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
http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org
New York City
Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net, CorderoRic@yahoo.com, Dr.Richard.Cordero.JDR@gmail.com, Dr.Cordero@Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org,
https://www.linkedin.com/in/dr-richard-cordero-esq-0508ba4b
This letter may be republished and redistributed, provided it is in its entirety and without any addition, deletion, or modification, and credit is given to its author, Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
___________________________________________
Dr. Cordero and Judicial Discipline Reform are non-partisan and non-denominational in their pursuit of one single issue: the exposure of the unaccountability of federal and state judges, who consequently engage in wrongdoing risklessly despite the harm to parties and the rest of the public.
Their plan of action is based on strategic thinking: Informing the national public of unaccountable judges’ wrongdoing so that the public may become so outraged as to demand of all politicians, whether running for, or in, office, that they call for, and conduct, nationally televised hearings on judges’ wrongdoing.
Therefore, members of the public who support any issue as well as those who oppose it are all welcome here as long as they believe in, and want to contribute to advancing, this common issue:
We the People are the sovereign source of all political power and as such the masters of all our public servants, including judicial public servants. We have the right to hold all judges accountable for honestly serving us Equal Justice Under Law, and liable to compensate the victims of their wrongdoing.
Achieving judicial reform that enables us to exercise that right is our ultimate objective, for judicial power is at the center of ‘government, not of men and women, but by the rule of law’. In that government, we want to assert the supremacy of our role as We the People.
Presidential Candidate Donald Trump has access to the national media, hence to the national public; is the only outsider of the Establishment, which recommended, endorsed, nominated, confirmed, and appointed judges; and is the only one who has dare criticize judges. Thus, the letter below is an application of the strategic thinking principle: The enemy of my enemy is my friend…and I will help him help me.
*********************************
Mr. Donald J. Trump
Donald J. Trump for President, Inc.
725 Fifth Avenue
New York, NY 10022
Dear Mr. Trump,
This is a proposal for you to apply a principle that you stated in an interview some 25 years ago to the effect that ‘you always think how things can go wrong, because if they go right, they take care of themselves, but if they go wrong, you want to know that you anticipated that event and did everything possible to prevent it and now are better prepared to make things right’.
Things can go wrong for your campaign due to lack of money and the dwindling support shown by polls. To run a campaign you may need $1 billion, of which you only collected $1.3 million in June. Since neither your party nor big donors are opening their pockets, you can either pay the difference from yours or implement this proposal for innovatively addressing both problems:
At the end of a long primary season, people are weary of stretched-out hands requesting money. So you can offer them your ears and invite them at rallies and in emails to voice their complaints on your website.
Complainants form that part of the electorate that you have identified and are your base: The Dissatisfied With The Establishment.
The most dissatisfied are those who, like you recently, feel they were treated unfairly by judges, not to mention those who feel that they had their property, liberty as well as the rights and duties that determine their lives mishandled: the dissatisfied with the judicial and legal systems. They form a huge untapped voting bloc:
More than 100 million people are parties to over 50 million cases filed in the federal and state courts annually(*>jur:8fn4,5); to them must be added the parties to the scores of millions of pending cases and cases deemed wrongly or wrongfully decided; plus the millions of closely related people who have also become just as dissatisfied: family, friends, peers, supporters, employees, etc. All are passionate in their quest for vindication and justice.
* See Dr. Cordero’s study of judges and their judiciary, which is titled and downloadable as follows:
Exposing Judges’ Unaccountability and
Consequent Riskless Wrongdoing:
Pioneering the news and publishing field of
judicial unaccountability reporting*
* http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf
All (blue text references) herein are keyed to that study, which has two volumes: …/OL/… and …/OL2/….
The dissatisfied with the judicial and legal systems will be receptive to your invitation to go to your website both to fill out a standardized case description form(*>ol:281) and to post their court papers so that anybody may search them for the most probative evidence, i.e., a pattern of wrongdoing(ol:274), unlike a claim of abuse in only one’s case, which is suspect of being self-serving and biased.
Thereby you would apply the marketing psychology principle that when people feel they have been given to, e.g., attention and hope of help, they feel grateful and prone to give back, e.g., money, volunteered work, and word of mouth support.
While the dissatisfied are on your website, they will be more responsive to your donation pitch. They may donate small amounts, similar to those that The Hopeful Young gave Sen. Sanders, which added up to scores of millions, even surpassing the big donations to Sec. Clinton.
You can thus grow your support, for those who post their complaints to your site will identify themselves and those closely related to them as potential voters for you, whom you can enter in your database, keep giving to(ol:362), and mobilize on Election Day.
Although you sue often, you are not afraid of criticizing judges. You can cause them to resign(jur:92§d) or be removed by denouncing(ol2:437) their unaccountability and riskless wrongdoing(ol:311).
Thereby you can launch media and official investigations of two unique national cases of judges’ wrongdoing(see infra) and provoke an institutional crisis that leads to judicial reform entailing a reconfiguration of checks and balances among the branches and between them and the people.
Indeed, that can become your legacy even if you lose the election: a new American governance system(ol2:423¶¶g,h) where We the People assert our supremacy in “government of, by, and for the People”.
If you win, you can also nominate replacement judges supportive of your legislative agenda(ol2:422).
To detail this proposal and explain how you can investigate(ol:194§E) the two unique national cases, I respectfully request a meeting with you and your officers.
Dare trigger history!(*>jur:7§5)…and you may enter it.
* http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf
Sincerely,
Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Judicial Discipline Reform
www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org
New York City
Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net,
DrCordero@Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org,
Dr.Richard.Cordero.JDR@gmail.com,
CorderoRic@yahoo.com,
Dr.Richard.Cordero.Esq@cantab.net
https://www.linkedin.com/in/dr-richard-cordero-esq-0508ba4b
NOTE 1: 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.
NOTE 2: This letter to Mr. Trump together with previous ones to him and supporting materials is found at:
http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/16-5-21DrRCordero-DJTrump.pdf.
********************************************
The Two Unique National Cases
of Judicial Wrongdoing
A. The P. Obama-J. Sotomayor case and the Follow the money! investigation
- What did the President(*>jur:77§A), Sen. Schumer and Sen. Gillibrand(jur:78§6), and federal judges(jur:105fn213b) know about the concealment of assets by his first Supreme Court nominee, Then-Judge, Now-Justice Sotomayor –suspected by The New York Times, The Washington Post, and Politico(jur:65fn107a) of concealing assets, which entails the crimes(ol:5fn10) of tax evasion(jur:65fn107c) and money laundering– but covered up and lied(ol:64§C) about to the public by vouching for her honesty because he wanted to ingratiate himself with those petitioning him to nominate another woman and the first Hispanic to replace Retiring Justice Souter and from whom he expected in exchange support for the passage of the Obamacare bill in Congress; and when did they know it as well as any other wrongdoing?(ol:154¶3)
- This case can be pursued through the Follow the money! investigation(jur:102§a; ol:1, 66), which includes a call on the President to release unredacted all FBI vetting reports on J. Sotomayor and on her to request that she ask him to release them. That can set a precedent for vetting judges and other candidates for office; and open the door for ‘packing’ the Federal Judiciary after judges resign for ‘appearance of impropriety’.
B. The Federal Judiciary-NSA case and the Follow it wirelessly! investigation
- To what extent do federal judges abuse their vast computer network and expertise –which handle hundreds of millions of case files(Lsch:11¶9b.ii)– either alone or with the quid pro quo assistance of the National Security Agency (NSA) –up to 100% of whose secret requests for secret surveillance orders are rubberstamped(ol:5fn7) by the federal judges of the secret court established under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act– to:
a. conceal assets –a crime under 26 U.S.C. §§7201, 7206(ol:5fn10), unlike surveillance– by electronically transferring them between declared and hidden accounts(ol:1); and
b. cover up their interception of the communications –also a crime under 18 U.S.C. §2511(ol:20¶¶11-12)– of critics of judges to prevent them from joining forces to expose the judges?, which constitutes a contents-based interception, thus a deprivation of 1st Amendment rights, that would provoke a graver scandal than Edward Snowden’s revelation of the NSA’s illegal dragnet collection of only contents-free metadata of scores of millions of communications.
- See the statistical analysis(ol:19§Dfn2) of a large number of communications critical of judges and a pattern of oddities(ol2:395, 405, 425) in those communications pointing to probable cause to believe that they were intercepted.
- This case can be pursued through the Follow it wirelessly! investigation(jur:105§b; ol:2, 69§C).
***************************************************