay and Associates until May 2002, when X went to work for the DA’s office of D County in my state

2)  A and B had the opportunity to know each other when they attended W Law School in 1996-1999 or in 1998, when they were members of Law Review, according to their profiles in Facebook, W Alumni Association website, and W University quarterly magazine. [NOTE: In a law school there can be dozens of student clubs or societies for different types of law or social or political issues; check them!]

3)  S is identified as the sister in law of J in a photo, which I found by using face recognition software, in the 2019 annual report of Downtown Developing Company, which was in charge of the renovation of the W University Library and acknowledged all donors at a gala dinner in their honor

4)  court documents available through PACER –Public Access to Court Electronic Records; https://pacer.uscourts.gov – and the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, https://www.uscourts.gov/court-records, show that Judge P habitually orders a forensic accounting of cases before him by the accounting firm of CGV Accountants, whose bills are assigned as court costs payable by the party suing, or being sued by, a landlord or an insurance company

5)  annual financial disclosure reports required by the Ethics in Government Act are filed as public documents; those of judges are collected at https://www.judicialwatch.org/documents/categories/financial-disclosure/. The reports of Judge G show that the mortgage on his home is held by Bank E, the defendant in my case. This points to a gross conflict of interests along the lines, ‘if you make me win, I let you refinance your mortgage at no cost’.

c. the title, i.e., Plaintiff v. Defendant, docket number, and date of any case mentioned in your story; the names of the courts where it was filed and, if any, to which it was removed, city, state, and telephone number; the names of judges and court/law clerks that signed any decision, order, or letter; etc.

d. the dates of events and court filings and appearances, trying as hard as possible to include the day and the month, not only the year. A lazy reference to ‘some time ago’ or ‘several years back’, is unacceptable. Thanks to your effort, keen attention to detail, and analytical capacity to realize that ‘this is not normal’, ‘something like this doesn’t happen by coincidence’, you may be able to tell the Reuters reporters:

a. Strangely enough, on the day before every long weekend and travel to judicial conferences a lot of motions before Judge Q were entered ‘denied’, according to the docket available on the court’s website. With the stroke of a pen, he enhanced a care-free ‘holiday’, the harm to the rights of the parties and the waste of their motion filing fees notwithstanding. What other judicial duty does he treat with the same contempt and disregard for the consequences on other people?

5. The two-phase writing method

50. In phase one, use your creative spirit to draft your story: Sit at your computer and write on a word processing page whatever word, term, or phrase identifies a person, event, place, document, thing, idea, concept, etc., associated with your story. They are your story’s informational dots.

a. You are not yet trying to write grammatically correct and complete sentences. You only want to get started telling your story.

b. Let your stream of consciousness bubble up unrestrained by your thinking mind so that it sprinkles dots of your story all over the page. As related words, terms, and phrases flow up, keep adding them to the other dots on the page or between them.

c. To pull up dots from the well of your memory, ask yourself about your story the journalists’ W-questions: What!? Who? Where? When? How? Why? What now?

d. Keep asking of every word, term, phrase, and sentence concerning an event: “then what happened?…and then what did they say?…and then what did I do?…and then…?” They are alive in your mind. They can hear you. They can answer you. They will engage you in conversation.

e. If related questions emerge to the surface, but you cannot answer  them, only jot them down. This is not the time to tax your memory anymore; pass judgment on the questions’ relevance; or interrupt the free flow of ideas. Search for answers in phase two:

……….1) What was the name of the opposing party’s attorney?…and her law firm?

……….2) Did the judge issue an oral order from the bench or did he read one that he had written? Did he cite any law or rule?

……….3) Why did he order me to pay rent because the landlord had fixed the plumbing? I never told him and the landlord never filed an answer! How many times has this ‘expert’ testified for P?’

51. When you have about ten of those dots, move them up and down in a rough chronological order of appearance in your story. As you do so, add to them any other words, terms, and phrases that enlarge their meaning, identify them more narrowly, or should be inserted between them.
.
a. Keep reading the dots, even aloud. Put them in a jingle, make them rhyme even if they make no sense at all…and they will come alive!, dancing in your mind and inviting to dance other words, terms, and phrases that are dots.
.
b. Something like sentences will begin to appear. Keep ordering them chronologically and inserting more dots between them or enlarging them with details.
.
c. Painting by numbers, using stars to draw a constellation, you are connecting the dots into the sketch of a figure. It seems to be telling a story…your story! You can do this. You did it! You are telling your story!

52. Use a ‘balancing test’ to compare the dots’ weight of outrageousness for the story to make sense and be relevant. Remove to another page dots that feel ‘lighter’. You are starting to recognize a hierarchy among the dots, which will help you stay within the 500-word limit. Combine the dots into rough sentences. HOURS later you will feel that you have told your story from beginning to end. Let it sit for a day. You are not done, not even close: You only wrote your first draft. But you did!

53. In phase two, use your critical judgment to edit your story. Move around and connect the sentences in a way that will make sense to a person that does not know anything about you or your story. You are writing for the jury, which includes as jurors the Reuters reporters. Tell them your story. It must persuade them of the outrageousness of unaccountable judges’ riskless abuse of power and lead them to investigate your story and refer to it in their next report.

54. Revise your story; rewrite it; correct your grammar. Research it to provide accurate facts and relevant information that Reuters can verify; search for the answers to your jotted down questions. Avoid confusing your reader: Use the same word to refer to the same person, idea, event, etc. Self-editing will take longer than drafting your story: Dots were connected into a sketch. Now you are painting the sketch into the colored picture of a relevant, verifiable, and outrageous story.

55. Let it sit. Come back later for another session of phase-two. You are writing your story of being abused by judges and preparing your claim for compensation. Do the work that it takes to get it right.

6. Title, subtitle of a story of unaccountable judges’ riskless abuse of power

56. After you have written your story, you will recognize a theme running through it. Turn it into the title that expresses the nature of your story and highlights its most outrageous features.

[The title of your story: its summary in a sentence, e.g.]

How a judge failed to recuse himself from a case
where he approved the foreclosure on an apartment building,
the eviction of all the tenants, and
its conversion into an office building
by a development company in which he is a shareholder

How a judge once more declared another wealthy senior citizen incompetent and
appointed as her guardian a person to whom he regularly entrusts guardianships,
who squeezed every penny from her, and
then dumped her onto the state welfare system as an indigent

How a bankruptcy judge allowed the same bankruptcy trustee
to hold yet another unannounced auction
where only one and the same bidder showed up,
bought the debtor’s assets for pennies on the dollar, flipped them, and
made a killing…leaving me as the financial corpse

Bonfire of integrity at the penthouse:
Judges attending a judicial conference boasted about
how they cut corners on the law,
use parties’ information to enrich themselves and their partners, and
have clerks fudge documents; and
were overheard by the apparently invisible waiters and waitresses serving them,
who reported them to their chief circuit judge; and
although the chief deemed their reports complaints,
she dismissed them without the waiters and waitresses ever being called,
never mind heard, as part of any investigation

[subtitle of every story]

A reply to Reuters’s request for readers’ stories
of having been abused by judges

7. Additional information in links embedded in text and as endnotes

57. As stated in G2¶33 above, attachments are risky. Do not send them. Instead, turn a reference to a person, event, place, document, etc., into a linking blue text, which holds embedded in it a ‘hidden’, not visible, link. But it so happens at times that a reference loses its connection to the embedded link, whereby it becomes merely a non-linking blue text. So it is safer to provide a visible link right below the corresponding paragraph where the reference appears. Add those links after making sure that your story is within the 500-word limit.

58. Use superscripts if a paragraph contains one reference to X¹ here and another reference to Y² there, so as to identify the corresponding link.

¹ http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-Reuters_judges_investigation.pdf

² http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-Thomson_Reuters.pdf

59. Be reasonable: do not to clutter your story with dozens of links. Use your good judgment to identify the key ones. If the Reuters reporters need secondary documents, they will ask you for them.

60. Store the linked documents either on your website, DropBox, Google Plus, Academia, or any other cloud storage facility. Be aware that links are so much more useful if they identify the corresponding document rather than consist of a meaningless string of alphanumeric characters.

61. If need be, you may also provide a list of links at the end of your story. Add a brief description of what the corresponding document deals with:

See these supporting documents:

1. 1. 1. For an explanation of how a bankruptcy trustee and a bankruptcy judge run a bankruptcy fraud scheme and involve in it debtors and creditors, see http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_how_fraud_scheme_works.pdf
         .
      2. The exposure of how judges intercept the emails and mail of people in order to detect and suppress those of their critics can provoke national outrage more intense than did the revelation by Edward Snowden in 2013 of the collection of metadata of scores of millions of phone calls by the National Security Agency (NSA), which did not eavesdrop on, much less suppress, any call; http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_judges_ intercepting_emails_mail.pdf
         .
         3. On bringing radio, TV, and podcast talkshow hosts together to form a coalition that becomes a powerhouse of American politics just as the national TV networks are, see https://judicial-discipline-reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-Talkshow_hosts_coalition.pdf.

62. Be fair. Let them ‘talk’: Include in the list the documents of the opposing party and the decisions of the judges in your case. Be helpful: spare the Reuters reporters the need to search for those documents, which should be at your fingertips because you received them and obviously should have read them. Do not give the impression that you are hiding the other side of the story or that you are so self-centered and small-minded that you think your story only has one side: yours.

8. Sign and date your story

63. If your address, telephone number, and email address were not stated at the top of your story, state that information at the end of it. Show that you take responsibility for your story.

64. Moreover, your contact information will facilitate getting in touch with you to ask for any needed clarification or additional information.

65. Provide the date when you submit your story. That is a piece of information useful, in general, to order documents chronologically and, in particular, to establish your story’s currency, i.e., its ‘as of date’.

H. Advocates’ reciprocal revision of their stories, checklist, and chapter

66. Before submitting your story, share it with the Advocates of Honest Judiciaries to whom I send my articles –see the To: and cc: lines of my emails and ^†>OL2:1140¶28–; ask that they provide feedback on it just as you offer to do the same if they share with you theirs.

a. A competition for the title of “Protagonist of the Worst Abuse by Judges Ever” or the attitude “My story is more importan than yours cuse it effects more people” does not improve any story. They are egocentric and wasteful of everybody’s effort, goodwill, and time.

b. Cooperate to identify and rephrase, eliminate, or correct what is irrelevant; unverifiable; ambiguous; inconsistent; contradictory; digressive; repetitive; pretentious; self-aggrandizing; defamatory; a poor word choice; trite; in bad taste; foul language, which is absolutely impermissible; misspelled; unidiomatic; wrong syntax (word order); ungrammatical; etc.

67. All of you can draw up a ‘Checklist and Evaluation Form for Stories of Abuse of Power by Judges’. It can be used when composing the Annual Report on Judicial Unaccountability and Abuse of Power in America, as proposed at *>jur:126§3. http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_judicial_unaccountability_brochures_report.pdf

68. Reciprocal revision will afford you the opportunity to know each other. You can give rise to a chapter of Advocates who promote the formation of a national, civic, single issue movement for judicial abuse of power exposure, compensation of victims, and reform.

69. It will also give you an opportunity to show your willingness to work for free in the interest of We the People. By so doing, you will be working in your own enlightened interest (supra ¶¶14-17).

I. Proposals to the media outlets and how they can benefit them

70. After writing your 500-word story, point out to the Reuters and Boston Globe reporters(supra ¶40) that it is in their commercial and reputational interest to read and implement my proposals to them(^†>OL2:1125)^‡.
^‡ http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-Reuters_judges_investigation.pdf;

71. In brief, it is proposed that they:

A. Agree to a joint investigation with me that capitalizes on their experience investigating state judiciaries and my numerous leads(^*>OL:194§E) by applying them to expose federal judges’ coordinated abuse of power as their modus operandi to run the Federal Judiciary as a racketeering enterprise; http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_institutionalized_judges_abuse_power.pdf >OL:194§E

B. Publish one or a series of my articles exposing federal judges’ unaccountability and consequent riskless abuse of power; https://judicial-discipline-reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_judicial_abuse_forms.pdf

1) One of those articles can expose Supreme Court nominee Judge Amy Coney Barrett’s condonation of, and participation in, the abusive 100% self-exoneration of federal judges from complaints filed against them in the Seventh Circuit, and/or their underlying misconduct complained-about, similar to the articles collected in http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_complaint_dismissal_statistics.pdf

C. Hold unprecedented citizens hearings on judges’ abuse of power. They will be conducted at media outlets and universities by professors, journalists, and experts in Information Technology, forensic and fraud accounting, bankruptcy, money laundering, etc., to take the testimony of victims of, and witnesses to, judges’ abuse as well as other experts wherever they are since they will be heard via video conferences, made accessible to the national public through interactive multimedia, thus inexpensively and without involving travel

D. Develop the website at http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org, as proposed in my business plan(^†>OL2:1022)^♠, to turn it from an informational platform into:

1) a clearinghouse for complaints uploaded by anybody; and

2) a research center for fee-paying clients searching many writings from many sources that can reveal the most persuasive type of evidence: judges’ patterns, trends, and schemes of abuse of power.
^♠ https://judicial-discipline-reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-Capital_Investors.pdf

72. “Scandal sells”, every media outlet and journalist know it. Can you imagine a more outrageous scandal than the exposure of federal judges’ abusing their unaccountability to coordinate their power in order to risklessly run their Federal Judiciary for their gain and convenience as a racketeering enterprise?…and that at a time when the national public is shouting self-assertively the rallying cry:

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

73. The Reuters reporters can pioneer exposing federal judges and thereby win a Pulitzer Prize.

74. They can become recognized for prompting a generalized media investigation of federal judges’ individual and collective abuse of power.

75. That can set off transformative change in the judicial and legal system. From that change can emerge a different “government of, by, and for” We the People…and those of the rest of the World. Indeed, the demand for such change can become an international movement, as did MeToo! and the protest against police brutality and for racial and economic equality.

76. For the first time in history, the People, as the masters of all public servants, would hold their judicial public servants accountable for their performance and liable to compensate the victims of their abuse of power.

J. Offer of a presentation that can lead to forming a national movement

77. I offer to make via video conference to you and your group a presentation on this article leading to a Questions and Answers session.

78. This presentation can be helpful in starting to do what is essential for a group of people to organize and develop into a national civic single issue movement for judicial abuse of power exposure, compensation of victims, and reform: agree on division of labor. People agree to do what they are best at or what they recognize must be done to advance the interests of the group.

79. Any organization has staff and skills requirements. Organizing Advocates, victims, witnesses, and experts to expose unaccountable judges’ riskless abuse of power calls for:

a. lawyers, journalists, and business people to “pioneer the news and publishing field of judicial unaccountability reporting“

b. community leaders and public relations officers to connect to people and organizations; develop local chapters, and coalesce them into a national movement

c. law researchers and online researchers who know how to use software for recognizing faces, voices, places, etc.; locating documents in public and private databases; etc.

d. computer forensic and Internet Technology experts to protect our digital network from interceptors and hackers, and find out whether the emails and mail of people have been intercepted to detect and suppress those critical of judges;

e. lawyers to provide the novel niche legal service of forming and representing the class of victims demanding compensation from judges and their judiciaries

f. organizers of online and field tour presentations; and half and one-day seminars on a variety of subjects dealt with in the study* ^† of judges and their judiciaries

g. monitors in charge of the technical aspect of online presentations, e.g., getting people connected, recording them, sharing documents during the presentation, etc.

h. experts in fraud and forensic accounting

i. strategists and lobbyists of Congress and state legislatures

j. advertisers of activities, e.g., by mass emailing and placing press releases

k. developers of Judicial Discipline Reform at http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org

l. developers of software for conducting statistical, linguistic, and literary audits of judicial writings to ascertain authorship; detect behavioral patterns and biases; and impugn past and predict future judicial behavior

m. sellers of advertisement spots on that website to providers of goods and services

n. fundraisers

o. accountants

p. office managers

q. secretaries

r. handyman

79. A group to which a presentation is make can develop into a chapter of the national movement for judicial abuse of power exposure, compensation, and reform. There is precedent for this:

a. People who deemed themselves Taxed Enough Already got together at homes and backyards to discuss how to spread the word. They did it so effectively that they formed groups nationwide. Those groups became chapters. In turn, the chapters coalesced into the Tea Party. In less than 10 years, the Party grew so strong that it dominated presidential politics!

80. To decide whether to accept my presentation offer, you may wish to watch my video and follow it with its slides:

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

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

81. Thereafter you can get in touch with me using the contact information below to discuss the terms of the presentation and schedule it.

K. Unique opportunity arising from the concurrence of circumstances

82. Reuters and Boston Globe dare investigate and expose state judges. The national public has grown intolerant of any form of abuse and is wielding its strongest political power: voting at a presidential election, which is among the most polarizing and antagonistic ones in our history. The confirmation of a Supreme Court nominee will focus national attention on everything judicial.

83. These circumstances have given rise to a unique opportunity to persuade those and other media outlets to investigate federal judges for the stated reasons(supra ¶41) and publish this and my other articles exposing judges’ abuse of power. Thereby the issue of judges’ unaccountability and riskless abuse of power can be inserted into the 2020 campaign and thereafter into the national discourse. Informed and outraged, the national public may turn that issue into a decisive one on Election Day and from then on. That Day is approaching very fast.

84. As a result, time is of the essence. Let’s get to work.

a. write your story of abuse by judges and send it together with this article to the media^‡ mem-bers whose emails are listed in ¶37 supra; encouraging them to accept the proposals in ¶71;

^‡ http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-Reuters_judges_investigation.pdf;

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

b. share this article with all your friends, relatives, and acquaintances; and

c. post it to social media, such as:

LinkedIn                      Facebook                       Youtube

Google Plus               Instagram                       Pinterest

Twitter: Share with Reuters your story of abuse of power by judges and ask that it also investigate federal judges, who are unaccountable and risklessly run their Judiciary as a racketeering enterprise; http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_your_story_for_Reuters.pdf

L. Every meaningful cause needs resources for its advancement;
none can be continued, let alone advanced, without money

85. The study* ^† of judges and their judiciaries (supra ¶18) and this article were produced by the professional law research and writing, and strategic thinking of:

Judicial Discipline Reform

Subscribe for free to its articles similar to this one:

go here [ http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org]  <left panel ↓Register   or
+ New   or   Users   >Add New.

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

DONATE

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

by making a deposit or an online transfer to Citi Bank,
routing number 021 000 089, account 4977 59 2001

or by mailing a check to:

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. and ^†>OL2:1114§G, when emailing him, copy the above bloc of his email addresses and paste it in the To: line of your email so as to enhance the chances of your email reaching him at least at one of those addresses.
* http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf
^† http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates2.pdf

Their exposure can so outrage a public intolerant of abuse of power that the public forces the issue into the 2020 campaign, leading to transformative change in the administration of justice and the current form of government

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

The link to this file is: http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-Reuters_judges_investigation.pdf

Reporters Michael Berens and John Shiffman,
and editor Blake Morrison
Reuters, michael.berens@thomsonreuters.com, john.shiffman@thomsonreuters.com, blake.morrison@thomsonreuters.com, tips@thomsonreuters.com, editors@veteranstoday.com, “Veterans Today Managing Editor Jim W. Dean” <jimwdean@aol.com>, “VT Senior Editor Gordon Duff” <gpduf@aol.com>, Andrea.Januta@thomsonreuters.com, Caroline.Monahan@thomsonreuters.com, Corinne.Perkins@thomsonreuters.com, Isabella.Jibilian@thomsonreuters.com, Troy.Dunkley@thomsonreuters.com, Pete.Hausler@thomsonreuters.com,
and
all other reporters, editors, and Advocates of Honest Judiciaries

Dear Messrs. Morrison, Shiffman, and Berens, reporters, editors, and Advocates,

I read with interest your investigative report “The Teflon Robe”, published by Reuters on June 30, 2020, which “exposes hardwired judicial corruption” whereby “[t]housands of U.S. judges who broke laws or oaths remained on the bench” even though they “have made racist statements, lied to state officials and forced defendants to languish in jail without a lawyer – and then returned to the bench…sometimes with little more than a rebuke from the state agencies overseeing their conduct”.

In fact, your “findings reveal an “excessively” forgiving judicial disciplinary system”. Despite judicial conduct review commissions, “state and local judges have repeatedly escaped public accountability for misdeeds that have victimized thousands…the system tends to err on the side of protecting the rights and reputations of judges while overlooking the impact courtroom wrongdoing has on those most affected by it”.

Commissions may take years to start investigating a judge; have “special rules for judges” because “[m]ost states afford judges accused of misconduct a gentle kind of justice” while other “rules can leave lawyers and litigants fearing retaliation” so that they “intimidate anyone with a legitimate complaint”; drop a complaint after having “raised questions about whether proper procedures had been followed”; and allow judges to ‘return to the bench virtually unscathed’, while ‘victims of judicial misconduct are left uncompensated’, ‘“really losing sight of what a justice system should be all about”’.

No charge sticks to judges. Their Teflon robes cloaks them in impunity…while the public is exposed to misconduct by the complained-against judge and all the other members of the judicial system. Judges are unaccountable. The public is at their mercy and their victims are uncompensated. And state judges are not the only ones to wear Teflon robes.

A. Proposal for a joint investigation of federal judges and its justification

1. This is a proposal for a joint investigation extending yours of state judges to federal judges, the only ones with national jurisdiction so that their decisions and orders are apt to affect and even harm everybody in our country. Hence, the audience for its findings is the national public.

2. The target of the investigation is not misconduct that can be explained away as limited to individual rogue judges, whose removal and punishment would suffice to deal with the problem.

3. Rather, the investigative target is forms of abuse of power so pervasive and necessarily coordinated among federal judges as to constitute their modus operandi: It is abuse so interwoven with their way of doing business that it has been institutionalized in the Federal Judiciary. Their motive is grabbing illegal gain and convenience. Given that their abuse is so organized and influences all aspects of their activity, federal judges run the Federal Judiciary as a racketeering enterprise.

a. In fact, no lesser a politician than Senator Elizabeth Warren dare denounce in her “I have a plan for the Judiciary too” the systematic failure of federal judges to recuse themselves from cases in which they hold shares in the company of one of the parties before them and resolving the ensuing conflict of interests by favoring that party so as to maintain or increase the value of their shares. Sen. Warren has identified the circumstance enabling federal judges to commit such abuse to be their unaccountability. She has named it abusive self-enrichment.

b. Federal judges’ self-enrichment by abusing their power necessarily entails the crimes of:

1)  concealment of assets

2)  tax evasion

3)  money laundering

4)  fraud on the parties through intentional frustration of judicial process predicated on fairness and impartiality

5)  breach of contract for judicial services entered into with no intention to perform it and thus, in bad faith

6)  breach of their oath and of public trust causing injury in fact.

c. Federal judges have the means of committing those crimes:

1) The Federal Judiciary has a nationwide computer network run by expert personnel. It maintains a database that stores hundreds of millions of briefs, records, motions, applications, letters, decisions, orders, etc., and carries out electronic filings, retrievals, docket entries, daily schedule updating, database searches, etc.

2) It has leverage over the intelligence agencies, which run more extensive and sophisticated networks and whose secret requests for secret orders authorizing secret surveillance under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act must be approved by its judges.

d. Would you and the rest of the public trust federal judges to care about administering to you “Equal Justice Under Law” although they have no qualms about breaking the law to ensure their abusive self-enrichment? ‘He who can do the more can do the lesser.’

4. The exposure of federal judges’ institutionalized abuse will have a substantial financial and journalistic impact. “Scandal sells”, and it can sell for years. Thus, it can render the investigation more cost-effective. Also, it can lead to a permanent increase in a media outlet’s audience and reputation.

5. Moreover, the exposure can provoke such public outrage as to insert the issue of judges’ abuse into the presidential campaign. By journalism having such impact, it can set in motion transformative change in both the administration of justice and the rest of government, as discussed below.

6. The proposed joint investigation of federal judges is based on an investigative plan with many leads that allow for it to be focused and cost-effective(infra 1132§F; *>jur:194§E); https://judicial-discipline-reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_institutionalized_judges_abuse_power.pdf.

B. Proposal for the publication of one or a series of my articles

7. An investigation takes time and Election Day is fast approaching. The nominating conventions offer a national digital or physical venue where to force some politicians to address in their own defense the issue of judges’ abuse of power or to enable others to address it voluntarily to position themselves as leaders of those who demand that such abuse be detected, punished, and prevented and that the victims be compensated.

8. Since time is of the essence and to take advantage of the conventions, I propose that you publish upon payment to me one or a series of my articles exposing institutionalized abuse of power in the Federal Judiciary. They are written and available through the links hereunder for you to review.

9. The foundation of the proposed articles as well as of the proposed joint investigation is my two-volume professional study* ^† of judges and their judiciaries. Its originality lies on its pioneering analysis of the courts’ official statistics and reports annually submitted by law to Congress, whose politicians have a vested interest in disregarding them, the detriment to the public notwithstanding. 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 number up to OL:393

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

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

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

iii. 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.

10. Those statistics show that the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act of 1980, 28 U.S.Code §§351-364, (the Act) entrusts federal judges with the exclusive authority to self-discipline. This means that any complaint against a federal judge must be filed, not with any alleged ‘independent’ judicial conduct review commission, but rather with the respective chief circuit judge, whose decision is reviewable only by his or her peers and colleagues in the circuit’s judicial council. All of them have abused their authority year after year by dismissing 100% of complaints and denying 100% of petitions to review those dismissals. They have turned their robes of Teflon into the wings of birds of prey to fly high above their bench and perch themselves as Judges Above the Law well above the people in the courtroom and everywhere outside it(*>jur:10-14; ^†>OL2:548, 748); http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_complaint_dismissal_statistics.pdf

11. Other forms of judges’ abuse of power provide the subject for proposed articles, hereunder reduced to blurbs(more details at ^†>OL2:1097§G; and with articles downloadable through their respective links); http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_judicial_abuse_forms.pdf

a. How unaccountability corrupts and institutionalizes abuse of power(*>jur:49§4; OL:265)

b. Senator Elizabeth Warren’s denunciation of judges’ abusive self-enrichment(^†>OL2:1003); http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-media_DARE.pdf

c. Judges’ bankruptcy fraud scheme(*>jur:9; ^†>OL2:614); http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_how_fraud_scheme_works.pdf

d. How Covid has ushered in a new legal market(^†>OL2:1066); http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_adapting_to_new_legal_market.pdf

e. How Covid-caused bankruptcies will allow judges to take advantage of, and aggravate people’s financial and emotional distress(^†>OL2:984); http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-Thomson_Reuters.pdf

f. “The math of abuse” demonstrates judges’ failure to read most briefs, each of which costs a party $Ks and even $10Ks to produce and becomes a compensable waste(^†>OL2:760); http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_judges_do_not_read.pdf

g. The sham hearings in the Federal Judiciary and Congress on judicial accountability, involving judges/politicians’ connivance and their fraud on witnesses and the public(^†>OL2:1056); http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-reporters_clerks.pdf

h. The Chief Justice’s presiding over Trump’s removal trial with disregard for “traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice” can on grounds of equal protection of the law and privileged communications be invoked by anybody as precedent for refusing discovery(^†>OL2:1040); http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-parties_invoking_impeachment_trial.pdf

i. The abuse of power committed or tolerated by Supreme Court justices provides the grounds for petitioning President Trump to authorize the release of the FBI vetting reports on them (^†>OL2:1095§D). The petition will open avenues of investigation, not to mention any report released; http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_abuse_by_justices.pdf

j. Judges’ interception of people’s emails and mail to detect and suppress those of their critics This is the form of abuse likely to outrage the People the most because it affects directly the largest number of persons and deprives them of their most cherished rights, to wit, those guaranteed by the 1st Amendment of “freedom of speech, the press, and to assemble [on the Internet or by letter] to petition the government [of which judges constitute the 3^rd branch] for a redress of grievances”(OL2:1081, 781); http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_judges_intercepting_emails_mail.pdf

j. Other proposed articles are listed at ^†>OL2:719 and suggested by the program of activities(OL2:978§E) for a multidisciplinary team(^*>jur:128§4) to expose judges’ abuse of power.

C. Proposal for universities and the media to hold unprecedented citizen hearings

12. I also propose the holding of unprecedented citizen hearings(^†>OL2:1053§E; 1078§F). They are to be: https://judicial-discipline-reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_citizen_hearings-Professors.pdf

a. conducted jointly by journalists, professors, and other experts rather than the politicians who have connivingly elevated their judicial candidates to judgeships and justiceships and since then protect ‘our men and women on the bench’ despite the harm that they cause parties, the rest of the public, and the integrity of judicial process;

b. held at universities and media outlets;

c. intended for people to testify to the abuse by judges that they have suffered or witnessed;

d. broadcast nationwide through interactive multimedia so that witnesses and the public can participate inexpensively and in the largest number wherever they are; and

e. summited at the first-ever and nationwide conference on judges’ abuse of power, where the findings will be presented. The conference, which can be organized by university students (*>dcc:11, 31), can lead to events that bring about transformative change(^†>OL2:1069§E) in the administration of justice and the rest of government here and abroad:

1)  the grassroots formation of a constitutional convention, such as the one called by 34 states since April 2, 2014, thus satisfying Article V of the Constitution, but that the leaders in Congress have no intention of ever convening, lest they lose their position of power and privilege. In fact, the convention can run away from the given agenda as did the one called in 1787 only to amend the Articles of Confederation, but which ended up tearing them up and drafting the current Constitution of 1789. The convention can end up reasserting the People’s status as the sovereign source of all political power and the masters of all public servants, including judicial public servants, whom the People are entitled to hold accountable for their performance and liable to compensate the victims of their abuse(*>jur:158§§6-8);

2)  the formation of local chapters -similar to those backyard groups of people fed up with high taxes, who became more structured in chapters, and coalesced into the national Tea Party, which in less than 10 years came to be unified enough to dominate presidential politics- where parties will collectively demand from courts and their judges the refund of court filing fees for services not rendered; compensation for wasteful briefs required but not read; punitive damages; etc.(^†>OL2:1074§C); https://judicial-discipline-reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_inform_outrage_be_compensated.pdf

3) the organization of pro se litigants, who constitute more than 50% of the parties to appeals to the federal circuit courts of appeals(^†>OL2:455§B). Their cases are officially weighted as a third of a case regardless of the nature of the subject matter and the gravity of the conduct of the parties or its consequences. As a result, judges are both authorized and expected not to waste on a pro se case more than one third of the effort, time, and resources that they do on a case where both parties are represented by attorneys. While pro ses are not alerted to the fact the they will be given a third rate day in court, they are required to pay the full amount of court filing fees and produce expensive briefs(^†>OL2:781§A). The conference will provide a propitious venue for pro ses to join forces with public defender and civil rights entities; lawyers who volunteer hours every month to work with indigent parties; law school law clinics run by professors and students; and law firms that take cases pro bono(^*>OL:131 and next article infra).

4) the drawing of the attention of talkshow hosts to their interest in forming the Coalition of Talkshow Hosts for Justice, intended to become the loudspeaker for victims of, and witnesses to, judges’ abuse of power, thereby turning the Coalition into a national TV-network-like political powerhouse. The conference can facilitate the hosts’ meeting in person or through video conference, thus boosting such formation; https://judicial-discipline-reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-Talkshow_hosts_coalition.pdf

5)  a MeToo!-like worldwide movement can be launched that terminates the millennial impossible of holding judges accountable by eliminating their immunity as representatives of their appointers, “the king[, who] can do no wrong”, and subjecting them to the current reality that all other officers and everybody else are accountable for their acts and liable to compensation for even the accidents that they cause unintentionally, never mind their abuse, as are police and their departments, doctors and their hospitals, lawyers and their law firms, priests and their churches, journalists and their media outlets, pharmaceutical officers and their companies, etc.; http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-International_Team.pdf

6)  the meeting with officers of academia, the media, and investors to discuss the creation of the institute of judicial unaccountability reporting and reform advocacy(^†>jur:130§5). The plan is for the institute to be attached to a top university; staffed by professionals and students(jur:128§4) who execute a program of activities in education, litigation, research, etc.(^†>OL2:978§E); and carry on as the advanced stage of the multidisciplinary academic and business venture(jur:119§A); http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_Institute_judicial_unaccountability_reporting.pdf.

D. Proposal to develop a website as a multidisciplinary academic & business venture

13. I have posted some of my articles to my website, to wit, Judicial Discipline Reform at http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org. They have elicited such a positive reaction in its many visitors that as of this writing [on 26july20] 32,935 and counting have become subscribers(^†>OL2:Appendix 3). This calls to mind the business model of the Internet: give free access to attractive basic contents put on a website; when there are enough visitors sell them goods and services that you and advertisers offer; and provide access for a fee to advanced contents.

14. The posted articles are in long form. They are written for an educated audience accustomed to concentrating on what they are reading, particularly since my website has no pictures or videos. My site is akin to a professional journal, e.g., a law review, and the articles are similar to briefs submitted to a court of appeals by a law firm representing well-heeled clients. Thus, the subscribers to my site are likely to be professionals, affluent, and so willing to make an effort to understand my articles as to subscribe for more…like those who pay to read The New York Times Sunday Magazine.

15. A business savvy publisher or venture capitalists can invest in further developing The Judicial Discipline Reform website as proposed in my business plan(^†>OL2:1022), whose implementation is guided by the principle, “Making money while doing justice”. It can become, among other things: http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-Capital_Investors.pdf

a. a clearinghouse for complaints(^†>OL2:918) about judges by victims of, and statements of witnesses to, their abuse. Today they are held by judges secretly. However, they can be up-loaded for free by the victims and the witness exercising their 1^st Amendment right to freedom of speech, of the press, the right of the people peaceably to assemble [by email and on social media too], and to petition the Government [of which judges are the third branch] for a redress of grievances [including the payment of compensation]”(OL2:792¶1)

b. a research center that upon payment of a one-time or subscription fee enables users to audit (*>OL:274-280, 304-307) many complaints; judges’ annual mandatory filing of financial disclosure reports(*>jur:102§a), which are misleading(jur:105^213b); and their decisions and other writings in search of the most persuasive type of evidence, i.e., patterns(^†>OL2: 792§A), trends(OL2:455§§B, D), and schemes(OL2:614, 929) of abuse of power. It will develop software for statistical, linguistic, and literary analysis of writings to ascertain authorship, biases, impeaching-inconsistencies, etc.(OL:42, 60, 115, 255; jur:131§b)

c. an investigative center that coordinates and conducts here and abroad library, digital, and field investigations of judges’ abuse and their connivance with politicians; and disseminates its findings through a tour of presentations(OL:197§G) that promotes the formation of a civic movement for judicial abuse exposure, compensation of victims, and reform.

E. Inserting the issue in the 2020 campaign and sparking transformative change

16. The above proposals aim to form that movement by implementing the out-of-court inform and outrage strategy: inform the national public of abuse of power risklessly committed by federal judges due to their unaccountability and so outrage the public as to stir it up to demand of every politician, whether incumbent or running for election, to take a stand on the issue at every digital or physical rally, townhall meeting, interview, and press conference.

17. That information can outrage We the People. They can insert the issue of unaccountable judges’ abuse of power in the 2020 campaign as a decisive one, setting in motion transformative change: what emerges from the change is substantially different from what was initially subjected to it.

a. Until the nature, extent, and gravity of judges’ abuse has not been fully exposed, no discussion of what to change and into what to change it is opportune. The outrage provoked by the information about their abuse will turn change inconceivable today into necessary and unavoidable measures to ensure transparency, integrity, accountability, and liability.

18. The objective of inserting the judicial abuse issue into the campaign has reliable precedents:

a. 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 in a matter of days to the emergence worldwide of the MeToo! movement.

b. The news about the killing of George Floyd by white police officers provoked that very night protest demonstrations nationwide. Since then an outraged public has forced politicians at the municipal, state, and federal levels to take a stand on police brutality and even debate the adoption of the federal Justice in Policing bill and its state counterparts.

c. The People, outraged at lack of progress in racial equality, are now taking down the statues representing racial abusers.

d. The People will be all the more outraged upon being informed that even if a Justice in Policing bill were enacted it would be still have to be enforced according to its letter and spirit by the police, the prosecutors, and the judges. However, these are interdependent actors that need each other for their electoral survival, physical protection, and judicial exoneration, such as that enjoyed in effect by General Flynn, Michael Cohen, and Paul Manafort.

19. These precedents show that the present time is the most opportune to expose federal judges’ abuse: There is no better time to publish than when the audience is expecting avidly what one has to publish. The public mood is receptive to the exposure of abusers. The People are shouting self-assertively the rallying cry: Enough is enough! We won’t take any abuse by anybody anymore.

20. Nobody has more power to abuse than judges, for they are the ones who issue the ultimate orders disposing of our property, our liberty, and all the rights and duties that frame our lives and shape our identities. Among them, federal judges have the most ordering and staying power:

a. Federal judges are the only officers in the country to have a life-appointment. Historically, it has ensured them of irremovability in practice regardless of their abuse(*>jur>21§a).

b. The Constitution, Article III, Section 1, forbids the diminution of their salary while in office.

c. Their power of retaliation is devastating: While in theory Congress could take back the self-disciplining authority that in the Act(supra ¶10) it granted federal judges and replace it with a mechanism that effectively held them accountable, it would never dare do so:

1) A single district judge suspended nationwide President Trump’s Muslim travel ban, and a three-judge appellate panel upheld that suspension nationwide, although two panel members would have sufficed to achieve the same result.

2) Federal judges can hold any law passed by Congress –and even any state legislature– unconstitutional. They can render null and void one after the other all the legislative pieces of the political agenda of a party who allows any of its members to do what is anathema to judges: ‘Don’t you ever try to hold us accountable!…If you need orders to force your political opponents to produce documents or appear to testify, don’t even think of asking us to issue them! They are already denied! denied! denied!’(OL2:546)

d. The corollary is that federal judges wield power of self-immunization: In fact, the Supreme Court has held, “A judge will not be deprived of immunity because the action he took was in error, was done maliciously, or was in excess of his authority”(*>jur:26§d). The justices have arrogated to themselves and their peers what no person is entitled to in government by the rule of law: impunity. They have abused their power to strip Congress of its authority under the Constitution to apply checks and balances on the Judiciary and its judges.

21. Only one entity has stronger power than judges: an informed and outraged We the People, especially when voting at a presidential election and all the more so if assembled in a constitutional convention…or if the Judiciary loses its abusers in chief: the justices of the Supreme Court.

F. Beginning at the top: exposing the justices’ commission and cover-up of abuse

22. The proposed joint investigation, publication of my articles, citizen hearings, and the development of the website will enable initially one courageous and nimble media outlet, e.g., Reuters, and subsequently ever more outlets, to do what Congress not dare consider: Expose the abuse that the Supreme Court justices have committed since they were in the lower courts and continue to commit as justices and to cover up reciprocally as peers and as circuit justices allotted to the several circuits under 28 U.S.C. §42. Here applies the aphorism: “The cover-up is worse than the original crime”. http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_abuse_by_justices.pdf

a. Those who ‘only’ have kept silent have become accessories after the abuse committed by the principal and which they knew or could have known about but for their indifference and willful ignorance or blindness(*>jur:90§§b, c), for they had a legal and ethical duty to report it -18 U.S.C. §3057; Code of Conduct for judges, Canon 3B(6) (*>jur:68fn^123a)-.

b. They are accessories before the abuse that the principal or others will be encouraged to commit by the implicit or explicit assurance that the accessories by silence will not report them.

c. In either case, the silent judges contributed to the principal going unpunished while keeping the benefit of the abuse; the victim going uncompensated while suffering more abuse or its consequences; and the system of justice deteriorating through the erosion of public trust because “unchecked abuse festers” until it becomes the institutionalized modus operandi.

23. There are precedents supporting the expectation that an informed and outraged public can make holding on to office untenable, forcing resignations:

a. Public outrage at the conduct of Supreme Court Justice Abe Fortas forced him first to withdraw his name as a nominee to the chief justiceship; and because the outrage would not subside, he had no choice but to resign from the Court on May 14,1969(*>jur:92§d).

b. After the MeToo! movement erupted overnight and Chief Justice Roberts had received almost 700 letters from current and former law clerks informing him of the abuse that they had suffered or witnessed in their respective court, the Chief Justice was forced to take action by referring for investigation by the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit a judge who had been known for decades to be an abuser: Former 9^th Circuit Chief Judge Alex Kozinski. He chose to resign on December 18, 2017(OL2:645§A) rather than be investigated.

c. One report of abuse of power, i.e., that filed by the White House officer who blew the whistle on P. Trump’s Ukrainian quid pro quo affair, provoked such public outrage that it led the House to impeach the President and the Senate to hold a trial to remove him from office.

d. The Washington Post was the first to report on the break-in on June 17, 1972, at the National Democratic Convention located in the Watergate building complex in Washington, DC. Initially, it was derided as “a garden variety burglary by five plumbers”. But reporters Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein, supported by editor Benjamin Bradlee and publisher Katherine Graham, kept digging in. Their findings pointed to political espionage and a cover up plotted and executed by top Republican officers working for the reelection of President Nixon. Soon every other media outlet was jumping on their investigative bandwagon. Then the unthinkable happened: For their participation in those crimes, P. Nixon resigned on August 8, 1974, and all his White House aides were convicted and sentenced to jail.(*>jur:4 ¶¶10-14); http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-Washington_Post.pdf

1)  A question asked consistently of every witness by Senator Howard Baker, co-chair of the Senate Watergate Committee, became a guiding and productive investigative tool and can be rephrased here thus: ‘What did the justices know about justices’ and judges’ abuse of power and when did they know it’?

e. The Catholic Church is an institution rooted in society and protected by the First Amendment state-church separation clause. Yet, due to its institutionalized condonation of abuse by pedophilic priests, it has had to pay its victims well over $2.2 billion in compensation. Outraged victims that had been left uncompensated by the running of the statute of limitations forced legislators in at least 15 states to enact lookback laws that allow the filing of sexual abuse claims stretching back decades. Some 5,000 new cases could force the Church to compensate the victims by paying them more than $4 billion. The Church runs the risk of going bankrupt.

24. The national public’s outrage at abuse of power by police and federal militias can become so exacerbated by information about institutionalized abuse in the Federal Judiciary as to force the resignation of justices and even the Supreme Court as a whole. The Judiciary, exposed as a racketeering enterprise run by a board of complicit abusers, can go morally bankrupt and face crushing financial claims. The justices may find it unavailing to attempt to brush away the outrage by simply invoking the doctrine of judicial immunity that they have self-servingly conjured up(*>OL:158). http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_no_judicial_immunity.pdf

25. A whole branch operated by judges abusing their personal and institutional unaccountability can be found so inherently defective as to warrant its dissolution. The form of government of which it is part can likewise be so defective as to need its replacement by a new form yet to be devised by We the People, the ones entitled to do so in “government of, by, and for the people”(*>jur:82¹⁷²).

26. Informed of, and outraged at, the abuse heaped on them, the People can bring about transformative change. They can ensure that justice is administered and government is operated by public servants who remain accountable and liable to them. They will be grateful to the journalists and the others who were instrumental in such transformation, honoring them with, among other things(*>OL:3§F), a Pulitzer prize, a bestseller, a blockbuster movie, the study of their feat at every journalism school, and the most valuable and enduring reward: historic recognition as Champions of Justice…not only of the People of this country, but of every country in the world(supra ¶12e) where they can spark a civic movement for judges’ abuse of power exposure, compensation, and reform.

G. My offer to present this proposal to you and your colleagues and publisher

27. I offer to make a presentation on this proposal via video conference or in person. To decide whether to accept, see http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_judges_abuse_video.mp4. and

http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_judges_abuse_slides.pdf(^†>OL2: 958).

28. To arrange for it, please contact me using the information in the letterhead above.

Dare trigger history!(^†>OL2:1125)^‡…and you may enter it.
^† http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-Reuters_judges_investigation.pdf

H. Every meaningful cause needs resources for its advancement; none can be continued, let alone advanced, without money

Judicial Discipline Reform

conducts law research and writing, and strategic thinking,
which have produced articles like the one below.

Visit its website at

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

Join its 32,935+ subscribers to its articles thus:

go to the site, <left panel ↓Register
or    + New   or   Users   >Add New.

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

Donate

through Paypal

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

or

at the GoFundMe campaign at

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

Sincerely,

Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Judicial Discipline Reform
2165 Bruckner Blvd
Bronx, New York City 10472
http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org
tel. +1(718)827-9521
Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net, DrRCordero@Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org, Corderoric@yahoo.com

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

NOTE: Given the interference with Dr. Cordero’s email and e-cloud storage accounts described at *>ggl:1 et seq. and ^†>OL2:1114§G, when emailing him, copy the above bloc of his email addresses and paste it in the To: line of your email so as to enhance the chances of your email reaching him at least at one of those addresses; * http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf.

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

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

The link to this article is:
http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_research_documents&sources.pdf

Dear Advocates of Honest Judiciaries,

A. Finding pertinent quotations from judges’ decisions

1. You can easily cite quotations from court decisions like those that you read in any judge-written decision and attorney-written brief: You do law research in the books, called Reporters or Reports, that collect those decisions.

2. In their table of contents, they organize all the subjects of law alphabetically, like a dictionary, or chronologically, according to the procedural steps from filing a case in a trial court to enforcing a final decision from a court of appeals.

3. The subjects are organized under headings and subheadings, each of which is identified with a number, all of which form “the key number system”. With that number, you can find the same subject in any book of the same publisher, regardless of the main subject of the book; e.g., Witness k185 deals with the same subject, namely Attorney-client privilege, no matter where it appears in publications by Westlaw (see next).

4. You will be amazed by how easy it is to find quotations in paragraphs the length on average of this paragraph and frequently called headnotes. Those headnotes contain the gist of what judges have written on that very specific law subject, identified by its “key number”.

5. Those Reporters are published for decisions by the judges in the Federal Judiciary as well as each state judiciary –judiciaries are also referred to as jurisdictions-. The two main publishers are the following. Before clicking on the links below be aware that you only want to see the picture of their Reporters and Reports and read the description of their contents. Do not mind the price: you are not expected to buy any of them. They are sets of scores of volumes, not just one book. Thus, reporters are so expensive that only libraries and law firms can afford them.

a. Thomson-Reuters Westlaw:

1)  https://store.legal.thomsonreuters.com/law-products/Reporters/Federal-Reporterreg-2d-National-Reporter-System/p/100000581

2) https://store.legal.thomsonreuters.com/law-products/search?r=13001&s=KEYWORDSEARCH&q=reporter >left panel under the heading –Jurisdiction.

3) The same law research principle described above applies to each particular subject of the law, e.g., the all-important area of court procedure, that is, what parties and judges do in court and in what order; https://store.legal.thomsonreuters.com/law-products/Legal-Encyclopedias/Federal-Practice-and-Procedure-Wright–Miller/p/100028918?trkcode=recsbserp&trktype=internal&FindMethod=recs

b. LexisNexis:

1) All jurisdictions: https://store.lexisnexis.com/categories/shop-by-jurisdiction

2) e.g., the Supreme Court: https://store.lexisnexis.com/categories/shop-by-jurisdiction/national-194/us-supreme-court-reports-lawyers-edition-cd47dvd-skuSKU7291/details

B. Learning by doing and doing it methodically: do not skip any step!

6. To begin your law research with an enlightening visual and tactile impression you could go to a still open public library with a law department or venture into the library of a law school or association of lawyers, called a bar association, and ask for permission to take a look at the Reporters. But due to Covid-19, those libraries are likely to be closed. Call them and find out.

7. Hence, plan B: You get that experience digitally by going to the websites of public and law school libraries that offer access to legal databases online, including those of Westlaw and LexisNexis, as opposed to their bookstores.

8. Today you can query those databases using natural language as opposed to Boolean operators, such as AND, OR, AND NOT. For instance, your write in the search box: “Can a landlord evict a tenant who cannot pay rent because he lost his job due to the Covid-19 lockdown?”

a. New York Public Library Science, Industry, Business, and Law (NYPL-SIBL), https://browse.nypl.org/iii/encore/search/C__Swestlaw__Orightresult__U?searched_from=header_search&timestamp=1593550493317&lang=eng

b. The Legal Information Institute of Cornell Law School, https://www.law.cornell.edu/lii/get_the_law

9. The returns to your queries will contain headnotes, which are in essence the quotations that you are searching for. If you click the appropriate settings, your returns will contain the whole decisions of the judges as well as an abundance of other very useful information. Pay attention to detail and you will be richly rewarded. Practice, practice, practice for free there until you become familiarized with doing law research on a legal database online. Thereafter, if need be, you can take advantage of the 7-day free trial of Westlaw, https://legal.thomsonreuters.com/en/forms/try-westlaw.

10. For more information on LexisNexis, go to page OL2:1066 in my 2-volume professional study* ^† of judges and their judiciaries, 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:# up to page OL:393

^† 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.

C. Doing research only to be wiped out by judges: the alternative

11. In those two volumes of my study you will find an enormous amount of information about how the courts work. Click the binocular icon on the menu bar of each volume. In the search box, enter keywords that must appear in the text of the answer; this is not the type of box where to ask queries in natural language or with Boolean operators.

12. In that study you will find out what is so much more important to you than a nice quotation from a court decision: You will find out why a person like you, without a lawyer and thus called pro se, does not stand a chance of winning in court.

13. There you and scores of millions of other pro ses are wiped out by judges, who are unaccountable so that for their gain and convenience they risklessly abuse their power. Indeed, former Chief Circuit Judge Richard Posner of the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit wrote belatedly: “Many judges are hostile to pro se’s, seeing them as a kind of ‘trash’ not even worth the courts’ time” (^†>OL2:932).

14. This means that if you do not know even where to find quotations from judges’ decisions, you have no business going to court as a pro se, never mind attempting to write a legal brief for the court and the opposing party. Here applies the legal aphorism: He who cannot do the least cannot do the more.

a. That aphorism applies to judges too: You will find below the references to the mathematical demonstration showing that it is impossible for judges or their clerks to read anything but a minimal number of briefs, regardless of who writes them. But if in addition they are written by pro ses, the chances that the judges will read them are practically nil. The judges have doomed your law research and writing effort and expense to be wasteful from the outset.

b. Quotations are not the equivalent, let alone a substitute for, legal argument. If you do not know how to “craft an argument”, even a string of quotations will not do it for you.

c. A quotation is only useful to support a legal argument. It is only meaningful if you know its context. To learn that context you need to do a lot of research even if you are a lawyer. You cannot skip three years of law school, where you learn that context, and simply jump to a Reporter to snatch some quotations and cobble together a string of them. You cannot improvise yourself as a lawyer after spending a few hours on a legal database online. It is intrinsically a folly.

d. The judges know it. Yet, they require the production of a brief with the inevitable incurrence of expenditure of effort, money, and time; take the pro ses’ court filing fees;…and DIT their briefs: Dump them in the Trash. It is the equivalent of a casino taking a bet despite knowing that the odds of the bettor winning are illusory. In that vein, judges’ conduct gives rise to the following causes of action and legal considerations:

1) concealment of a material fact

2) abuse of superior knowledge

3) intentional frustration of reasonable expectations

4) misleading advertisement of adjudicatory services

5) fraud in the inducement and the performance

6) breach of contract

7) invidious discrimination against a class of people, the pro ses

8) intentional infliction of emotional distress

9) denial of equal protection of the law relative to those parties whose briefs judges read

10) deprivation of due process by failing to “hear” the party whose brief is not read

11) judges’ unaccountability as the means for their abuse of power committed for the motive of grabbing gain and convenience at every opportunity upon a party taking someone or being taken to court.

15. Avoiding such waste and abuse foretold warrants the alternative: It is in your interest to read in this volume, which sets a strategy for forming a movement to expose judges’ abuse of power; jointly demand compensation for their victims, and bring about reform of the judicial and legal system through transformative change where We the People, the masters of all public servants, including judicial ones, hold them accountable for their performance and liable to compensate the victims of their abuse of power(^†>OL2:1133); https://judicial-discipline-reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-Talkshow_hosts_coalition.pdf.

a. If you want to bring about change, you have to do things differently; otherwise, Einstein’s    aphorism applies: “Doing things the same way while expecting a different result is the hallmark of irrationality”. This is so because it betrays ignorance of, or disregard for, a fundamental law of both the physical and the human worlds: cause and effect. This is in harmony with Sir Isaac Newton’s third law of motion: bodies in motion tend to keep moving in the same direction and at the same speed; and bodies at rest tend to keep at rest until a force impels them to move. The force that you need to change your course of action comes from KNOWLEDGE [, which] IS POWER; and from the application of dynamic analysis of harmonious and conflicting interests(^†>OL2:593¶¶15-16; dcc:8¶11).

16. I respectfully ask that you help make that article go viral by sharing, posting, and emailing it as proposed. See also the latest article posted to http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org

17. Life is a give and take. I have given. Now you can give back…and your giving will be in your own interest and that of your friends, relatives, and the rest of your fellow members of We the People.

D. Every meaningful cause needs resources for its advancement; none can be continued, let alone advanced, without money

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

Donate

to support the law research and writing, and
strategic thinking of

Judicial Discipline Reform

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

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

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

                Dare trigger history!(^†>OL2:1125)^‡…and you may enter it.
https://judicial-discipline-reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_Reuters_judges_investigation.pdf

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

By

Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Ph.D., University of Cambridge, England
M.B.A., University of Michigan Business School
D.E.A., La Sorbonne, Paris
Judicial Discipline Reform
New York City
http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org
Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net, DrRCordero@Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org, CorderoRic@yahoo.com

Editor Jacob Jude, International Journal of Educational Research and Review (IJER) ijerr@spectacularjournals.org, ijerr.spectacular@gmail.com, contact_us@spectacularjournals.org

Prof. Mortimer Sellers, University of Baltimore, msellers@ubalt.edu
Prof. James Maxeiner, University of Baltimore, jmaxeiner@ubalt.edu
Prof. Tania Sourdin, Newcastle Law School, Australia, tania.sourdin@newcastle.edu.au
Prof. Archie Zariski, Athabasca University, Canada, archiez@athabascau.ca
and
researchers, law and journalism professors, multidisciplinary experts, the media, students, and Advocates of Honest Judiciaries

Dear potential team members and Advocates,

1. Thank you, Editor Jude, for your email calling for papers for the International Journal for Educational Research and Review.
2. Thank you, Professors Sellers, Maxeiner, Sourdin, and Zariski for your work on “The Responsive Judge: International Perspective”, published by Springer.
3. Kindly consider this article^‡ a submission to each of you for publication.
4. This article sets forth a proposal for join forces in a multidisciplinary team of researchers, experts -such as those in law, journalism, Information Technology, statistics, and fraud and forensic accounting (FFA)-, students, and the media, to undertake library research and field investigation reasonably calculated in light of precedent and current events to form an international civic apolitical movement to:
   aaaaa a. expose judges’ unaccountability and consequent riskless abuse of power;
   bbbbbb. enable the abusees to assemble in local chapters to demand compensation; and
   ccccccc. reform the judicial and legal system through transformative change.

   A. The root of judges’ abuse of power is that of police’s: unaccountability

   5. You and your counterparts at thousands of professional reviews and journals publish scores of thousands of articles and notes every year written by professors, experts, and students. But do they make a difference by improving the quality of the judicial and legal system? To answer this question these official statistical facts, taken from the U.S. context for illustrative purpose, are outcome-determinative:
   a. In the last 231 years since the creation of the Federal Judiciary in 1789, the number of federal judges impeached and removed is 8!(*^†>jur:21§a; for(* ^†>blue footnote-like references) see infra §B) To gauge the implications of that number compare it against the 2,340 federal judicial officers on the bench on September 30, 2019.
   b. Federal judges dismiss 100%(*>jur:10-11; ^†>OL2:548, 748) of complaints against them, which under the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act of 1980 -28 U.S.Code §§351-364 (jur:24fn^18a)- must be filed with them, and deny 100% of petitions to review those dismissals.
   c.  Judges’ official statistics showing those rates of dismissals and denials are submitted to Congress as a public document in the Annual Report of the Director of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts(*>jur:21fn¹⁰), as provided for under 28 U.S.C. §604(h)(2)(jur:26fn^23a; ^†>OL2:551fn¹). The Administrative Office (AO) was established under §601, which empowers the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court to appoint its director and deputy director.

1) Those statistics show that the judges have arrogated to themselves the power to abrogate in effect an act of Congress intended to hold them accountable for the benefit of everybody.

2) Yet, year after year the politicians disregard those official statistics: They are the ones who recommended, endorsed, nominated, and confirmed the judges and thereafter protect them as ‘our men and women on the bench’…or else.

3) Indeed, politicians would not dare turn against their judges, whereby they would expose themselves to their devastating power of retaliation: Judges can hold unconstitutional any law and even the whole legislative agenda of a political party. Their power is so enormous that a single federal district judge, U.S. D.J. James Robart, suspended nationwide President Trump’s Muslim travel ban; and a panel of three appellate judges of the 9^th Circuit upheld the suspension nationwide.

6. The answer to the question is irrefutable: Judges could not care less what lawyers, professors, students, and editors crank out in their ‘publish or die’ articles, notes, and studies. Politicians do not dare care.
7. Judges rely on the historic record of their irremovability in practice, which insures their impunity. Once a judicial nominee is confirmed to the federal bench, he or she is endowed with an attribute that no other officer has: a life appointment. From that moment on, that judge can for personal or judicial class gain or convenience abuse risklessly their power over We the People’s property, liberty, and all the rights and duties that frame our lives and shape our identities. They are unaccountable. Their ‘power is absolute; it corrupts them absolutely’(*>jur:27fn28).
8. Federal judges and their Federal Judiciary are the model of their state counterparts. When a case is appealed from a state highest court to the Federal Judiciary, federal judges allow state judges to do everything that they allow themselves to do.
9. The published articles, notes, and studies are irrelevant to federal and state judges. They cannot force judges to respect and enforce the due process and equal protection rights of the parties before them and those of the rest of We the People.
10. Proposal based on a study and a website with proven public appeal
11. The above statements rest on my two-volume professional study of judges and their judiciaries, titled and downloadable thus:

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

11. My study cannot force judges to curb their abuse of power any more than articles and notes can. However, my study has proven its public appeal: I have posted many of its articles to my website Judicial Discipline Reform at http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org. They have elicited such a positive reaction in the countless visitors to it that 32,141 and counting have become subscribers(^†>OL2:Appendix 3).
12. An enhanced website as the initial research center with a program of activities
13. That positive reaction to my posted articles can be broadened and intensified by enhancing that website as proposed in my business plan(^†>OL2:1022). The enhancement can turn it, among other things, into:
14. a clearinghouse for anybody to upload their complaints against judges’ abuse that they have suffered or the letters stating the abuse that they have witnessed, which today are unavailable because they are filed or submitted(^†>OL2:645§A) to judges as secret documents; and
15. a center for the research of those complaints and letters. The research can also include the type of document that sets my study apart: judges’ official statistics, reports, speeches, etc.(infra §H), which judges, as their authors, cannot contradict. Those documents can be used to show their abuse of power and impeach their honesty.
16. As a result of such enhancement, the website can be run as a profit center under the guiding principle “Doing Justice While Making Money”(^†>OL2:914)…for:

Every meaningful cause needs resources for its advancement;
none can be continued,
let alone advanced,
without money(infra §H).

2. Strategy for introducing the issue of judges’ abuse on the world scene
3. The enhanced website will be the appropriate digital office of the initial center for the international team of professionals and students to work at(*>jur:128§4). There they will be able to do justice through a robust program of concrete, reasonable, and feasible activities(^†>OL2:978§E).
4. To begin with, the proposed international multidisciplinary team can work on exposing the abuse of power that the judges of the Federal Judiciary in the United States have institutionalized as their modus operandi. That way we can build a shared treasure of experiences, concepts, techniques, templates(*>OL:280, 304), etc.
5. Moreover, the hotly contested presidential campaign in the U.S. is being reported all over the world. If, as intended, the team manages to insert the issue of unaccountable judges’ riskless abuse of power in the campaign, it will also be reported on. This will lead the media and the public abroad to ask themselves, ‘are our judges abusers too?’
6. That question will prompt the media and other researchers to report on the issue and thereby offer the answer demanded by the public. It will enable the members of the team to seamlessly shift the focus of their research onto the particular circumstances of their respective judiciary.
7. By that time, it might be too late for judges abroad to retaliate against the media and researchers as they would have done had those judges been the first target of the reporting and of the characterization as abusers. The international movement has already started to form.
8. A program of library research and field investigation activities
9. This strategy justifies the type of document and source that the team can research at the beginning.

http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_research_documents&sources.pdf

20. The team’s activities include the application of both Information Technology and fraud and forensic accounting to perform statistical, linguistic, literary, and accounting analysis(*>jur:131§b; *>OL:255) of documents to detect patterns(^†>OL2:792§A), trends(OL2:455§§B, D), and schemes(OL2:614, 929) of abuse of power. Analyzed will be the misleading mandatory(*>jur:65fn^107.d) annual financial disclosure reports(*>jur:102§a and fn^213b) that judges file to commit concealment of assets, tax evasion, and money laundering(*>jur:65fn^107.c).
21. The media can pursue the abundance of leads for their field investigation of judges and justices of the Supreme Court(*>OL:194§E).
22. At the appropriate time, the research center based on the enhanced website can acquire a physical presence as an entity attached to a top university or think tank. There it will continue its activity, with franchises in other countries, as the Institute of Judicial Unaccountability Reporting and Reform Advocacy(*>jur:131§5).
23. Forms of judges’ abuse of power that will outrage the public
24. The team can begin researching concrete forms of judges’ abuse. Its findings together with those in my study will outrage the public. Those forms are stated hereunder only as blurbs; their summaries are at(^†>OL2:1097§G) ; and their fuller discussion is in the(^{* †}>references) and the linked articles:

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

1. Senator Elizabeth Warren’s denunciation of judges’ self-enrichment by failing to recuse themselves and concealing their financial interests in cases before them and deciding them in their favor and to the detriment of parties and the rest of the public(^†>OL2:1003)

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

1. Judges’ bankruptcy fraud scheme and its spread to Covid-caused bankruptcies(^†>OL2:984)^‡, whereby judges’ take advantage of, and aggravate people’s financial and emotional distress(*>jur:9; ^†>OL2:614)^ϕ

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

ϕ http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_how_fraud_scheme_works.pdf

1. “The math of abuse” demonstrates judges’ failure to read most briefs, each of which costs a party $Ks and even $10Ks to produce and becomes a compensable waste(^†>OL2:760).

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

1. Judges’ interception of people’s emails and mail to detect and suppress those of their critics and prevent individuals from exercising their 1st Amendment right to “assemble [on the Internet or by letter] to petition the government for a redress of grievances”(OL2:1081, 781)

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

1. The sham hearings in the Federal Judiciary and Congress on judicial accountability, involving judges/politicians’ connivance and their fraud on witnesses and the public(^†>OL2:1056)

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

1. The Chief Justice’s presiding over Trump’s impeachment trial with disregard for “traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice” can be invoked by anybody as precedent for refusing discovery on equal protection grounds and privileged communications(OL2:1040)

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

1. Judges dismiss 100% of complaints against them, which must be filed with them, while politicians condone such self-ensured unaccountability, thus conniving to leave complain-ants uncompensated and the rest of the public at their mercy(*>jur:10-14; ^†>OL2:548, 748)

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

1. The abuse of power committed or tolerated by Supreme Court justices provides the grounds for asking P. Trump to authorize the release of the FBI vetting reports on them(^†>OL2:1095§D). That will create its own set of outrage-provoking circumstances.

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

1. Precedents and current events make this proposal realistic and opportune
2. People across the United States who deemed that they were taxed enough already gathered in local chapters to advance the single issue of reducing taxes. Those chapters coalesced into the Tea Party. In less than 10 years, they came to dominate American presidential politics.
3. The articles exposing Harvey Weinstein’s decades-long unaccountable sexual abuse were published on October 5 and 10, 2017, by The New York Times and The New Yorker, respectively. They provoked public outrage. Within a week, they caused the eruption in our country and abroad of the MeToo! movement.
4. The footage that the national TV networks broadcast of a white police officer kneeling for almost 9 minutes on the neck of George Floyd and killing him in cold blood, and the ensuing reports and interviews by journalists have outraged the national and international public. That outrage has forced municipal councils, state legislatures, and even Congress to debate the demand that the police departments be defunded and the funds be reallocated to establishing and running a civilian entity that offers social services and hold the remainder of the police departments accountable for the training and performance of their police officers.
5. The cumulative effect of these precedents and current public outrage is that the public has been emboldened to shout ever more self-assertively the rallying cry:

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

1. The presidential campaign offers the most opportune time for the public to be informed and become outraged
2. This is the most opportune time to inform the national and international public about judges’ unaccountability and consequent riskless abuse of power. Outraged, the public can make that cry resonate most loudly and compellingly to protest their abuse and demand its full exposure:
3. We are in the midst of a hotly contested presidential campaign. Politicians need to appear sensitive to public demands, lest the public deny them the donations, campaign volunteer work, and word of mouth approval that they so desperately need. The public is at its strongest. It can demand that politicians take a stand on the issue at every digital or physical townhall meeting and interview; and even hold nationally televised congressional hearings on judges’ abuse of power.
4. If the public is informed of the nature, extent, and gravity of judges’ abuse of power, it can become so outraged as to force the judicial and legal system to undergo transformative change: Reform that today is unthinkable becomes unavoidable. It can include judicial services being controlled by the only civilian entity entitled to hold judges accountable: We the People, the sovereign source of all political power and masters of all public servants, even judicial public servants.(*>jur:158§6-8)
5. The demand that the police be defunded and disbanded may be extended to their allies: the judges
6. The demand for change will be all the stronger once the public realizes that the prosecution of all abusive police and the enforcement of any federal, state, or municipal version of the “Justice in Policing Act” will end up before judges who have the mindset of abusers. How would you feel as the chicken trying to hold the fox accountable before the wolf?
7. In fact, judges count on the police to protect them. In light of the violent as well as peaceful huge demonstrations in hundreds of cities and even before the White House, judges will deem that if their own abuse of power is exposed, they will need the unwavering protection of the police. For judges to appear to be turning against the police would be suicidal.
8. In the same vein, prosecutors need the cooperation of the police and must avoid retaliation by judges to make their cases(*>Lsch:17§C). If the judges let one police officer after the other be convicted and interpret and apply any ‘Justice in Policing Act’ without watering it down until it is harmless, or even held unconstitutional, the police can put pressure on prosecutors to investigate judges’ abuse forcefully.
9. This means that judges, police, and prosecutors know that they have harmonious interests(^†>OL2:593¶¶15-16) so intertwined that they stand together or hang together. They are biased toward each other, regardless of the detriment to the public. They cannot be trusted to hold each other accountable, much less liable.
10. The realization that all the effort to hold police accountable and liable can be thwarted by judges, the police, and prosecutors looking after each other will further outrage the public. It will exacerbate its demand for change in a judicial and legal system that is rigged against the public.
11. The call for unprecedented citizen hearings and compensation of abusees
12. For the public to be outraged, it must first be informed. The media is indispensable. This explains the call for unprecedented citizen hearings.
13. In addition to, or in the absence of, congressional hearings, citizen hearings will be held at university and media outlets and conducted by professors, journalists, and other experts. They will take the testimony of victims of, and witnesses to, judges’ abuse. Wherever they are, they will be able to participate inexpensively thanks to interactive multimedia broadcasting the hearings nationally. The experience gained during the Covid-19 lockdown with video conference platforms, such as Skype, Zoom, and Google Hangouts, will be put to good use: to do justice.

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

38. The citizen hearings can boost significantly another potent motivator for the public to participate in forming the movement to hold judges accountable and liable: compensation of abusees by judges and their judiciaries for their abuse of power.
39. The demand to be compensated will include the refund of court fees, the expense of briefs not read, and compensatory and punitive damages for fraud and deprivation of honest services. Abusees who have appeared or are appearing before the same judge or in the same court will gather in Tea Party-like local chapters to assert their demand joint(^†>OL2:1074§C; *>OL:276§C). Springing up all over the country, they will be as forceful as the demonstrations against police brutality.
40. Action requested to inform; and a presentation offered to form the team
41. People who take action on a meaningful cause are the ones who make transformative change in their own interest and that of the rest of the world.
42. Thus, I respectfully request that you approve this email as a submission and publish it as an article.
43. In turn, I offer to make a presentation via video conference or in person to you and your guests on the proposed formation of the international team to expose judges’ unaccountability and consequent riskless abuse of power.
44. Hence, you may share and post this email as widely as possible, making it especially available to professors, the media, lawyers, students, business developers, and civic organizations.
45. To decide whether to organize such presentation you may watch my video together with its supporting slides(^†>OL2:958) at:

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

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

45. You may use the information in the letterhead to contact me and discuss the presentation’s terms and conditions and its scheduling.
46. Time is of the essence: There is less than 5 months to Election Day on November 3 in the U.S.
47. The interception of emails containing this article and of replies to them
48. Since June 12, I have repeatedly emailed the above article to you and the others in the above bloc of addressees; the 12 researchers cited in “The Responsive Judge”(supra ¶2); and thousands of other professors, members of the media, lawyers, and students. Yet, I have not received any acknowledgment of receipt, much less a comment on it. This is not possible but for the interception(supra ¶23.d) of replies to me.
49. There is probable cause to believe that some of you have indeed replied to me: My website Judicial Discipline Reform at http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org has received so many visitors and they have reacted so positively to my articles posted there that 32,141+ have become subscribers to it. To subscribe, go to the site <left panel ↓Register or + New or   Users   >Add New.
50. Those subscribers are likely educated and affluent people, who are attracted by college level text with no video or pictures. They are similar to the audiences of the likes of The New York Times, The New Yorker, The Washington Post, and TIME. They are apt to form an opinion and be articulate enough to express it by email, mail, or phone call. Yet, I do not receive any from them.
51. In a country as divided as the United States and within a group of people with as different interests as professors, journalists, lawyers, and students, it is statistically impossible for 100% of thousands of them to have reacted in a unique way: ‘I won’t reply or otherwise communicate with Dr. Cordero’. Not even a single outlier so that the dependent variable on the Y axis has never risen above the origin point 0 regardless of the nature of the independent variable on the X axis. It is reasonable to conclude that some of you have replied to me but that your replies have been intercepted.
52. To achieve such 100% effectiveness, the interceptor must intercept the communications of everybody in the population so as to detect and suppress those of people like me and you that it does not want reaching their addressees. The intelligence agencies, e.g., NSA; the companies that control the central nodes of the Internet, such as the large telephone and email service providers; and the USPS -see its Informed Delivery service- have the capacity to conduct such wholesale interception.
53. The interceptor is likely to be an entity with the greatest interest in preventing me from communicating with you and you with each other because it is the target of my criticism and proposed expo-sure, to wit, unaccountable judges risklessly abusing their power(supra §C).
54. Such interception is unquestionably illegal, cf. 18 U.S.Code §§2511 and 1030(*>OL:5a/fn^{13, 14}).
55. Graver still, it is an outrageous infringement on We the People’s right guaranteed by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution to “freedom of speech, of the press, the right of the people peaceably to assemble [through the Internet and on social media too], and to petition the Government [of which judges are the third branch] for a redress of grievances [including the collective demand as members of local chapters of abusees for compensation for the abused suffered]”(^†>OL2:972¶1).
56. If you find probable cause to believe that judges intercept the public’s communications, including yours, and it outrages you, you can seize this opportunity to join forces to expose it(supra §B.3).
57. It is reasonable to expect that by joining forces and relying on the precedents of the Tea Party and the MeToo! movement(supra §D), and the current worldwide movement against police brutality, we can set in motion transformative change in a millennial impossible(*>jur:xlv§G) to compel historic reform(^†>OL2:1093§B): We the People can end up holding judges accountable for their performance and liable to compensate their victims. That is change demanded by an honest belief that “Nobody Is Above The Law” or immune to the consequences of harming others in ‘government, not of men and women, but of the People by the rule of law’(*>OL:5fn⁶; jur:82fn¹⁷²).
58. To discuss the publication of my article; forming a team to set off an international movement to expose judges’ abuse by promoting citizen hearings and compensation(supra §E); and my offer to make a presentation to you and your colleagues(§F), I invite you to call me at +1(718)827-9521 until you have me on the phone. I speak English, Spanish, and French, and you can speak to me in German and Italian. You can write to me in any of those languages, but will your email reach me?
59. Support Judicial Discipline Reform in its professional law research and writing, and strategic thinking

Visit the website at, and join its 32,141+ subscribers to its articles thus: http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org <left panel ↓Register or    + New   or   Users   >Add New

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

Donate
through

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

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

Dare trigger history!(^†>OL2:1108)^‡…and you may enter it.
^‡ https://judicial-discipline-reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-International_Team.pdf

Sincerely,

Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Judicial Discipline Reform
2165 Bruckner Blvd.
Bronx, New York 10472-6506
United States
http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org
tel. +1(718)827-9521

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

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

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

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