[administrating-your-public-servants] Re: [administrating-your-public-servants] Re: [administrating-your-public-servants] Re: [administrating-your-public-servants] Taking action and thinking critically to cause journalists and politicians to read your story and ask: What did Judge K Brown Jackson, Attorney General M Garland, and Justice Thomas know about judges’ abuse of power and when did they know it?

From: "Bill" <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> ("billdealsre")
To: "administrating-your-public-servants@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <administrating-your-public-servants@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2022 21:14:24 +0000 (UTC)

What is a CAR card ?
    On Monday, April 25, 2022, 01:59:46 PM CDT, Paul M
<dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

  suggestion - ask Lawyer for their CAR card and their FARC - Foreign Agent
Registration Card. A must havewe can tell any one that maybe assigned to us
that if they believe they represent you tell them they are FIRED

    On Monday, April 25, 2022, 12:05:16 AM CDT, Don Mashak
<dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Towards Establishing A Truer Perspective of Reality Among US Citizens
https://donmashakshennepincountymnfreepressnews.wordpress.com/2022/04/22/toward-establishing-a-truer-perspective-of-reality-among-us-citizens-hacia-el-establecimiento-de-una-perspectiva-mas-real-de-la-realidad-entre-los-ciudadanos-estadounidenses-%e5%9c%a8/

Those were my thoughts.

Thank you for your time.

In Liberty,
Don Mashak
The Cynical Patriot

    On Sunday, April 24, 2022, 07:30:59 AM CDT, dr.richard.cordero_esq
<dmarc-noreply-outsider@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

NOTES: I would be grateful if you would acknowledge receipt of thisemail.
         You are encouraged to share and post it to social media aswidely as
possible in your own interest and that of the rest of We thePeople; e.g., click
“Reply All” andsend.               To subscribeto articles similar to the one
hereunder go to http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org ;<left panel
↓Register;    or   + New  or  Users  >Add New; or fill out the NewUser form at
https://www.judicial-discipline-reform.org/wp-admin/user-new.php .
The article below had a consistent format when sent. If it showsirregularities
when received, they crept in during transit and are beyond mycontrol. Kindly
overlook them. A pdf version of this article -as such likely tobe free of
irregularities- is found here and downloadable throughthe next link. Advocates
of Honest Judiciaries
thinking critically and taking action
at the most propitious time
to persuade journalists to investigate judges' abuse of power; and
to set in motion a national, single issue, civic movement for
judicial abuse exposure, compensation of abusees, and reform
http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_think_critically&take_action.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.orgDr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@xxxxxxxxxxx , ;
DrRCordero@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, CorderoRic@xxxxxxxxx  Dear Advocates
of Honest Judiciaries,  Thank you for your emails.  A. The need to take action
now 1. I appreciate your sharing my article withothers by clicking “Reply All”
and “Send”. Although you mayreceive the same article repeatedly, by so doing
you are sharing it with different blocs ofaddressees in the To: box. 2. We need
people who take action atthis most propitious time for exposing judges’ abuse
of power and financial criminality, as explainedhereunder. 3. Indeed, we are
all united by ourcommitment to attaining one common objective: to expose
judges’ abuse and criminalityandobtain compensation for the harm that judges
have caused us. 4. That commitment requires effort to read, reread, and read
again the below article until you understand the out-of-court strategy to
inform and outrage the national public so that it demands that journalists and
primarying politicians expose judges and hold them accountable and liable to
compensate the victims of their abuse and criminality. KNOWLEDGE IS POWER.

a. Here applies the axiom of strategic thinking, "Those who cannot do the least
cannot do more". Those who cannot read even an article written for their
benefit will keep roboticly seeking their remedy alone in court only to be
further abused by judges...and will keep whining about it.
5. The required effort includes sharing this article andmy other ones by
clicking "Reply All" and "Send";and posting it to social media, such as:
Facebook,   Youtube,   LinkedIn,   Instagram,   GooglePlus,   Pinterest,
Reddit,   Snapchat,   WhatsAp
Tweet:  Tell journalists and politicians your story of judges' abuse of powerto
participate in unprecedented citizens hearings and demand compensation and
reform;
http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_your_story_for_media&citizens_hearings.pdf

6. This group is not a law debating society.Nor a mutual commiseration therapy
group. 7. We are people committedto implementing the above-stated out-of-court
inform and outrage strategy by forming a national, single issue, civic
movementfor judicial abuse of power exposure, compensation of abusees, and
reform. 8. If you are truly committed to the effort of informing and outraging
the national public, let nothing derail you from its pursuit. When you receive
an email that is off subject, uninformative,or otherwise inappropriate,
politely let the sender know…or simply clickdelete, which is what I do to any
email that uses foul language, for that istotally unacceptable. We will not let
the bad and unprofessional behavior of some people justify judges' dismissal of
pro ses and all other Advocates of Honest Judiciaries as 'a bunch of
disgruntled losers'. Far from it, we want the national public, journalists, and
primarying politicians recognize, and look up to us, as Champions of Justice.
9. If you ask me to remove you from my emailinglist because you are receiving
too many and unhelpful emails, that means thatthe effort to click "Delete" is
more harmful to you than all theabuse that you allegedly suffered or are
suffering at the hands of judges. Lucky for you,you have not been and are not
being abused at all. 10. Take action! Read, Share, Write andrealize…  B. The
need to analyze with critical judgmenteverything we hear or read 11. Your link,
advocate Tak, characterizes thecomplaint filed by a neighbor of Ardee as
“baseless”. Understandably, thatupset you given that it led to Ardee’s 72-hour
commitment to a psychiatric ward. 12. Now you have to use criticaljudgment to
analyze that link, never mind the article downloaded through it.  13. You
cannot simply jump to theconclusion, perhaps in line with your experience, that
the complaint was “baseless”just because it was so characterized by somebody
somewhere. That would onlyshow bias toward believing anything that was negative
about ‘the system’ or ‘thepolice’ or ‘social services’.  14. You always need to
be criticaleven when the information that you receive supports your beliefs.
15. Hence, ask yourself:  a. Who wrote that article?  b. How much do they have
to lose or gain bystating something sensationalist?  c. Do they make money
depending on how many timespeople view their articles and click their
advertisement spots?  d. Do they work for a reputable publisher worthsuing for
defamation for making incorrect statements, a risk that increases itsinterest
in ensuring that all its statements are correct? e. Or do they work for a
no-name start-up digitalpublisher that can hardly pay for its Internet
connection so it is onlyinterested in increasing itsnumber of clickers even if
they are a full fool followercomplement? 16. The complaint was filed by
“aneighbor”. So ask yourself:  a. How manytimes before had that neighbor
complained about Ardee?  b. What was the nature of those complaints?  c. Was
there violence or threats to someone’s orthe public’s safety?  d. If Ardee had
been harmed because none ofhis/her neighbors cared enough to abide by the
public safety instruction, “Ifyou see something, say something”, would you
blame the neighbors for their crassself-centeredness and culpable indifference?
e. If your neighbors did not bother to alert theauthorities when they had
reason to believe that you were in danger, would you feelsafer or so much
lonelier and abandoned? 17. You need to be critical at alltimes…because there
is ALWAYS only six feet away from you the attorney for theopposing party, who
is paying attention to every word that you say and do notsay and is taking
notes. And when it is her turn, she will cross-examine you.  18. And if you
were never criticalof what you heard or read and simply used it if it comforted
your prejudices,that is, your previous judgments, that opposing counsel will
tear you to pieceson the stand in front of the jury and the journalists in the
audience in court and out of court via video conference! And youwill have let
all of us down.  19. And when you step down from thewitness stand and walk to
your seat you are going to feel so very small,humiliated, and dissatisfied with
yourself because you failed to thinkcritically: You could and should have asked
yourself those questions.  20. That is why you are going to thinkcritically!
So, on the stand you will earn the respect and the attention ofeverybody,
including the judge, all of us, and the national public because everybody
realizes thatyou are a responsible, fair, and thoughtful person. You meet the
legal standardof “a reasonable, impartial observer who proceeded responsibly
under thecircumstances to inform herself of the facts”. 21. Help us become like
you. Set theright example. Teach pro ses to think critically so that we all
earn publicrespect and support.
1. An exercise in thinking critically

22. Practice analyzing the subjectline of this email:  Re:What did Judge
Ketanji Brown Jackson and Justice Thomas know about judges’abuse of power and
when did they know it? 23. Does that subject line show that I amracist because
I make reference to Judge Jackson and Justice Thomas given that they are the
two most talked-aboutjurists at the moment, and they happen to be Black, or
does it show that I wantjournalists and politicians to cross-examine them to
expose the ‘abuse of power by judges’, who include allthose judges who are
white, yellow, brown, male, female, Christian, Muslim,Hispanic, whatever!? 24.
“Judges” arethe ones that my subject line criticizes for abusing power,not the
two named jurists who knew about it or should have known had they proceeded
with due diligence to safeguard the integrity of judicial process. Thequestions
that the subject line implicitly asks of them are: a. What did they do based on
that knowledge or dothey lack any knowledge because they engaged in willful
blindness and willfulignorance?(jur:90§§b-c)
b. Did they use their knowledge or their means ofgaining it to ensure the
integrity of judicial process or did they disregard itto cover up for their
“brothers and sisters of the robe” and avoid being treated as their traitors?
c. Have they shown enough respect for judicialintegrity to remain on the bench
or should their complicit conduct cause such outrage out of court in an
informed public as to deprive them of public trust, thus requiring that they
resign…togetherwith the abusive judges that they covered up for? 25. It is
imperative for Advocates, including all pro ses, to think critically at every
step of the way toward forming a movement for judicial exposure of judges'
abuse, compensation, and reform, so that they may be recognized and followed by
the national public as its Champions of Justice.
C. Every meaningful cause needs resources for itsadvancement;
     none can be continued, let alone advanced, without money 26. Lip service
advances nothing; butit continues to enable the abusers. 27. Put your money
where youroutrage at abuse and quest for justice are. 28. Support the
professional lawresearch and writing, and strategic thinking at:
JudicialDiscipline Reformhttp://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org DONATE by ;
making a deposit or an online transfer through either the BillPay 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, New York City 10472-6506
    tel. +1(718)827-9521
Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@xxxxxxxxxxx, DrRCordero@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ,
CorderoRic@xxxxxxxxx
https://www.linkedin.com/in/dr-richard-cordero-esq-0508ba4b NOTE: Given the ;
interference with Dr. Cordero’semail 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 inthe To: line of your email so as to enhance the
chances of your email reachinghim at least at one of those
addresses.*******************************

NOTES: I would be grateful if you would acknowledge receipt of this email.
               You are encouraged to share and post it to social media as
widely as possible in your own interest and that of the rest of We the People;
e.g., click “Reply All” and send.                 To subscribe to articles
similar to the one hereunder go to http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org ;
<left panel ↓Register   or   + New   or   Users   >Add New.
The article below had a consistent format when sent. If it shows irregularities
when received, they crept in during transit 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.
Journalists interested in ascoop and a Pulitzer Prize;
primarying politicians; and
thoseoutraged by The Wall Street Journal finding in only a sample of casesthat
“131 FederalJudges Broke the Law by Hearing Cases Where They Had a Financial
Interest”,
yet they have been
neitherinvestigated by either their Federal Judiciary or former chief judge
nowAttorney General Merrick Garland,nor required to disgorgethe gains that they
grabbed,can use the officialstatistics of his and J. Ketanji Brown Jackson’s
District of Columbia Circuit
to show their participation in a cover-up
concerningtheir peers' law-breaking and other forms of abuse of power, and
effected by
dismissing 100% of complaints against their peers and
denying100% of petitions to review those dismissals,
thusrevealing their lack of courage to expose their peers’ abuse and
interest
innot being shunned as traitors but rather
inbeing accepted by their "brothers and sisters of the robe"
atthe expense of the complainants and
theintegrity of the system of justice, left to fester with
theunderlying and untreated cause for complaint:
judgesemboldened by reciprocally ensuring the risklessness of their abuse
http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-journalists_politicians_scooping_judges_racketeering.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@xxxxxxxxxxx ;
, DrRCordero@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx , CorderoRic@xxxxxxxxx
  Dear Journalists, Politicians, and Advocates of Honest Judiciaries,
  1.  Justice nominee Ketanji Brown Jacksonwas confirmed by the Senate on April
7, 2022. However, she will not take herseat on the Supreme Court until the end
of this term in the summer. Thisaffords a unique opportunity to journalists,
including the media outlets forwhich they work, who want to make a scoop that
can lead to their winning aPulitzer Prize; principled and opportunistic
primarying politicians; and peopleinterested in the integrity of the judiciary:

a. They can examine the integrityand character of J. Brown Jackson and of
former chief judge now Attorney General (AG) Merrick Garland in light of the
official reports and statistics oftheir District of Columbia Circuit. There she
sat as a trial judge from 2013 to2021, and has sat as an appellate judge of the
Court ofAppeals for that Circuit(CADCC)since June 2021; and he served as that
Court's chief judge from 2013 to 2020.

b. Itfollows that the comments made here referring to J. Brown apply even
moreforcefully to Now-AG and Then-Judge and even Chief Judge Garland, asthey do
to Justice Clarence Thomas. Hence, suchapplication is not made explicit in
every instance.

A. The official statistics on complaints against judges

2. Those reports and statistics are submitted by the 13 U.S. courts of appeals,
including CADCC, and 2 national courts to Congressas a public document in the
Annual Report of the Director of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts.
The director is appointed by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court under Title
28 of the U.S. Code [of federal law only] section 601(28 U.S.C. §601).

3. Complaints against judges of a circuit can be filed by any person, including
a judge, under the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act of 1980(the Act; id.
§§351-364). The complaint statistics have appeared for most of those years in
Table S-22 of the Annual Report. I have compiled and tabulated them for ease of
presentation and analysis. Those statistics show that for decades, federal
judges have dismissed 100% of complaints against their peers and denied 100% of
petitions to review those dismissals.
4. Indeed, the introduction to Table S-22 for 2021 states the following
concerning complaints filed in the 15 reporting courts:

"The number of complaints filed in 2021 was 1,282, an increase of 29
complaints (up 2 percent) from the number filed in 2020.

Fifty-nine percent of the complaints were made against district judges, 25
percent were against circuit judges,...
Chief judges dismissed 1,402 complaints in whole or in part. This total
includes complaints that later were terminated with finality by circuit
judicial council orders on petitions for review, as well as complaints for
which additional review was still possible.

Chief judges terminated 948 complaints with no further review. Circuit judicial
councils terminated 480 complaints, including 2 terminated after reports by
special committees were issued."

5. Table S-22 shows the outcome of those complaints:

                Complaints with Corrective Action Taken
                or Intervening Events                                    0

             Censure or Reprimand                                      0
              Suspension of Assignments                             0

              Action Against Magistrate Judge                       0
              Removal of Bankruptcy Judge                           0
              Requesting of Voluntary Retirement                  0
              Certifying Disability of Circuit or District Court     0

B. The implications for judges of the statistics on complaints against them
6. It follows indisputably that the outcome of processing complaints against
federal judges is predetermined: The chief circuit judge, who by law examines
them in the first instance, will dismiss them systematically. The circuit
judicial council, composed of district and circuit judges, will deny all
petitions for dismissal review out of hand on a 5¢ form bearing the
rubberstamped signature of the clerk of court. No reason whatsoever is given.
There is no discussion of facts or law. The denial is a fiat.

a. The processing occurs in complete secrecy. It guarantees that the
complained-against judges will not be disturbed by any complaint, for they need
not have to be notified of it...after all, it will be dumped no matter its
nature, frequency, and gravity. But if a judge replies, he can make up any
story in his defense and to the detriment of the complainant, who will not be
able to check it in rebuttal because she will not be given a copy of the reply
without the judge's consent.

b. The implication of such peremptory dumping of complaints is inescapable:
Judges take care of their own to ensure that "Judges are Untouchable".

7. It is statistically impossible for thousands of complaints over decades
involving hundreds of judges to have led to the same outcome but for the
implicit or explicit complicit agreement among judges to exonerate each other
by abusing the power to self-discipline granted by Congress: 'Today I exonerate
you and tomorrow, when I am or my friends are complained against, you and your
friends exonerate us'.

a. It is possible for that complicit agreement to exist and operate only
because of the connivance between, on the one hand, the politicians that
adopted the Act and ignore the Annual Report on complaints and, on the other
hand, the judicial candidates that they recommend, endorse, nominate, and
confirm to a judgeship or justiceship, whom must be provided with unequal
protection from the law and spared any investigation by law enforcement
authorities or congressional committees, lest the judges wield against the
politicians their devastating power of retaliation(jur:81§1; Lsch:17§C).

8. Judges wield the most power over people's property, liberty, and all the
rights and duties that frame their lives and shape their identity. This is
especially so of federal judges, who are the only officers in our country to
have a lifetime appointment; they have the longest time to hold grudges. When
judges dismiss 100% of complaints against their peers and deny 100% of
petitions to review those dismissals, they not only protect themselves by
covering up their abuse underlying the complaints against them. They also leave
complainants uncompensated and unprotected from the retaliation of all judges.
a. As Then-Judge, Now-Judge Neil Gorsuch put it when visiting with senators
before his confirmation hearings: "An attack on one of our brothers and sisters
of the robe is an attack on all of us".(OL2:546; 548) That was the expression
of judges' gang mentality. They do no process complaints impartially in light
only of the law and what is right and just. What matters is gang belongingness
and self-interest.
9. What is more, judges have left all parties and the rest of the public at the
mercy of judges emboldened by the assurance that no matter what they do, their
"brothers and sisters of the robe" will cover up for them. They reciprocally
ensure that they are Judges Above Congress by in effect abrogating its Judicial
Conduct and Disability Act. Yet, they give the false impression to the public
that a complaint under that Act will be processed fairly and impartially. By
misleading the public to its detriment for their own gain and convenience, the
judges have committed fraud on the public.

10. That is what they have done as a matter of fact. For proof, there is the
series of articles published by the highly regarded The Wall Street Journal
beginning on September 28, 2021, under the initial title:

a. “131 Federal Judges Broke the Law by Hearing Cases Where They Had a
Financial Interest”. "[Federal] judges failed to recuse themselves from 685
lawsuits from 2010 to 2018 involving firms in which they or their family held
shares, a Wall Street Journal investigation found...Alerted to the violations
by the Journal, 56 of the judges have directed court clerks to notify parties
in 329 lawsuits that they should have recused themselves. That means new judges
might be assigned, potentially upending rulings."

b. 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. Rodney Gilstrap initially argued he didn’t violatefinancial-conflicts
law”; James.Grimaldi@xxxxxxx, Joe.Palazzolo@xxxxxxx, Coulter.Jones@xxxxxxx,
Michael.Siconolfi@xxxxxxx. (See the articles referred to here and at
Appendix:6§C.22.)
c. Who is going to pay for a new trial or appeal or for disentangling contracts
based on void or voidable decisions by law-breaking judges? See paragraph 26
below and a plan for collectively demanding compensation to be implemented by
journalists, professors, and students.

C. The implications for justice nominee Brown Jackson and A.G. judge Merrick
Garland

11. The above provides reasonable grounds, and even probable cause, to
believethat during her long career in the Federal Judiciary –even longer
forThen-Judge and Chief Judge Garland–, Judge Brown acquired actual knowledge
ofthe abuse of power of judges and their complicit agreement on
reciprocalexoneration from complaints against them. She satisfies the standard
that makesjurors suitable peers of a defendant: 'a person with common sense
reasonablybecomes aware and informs herself of the circumstances affecting her
and thepeople close to her emotionally, physically, or socially and forms an
opinionof what is right or wrong".
12. Judge Brown has breached the reporting duty under 18 U.S.C. §3057-Title 18
contains the federal Criminal Code- on any judge “having reasonablegrounds for
believing [which is a standard lower than “probable cause tobelieve” and much
lower than “evidence admissible in court ”] that anyviolation under chapter 9
[on bankruptcy, the classification of over 70% of allcases filed in the Federal
Judiciary] of this title [18] or other laws of theUnited States relating to
insolvent debtors, receiverships or reorganizationplans has been committed, or
that an investigation should be had in connectiontherewith [which lowers the
standard below, and precedes, “having reasonablegrounds for believing”].
a."Probable cause to believe" that a person has committed the offensewith which
he has been charged is a standard of proof. It need not be satisfiedto warrant
investigating a person. Before any investigation, it may besatisfied by the
facts known up to then, e.g., those surrounding the person'sdetention. That
explains why it can be applied before conducting discovery. Incriminal cases,
district attorneys may invoke it to justify the indictment thatthey present to
the arraignment judge. The latter may reject the not guiltyplea of the
defendant and rely on probable cause to commit him to jail with orwithout bail.
If the defendant cannot post the bail set, he is committed to jailuntil he can
or the case is finally disposed of.
b.Neither willful blindness nor willful ignorance(jur:90§§b-c)prevents
knowledge of such breach from being imputed to judges or their clerks.
13. Likewise, Judge Brown has breached her ethical reporting duties under the
Code of Conduct for U.S. Judges, Canon 3(B)(6)).
a.Judges have legal and ethical duties to report other judges' breach of
theirduties and "improprieties and even the appearance of improprieties"(id.,
Canon2).
14. Judges must not perform such reporting pro forma, but rather must pursue
itin good faith by exercising due diligence until the reporting achieves
itsintended purpose of safeguarding their own integrity and that of
judicialprocess, lest the judges end up inured to the commission or cover-up of
thebreach, condoning it, and becoming chargeable with misprision of felony(18
U.S.C. §4).
15. It follows that by Judge Brown not reporting judges'
abusiveself-exoneration from complaints, she has covered it up. Thereby she
hascontributed to judges' committing with impunity the abuse underlying
thecomplaints. In fact, she has aggravated their abuse, for people who commit
onetype of abuse without suffering any adverse consequences are, far
fromdeterred, encouraged by risklessness and the lure of more gains and
convenienceto grab them by committing ever more types.

a. For both her, as accessory afterthe last abuse that she knew about but
covered up and as accessory before thenext abuse that the principals committed
in reliance on that cover-up precedentof hers, applying the law, never mind
doing so fairly and impartially, hasbecome only an afterthought...'so long as
it does not keep me from grabbingever more or making me run the risk of being
treated as a traitor to "mybrothers and sisters in the robe".
b. That is how Judge Rodney Gilstrap broke the lawby deciding 138 cases in
which he had a financial interest and the judges thatheard him brag about it
covered up for him by failing to report him(supra, paragraph 10)

D. The opportunity for journalists and the senators

       1. Conducting journalistic and congressional investigations

16. Journalists in their investigation and the senators in their written
questions before the hearing and their oral ones at the hearing can ask that
historic question asked of every witness by Senator Howard Baker, a cochairman
of the Senate committee holding hearings on the break-in at the Democratic
National Committee at the Watergate building in Washington, DC, on June 17,
1972, by Republican operatives engaged in political espionage in favor of the
reelection campaign of President Nixon: "What did the President know and when
did he know it?"

a. The answers to that question led to the resignation of President Nixon on
August 8, 1974, and the incarceration of all his aides.
17. Journalists and senators can reformulate that question to determine whether
Judge Brown has shown bias toward her peers and harmful indifference toward
parties and the rest of the public in disregard of her oath of office(28 U.S.C.
§453) that disqualify her from both becoming a justice and remaining a judge:

a. Whatdid J. Brown and Then-Judge Garland know and when did they know about
judges’:
1) implicitor explicit agreement for reciprocal exoneration from complaints
against judges,including Then-Judge, Now-Justice Brett Kavanaugh;

2) breaking the law by failing to recuse themselves from cases in which they
had a financial interest;
3) braggingin court and out of court, e.g., at the suite of the organizer of a
judicialseminar, a country club, restaurants and hotels, about the gains
andconvenience that they had grabbed by breaking the law that way and any
otherway;

4) concealingassets, evading taxes, money laundering, and filing misleading and
falsemandatory annual financial disclosure reports under the Ethics in
GovernmentAct of 1978(Appendix to 5 U.S.C.) with the all-judge Financial
DisclosureCommittee of the Judicial Conference(28 U.S.C. §331) in reliance on
the Committee examining thosereports only pro forma with the approval or
condonation of their appointer,none other than the Supreme Court Chief Justice;

18. Many other questions are suggested throughout my three-volume study* † ♣ of
judges and their judiciaries, the product of my 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* † ♣    a. Open the downloaded files using
Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available for free.       b. Some of my law
articles included in that study are also posted to my website Judicial
Discipline Reform at http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org.       c. My ;
articles analyze current events and propose concrete, reasonable, and feasible
actions that webvisitors can take in their own interest.       d. Those
articles have attracted so many visitors and elicited in them such a positive
reaction that the number of those who had become subscribers as of April 23,
2023, was 43,834+(Appendix 3).        e. How many law firms, let alone lawyers,
do you know who have a website with so many subscribers?       f. You too can
subscribe: go to the website <left panel ↓Register;    or    + New  or  Users

Add New; or fill out the NewUser form at

https://www.judicial-discipline-reform.org/wp-admin/user-new.php .        19. ;
Those questions can be supplemented by one that can have far reaching
implications by exposing the politicians-judges' connivance and breaking open a
window into the staff of the most secretive entity in the U.S.: the Federal
Judiciary.

a. Those questions can besupplemented by one that can have far reaching
implications by exposing thepoliticians-judges’ appointer-appointee connivance
as well as for the firsttime breaking open a window into the complicity of the
clerks of the U.S.’s mostsecretive entity: the Federal Judiciary?

b. Cf. Justice Thomas's wife, Virginia "Ginni" Thomas, was exposed by CBS News
on March 25, 2022, as working with Trump's chief of staff Mark Meadows, with
whom she exchanged 29 emails, and members of Congress to overturn the results
of the 2020 presidential election and make Trump the president. Justice Thomas
was the only justice who voted to allow Trump to keep secret documents sought
from him in the official investigation of the House Committee on the January 6
insurrection. One can think of the situation where Justice Thomas screams at
his peers what all judges have etched on their forefronts: 'If you let them
take me [or my wife] down, I'll bring you with me!'  If so, the domino effect
of his retaliatory revelations can cause  one or more judges or justices to
topple others until the Judiciary crumbles from the inside.

c.i. Cf. The Judiciary's highest policy-making body, i.e., the Judicial
Conference of the U.S., whose presiding officer is the Chief Justice of the
Supreme Court, adopted rules at its March 2022 meeting for:.1) the automatic
release of judges' annual mandatory financial disclosure reports and the
screening of conflicts;
2) the certification by judges twice a year of a statement that they do not
have conflict of interests, whether financial or otherwise; and
3) the expansion of the lifestreaming audio of proceedings.
c.ii. The wealth of information that may be available for comparison with what
judges have reported for the past seven years can prove devastating to the
Judiciary, the most secretive branch, the one that holds all its adjudicative,
policy-making, administrative, and disciplinary meetings behind closed doors.
20. Journalists, politicians, and the rest of the national public should:
a. demand that President Biden release the FBI report on Judge Brown as well as
the reports on all the other judges and justices. That is necessary to
establish what presidents and the senators who shepherded judicial nominees
through the confirmation process(OL:194§E) knew about them and when they knew
it. We the People, the Masters of all public servants, including judicial
public servants,are entitled to those reports to be able to hold our servants
accountable and liable to compensate the victims of their abuse of power.
21. They should invoke Article III, Section 1, of the Constitution, which
provides that:

"The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices
during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services,
a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in
Office."

a. to argue that the 131 judges who broke the law and others similarly situated
have given probable cause to believe that they have not maintained the "good
Behaviour" required to "hold their Offices" so that their "Continuance in
Office" must be suspended, and they must without "Compensation" be removed from
their current cases and not assigned new ones until an investigation, e.g.,
into their financial reports for false and misleading disclosures, and their
relations to other people for any bragging about, or admission of, their
grabbing gains and convenience, either clears them or determines that they
should permanently not be allowed to "hold their Offices".
22. They should demand that Attorney General judge Garland recuse himself
publicly from any participation in the official investigation by the FBI and
the Department of Justice of his former fellow judges and their clerks.
23. They should also petition the House of Representatives to form a committee,
to the fullest extent endowed with discovery powers, such as of subpoena,
contempt, and search and seizure, to investigate judges' failure to maintain
"good Behaviour" by engaging in a many  forms of abuse, such as their:
a. dismissal of 100% of complaintsand denial of 100% of petitions to review
those dismissals. That is how they cover-up of the abuse of power underlying
the complaints;
b. disposition of the majority of cases without ever reading their briefs. Each
brief costs $1Ks and even$10Ks to produce through discovery, field
investigation, witness-locating, transcription of depositions, printing,
copying, binding, serving, filing, arguing orally, etc., and entails
compensable waste, breach of contract for judicial service, false
advertisement, fraud on the party and the public, etc.;

1) such failure can be demonstrated mathematically by dividing the annual
number of disposed of cases, motions, and applications, by the number of judges
in the court, of judges on each panel, of panels in the court, and of working
days. The number of daily dispositions will make it apparent that the judges
could not possibly have had time to read the respective briefs, decisions,
record, laws, rules, regulations, treatises, journals, field specific and
background information, etc., never mindresearch, draft, deliberate, etc. Note
that their time for dispositions was diminished by their non-adjudicative
activities, e.g., administrative, policy-making, disciplinary, bar-admitting,
guest-receiving activities;

2) yet, more than 93% of appeals to the federal courts of appeals are disposed
of in “procedural [e.g., the catchall, expedient ground of "lack of
jurisdiction"], unsigned, unpublished, without comment, and by consolidation
[throwing together a bunch of cases for disposition in one fell swoop]”
decisions issued by caseload-lightening clerks rubberstamping the signature of
the clerk of court on a reasonless, non-precedential, ad-hoc, arbitrary fiats
contained in a 5¢ in-the-wastebasket-dumping form!(OL2:457§D); and
c. interceptionof people’s emails and mail to detect and suppress those of
their critics. That constitutes a deprivation of the rights most cherished by
Wethe People, namely, those guaranteed under the 1st Amendment tothe
Constitutionto “freedom of speech, of the press, the right of the people
peaceably toassemble [through the Internet and on social media too], and to
petition theGovernment [of which judges are the third branch] for a redress of
grievances [by paying compensation].
24. Informing the national public about how the above questions,
investigations, and similar ones are warranted by judges' abuse of power and
their official court statistics can so outrage the public as to force Judge
Brown to withdraw her name from the justice nomination and resign. That
expectation is reasonable on the strength of its precedent: Public outrage at
Supreme Court Justice Abe Fortas's 'improprieties', which were not criminal,
not even civil offenses, forced him to withdraw his name from the nomination to
chief justice and thereafter resign on May 14, 1969(jur:92§d).

25. In fact, an informed public's outrage can be so intense as to stir up the
public to  demand that politicians running in the primaries and their
supporters:
a. address the issue of judges' unaccountability and riskless abuse of their
unequaled power at every interview, rally, townhall meeting, and in their
electoral programs;
b. call for official investigations by the House and the FBI and DoJ;
c. support the abusees' collective demand for compensation; and

d. reform the system of justice so that judges and their judiciary are held as
accountable and liable as they have held pedophilic clergy and their churches
because nobody is entitled to arrogate to themselves unequal protection from
the law.

       2. Asking for copies of complaints and stories of abuse by judges
26. In the same vein, journalists and politicians can ask people to send them a
copy of the complaints that they have filed in court or with judicial
performance review commissions as well as their stories of judges' many forms
of abuse  of power that they have suffered or witnessed.

a. They can invite people to apply the two-phase method for writing in up to
500 words stories that are accurate, significant, and verifiable. Their
analysis of those complaints and stories will enable them to detect the most
probative type of evidence: patterns of abuse and schemes that can only be the
product of coordination among wrongdoers, thus acting knowingly and
intentionally.

b. Such analysis will also enrich the existing list of abundant leads(OL:194§E)
for launching a generalized media investigation into judges' and justices'
abuse of power and their cover-up.

27. People can send their story to the following two blocs of email addresses
of top journalists -many of whom in their articles and reportage(OL3:1452§1)
have already exposed judges' abuse of power- and professors:     To:
[journalists]   adenney@xxxxxxx, pam.spector@xxxxxxxxxx, dbiscobing@xxxxxxxxx,
adam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, iteam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, assignmentdesk@xxxxxxxxx,
iteam@xxxxxxx, James.Grimaldi@xxxxxxx, Coulter.Jones@xxxxxxx,
Joe.Palazzolo@xxxxxxx, michael.siconolfi@xxxxxxx, kate.davidson@xxxxxxx,
john.shiffman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, michael.berens@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
erik.ortiz@xxxxxxxxxx, Anna.Brand@xxxxxxxxxx, Tim.Perone@xxxxxxxxxx,
Jessica.Simeone@xxxxxxxxxx, cmartel@xxxxxxxxxxx, Jaquetta.White@xxxxxxxxxx,
blake.morrison@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, tips@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
contact@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, newstip@xxxxxxxxx, patricia.wen@xxxxxxxxx,
brian.mcgrory@xxxxxxxxx, spotlight@xxxxxxxxx, insiders@xxxxxxxx,
tips@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, gryle@xxxxxxxx,ginger.thompson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
andrea@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,marketresearch.thomsonreuters@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
drew@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, contact@xxxxxxxx, fshiel@xxxxxxxx,
investigations@xxxxxxxx,charles.ornstein@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
newsletters@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, email@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
Lisabennett418@xxxxxxxxx, mderienzo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
watchdog@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, emily.holden@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, tips@xxxxxxxxxxx,
ryan.grim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, tips@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, info@xxxxxx,
corderoric@xxxxxxxxx, mcnulaj@xxxxxxxxxxx, communication@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
info@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, aturturro@xxxxxxx, support@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
Opencourt@xxxxxxx,aj.cameron1@xxxxxxxxx, wpmagazine@xxxxxxxxxxxx,
Evan.Allen@xxxxxxxxx, Brendan.McCarthy@xxxxxxxxx, colorofmoney@xxxxxxxxxxxx,
   cc: [professors]   robert.bauer@xxxxxxx, cristina.rodriguez@xxxxxxxx,
dana.fowler@xxxxxxxxxxxx, caroline.fredrickson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
kandrias@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, jack.balkin@xxxxxxxx, baude@xxxxxxxxxxxx,
madams@xxxxxx, charles@xxxxxxxxxxxx, acrespo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
jgoldsmith@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, bross@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, wdellinger@xxxxxxx,
levi@xxxxxxxxxxxx, ecb95@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, justin.driver@xxxxxxxx,
development@xxxxxxxxxxxx, rfallon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,heather.k.gerken@xxxxxxxx,
tgrove@xxxxxxxxxx, ngertner@xxxxxxxxxxx, tgriffith@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
bhuang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, mkang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, ojohns@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
awhite36@xxxxxxx, lacroix@xxxxxxxxxxxx,
lemos@xxxxxxxxxxxx,trevor.morrison@xxxxxxx, cnelson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
rick.pildes@xxxxxxx, d-strauss@xxxxxxxxxxxx, mramsey@xxxxxxxxxxxx,
tribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, krooseve@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, kewhitt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx,
michael.waldman@xxxxxxx, Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@xxxxxxxxxxx,

3. Holding unprecedented citizens hearings and a conference and forming local
chapters of a national movement for transformative judicial reform
28. By writing their story, people can take their first step toward attaining
one of their most compelling objectives in their quest for justice: telling it
orally to the national public. That is the second step, which they can take at
the proposed unprecedented citizens hearings. They are to be organized by
journalists and politicians joining forces with professors and students at
schools of journalism, law, business, Information Technology, and social
sciences; and held at media stations, university auditoriums, and via video
conference so that the largest number of people everywhere can attend and
testify inexpensively and with minimal disruption to their daily routine.

a. The report on the citizens hearings can be presented at the first-ever
conference on judicial unaccountability and abuse of power, broadcast
nationally and internationally multimedia and interactively.

b. Only after a thorough investigation and presentation of the nature, extent,
and gravity of judges' unaccountable and abusive exercise of power can there be
a discussion of measures to prohibit, prevent, detect, and punish their abuse.
29. Journalists and politicians can also work together to facilitate the
formation by people who have cases before the same abusive judge or in the same
court of local chapters. Their purpose will be to collectively demand
compensation for abusees from judges and their judiciaries.
a. The local chapters are intended to coalesce eventually into a national
movement for judicial abuse of power exposure, compensation, and reform.

30. That is how the unprecedented citizens hearings and the conference will
open the way for reforming the system of justice through transformative change:
the system that enters the process of change will come out transformed into a
different entity because reformative measures that today are deemed unthinkable
will manifest themselves as unavoidable(OL3:1372¶f) .

E. My offer of a presentation to you and your guests and a pitch of one or a
series of my articles

31. The Senate confirmation hearings, the primaries, and the national
MeToo!-BLM intolerance of all forms of abuse have coincided to turn the present
time into the most propitiousto make progress in judicial abuse exposure,
compensation, and reform. By taking the above-mentioned and similar concrete,
reasonable, and feasible actionsthat I have proposed, you can advance your own
commercial and reputational interests: "Scandal sells"  and you can become
nationally recognized by a grateful We the People as their Champion of Justice.

32. I offer to present these actions to you and your guests via video
conference or in person. To schedule the presentation use my contact
information below.

33. To invite people to attend the presentation and send you their complaints
and stories 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 and politicians your
story of judges' abuse of powerto participate in unprecedented citizens
hearings and demand compensation and reform;
http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_your_story_for_media&citizens_hearings.pdf
34.  Therefore, this pitch can advance your commercial and reputational
interests just as it can mine if you publish this or a series of my articles. I
have written scores of them and made them available for download and
review(OL3:App6§A). In addition, there is a long list of subjects(id., §B) that
I have already treated in my study of judges and their judiciaries(paragraph
17.a.5 supra). Of course, I can  write on commission, whether articles, briefs,
or case evaluations. Seealso my urban development Offshoot Oases Project.
     F. Every meaningful cause needs resources for its advancement;
    none can be continued, let alone advanced, without money     35. Lip
service advances nothing; but it continues to enable the abusers.   Put your
money where your
outrage at abuse and
quest for justice are.   36. Support the professional law research and
writing, and strategic thinking at

  Judicial Discipline Reform
http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org.  37. 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, New York City 10472-6506
     tel. +1(718)827-9521
Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@xxxxxxxxxxx, DrRCordero@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
CorderoRic@xxxxxxxxx
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.
*******************************

Follow-Ups:
- [administrating-your-public-servants] Re: [administrating-your-public-servants] Re: [administrating-your-public-servants] Re: [administrating-your-public-servants] Re: [administrating-your-public-servants] Taking action and thinking critically to cause journalists and politicians to read your story and ask: What did Judge K Brown Jackson, Attorney General M Garland, and Justice Thomas know about judges’ abuse of power and when did they know it?
  - From: Paul M

References:

Other related posts: