 How Trump can benefit you by turning criticism of a judge into exposure of judges’ wrongdoing
Click to teach Gmail this conversation is important.
NOTE: If in spite of all efforts to circumvent the glitch that creates“joinedwords”, this email, saved in Rich Text, has them, kindly overlook them and let the author know by sending him an email tothis bloc of email addresses: Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon
How Donald Trump
can turn his criticism of a federal judge intoan opportunity to denounce federal judges’unaccountability, which gives rise to the mindset of impunity that induces judges to engage risklessly in wrongdoing,including illegal, criminal activity, thus providing probablecause to believe that judges, fearing no adverse consequences, also abuse their discretion
An opportunity for Trump to emerge as
TheVoice of The Dissatisfied With The Establishment,The Champion of Justice of the victims of wrongdoing and abusive judges, and TheArchitect of theNew American Judicial System bycausing the investigation of two unique national stories ofjudicial wrongdoing
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 JudicialDiscipline Reform http://www.Judicial- NewYork City
Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@
Thislettermay be republished and redistributed, provided it is
inits entirety and without any addition, deletion, or modification, andcredit is given to its author, Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Mr. Donald J. Trump
Donald J. Trump for President, Inc. 725 Fifth Avenue New York, NY 10022
Dear Mr. Trump,
On May 23, I delivered at the reception of Trump Tower aletter(†>ol2:422)for you with materials†proposing that you denounce federal judges’ unaccountability andconsequent riskless wrongdoing, and reap benefits from so doing,i.e., attracting the attention and support of the huge(*>ol:311¶1)untapped voting bloc of all the people who are dissatisfied with thejudicial and legal systems. They form part of the dominant sector ofthe electorate to whom you have given a voice and who represent yourkey constituency: The Dissatisfied With The Establishment.
* See Dr. Cordero’s study of judges and their judiciary, which istitled and downloadable as follows:
Exposing Judges’ Unaccountability and
Consequent Riskless Wrongdoing: Pioneering the news and publishing field of judicial unaccountability reporting*
All (bluetext references)herein are keyed to that study. There such references are active internal hyperlinks. By clicking on them, you can effortlessly bringup to your screen the referred-to supporting and additionalinformation, thus facilitating substantially your checking it.
A. Federal judges’ unaccountability and consequent risklesswrongdoing raises probable cause for criticism of abuse of discretion
1. Your criticism of the exercise of discretionary power by JudgeGonzalo Curiel, who presides over the Trump University case, offersyoutheopportunity to denounce judges’ unaccountability that enableswrongdoing and abuse of discretion(*>jur:5§3):
2. You can argue thatjudges have granted themselves absolute immunity from prosecution,thus elevating themselves above the law; and are held unaccountablein practice by the Establishment politicianswhorecommended, endorsed, nominated, and confirmed them to the FederalJudiciary andprotect them there as ‘theirmen and women on the bench’. So the judges are in practiceirremovable:
3. In the last 227 yearssince the creation of their Judiciary in 1789, the number ofimpeached and removed federal judges –2,217 were in office on30sep13– is 8!(jur:22fn13,14) As aconsequence, they do wrong risklessly(jur:65§§1-3)and even exercise their discretion abusively: Those who can do themost –impeachable wrongdoing– can do the lesser –reversiblediscretion-abusing decisions–.
B. Distinguishing between abuse of discretion and a charge ofwrongdoing
4.You need not prove that Judge Curiel himself has engaged in wrongdoing,not even that he has abused his discretionary power, for which youwould have to meet the exacting requirement of proving that hisdecisions were grossly unsound, unreasonable, illegal, or unsupportedby the evidence.
5. Convincing appellatejudges in any case that a peer in the court below and friend oftheirs for years, who knows of their own wrongdoing and abuse, abusedhis discretion is an uphill battle; it is rendered in this case allbut impossible because the appellate judges as well as all the otherjudges have closed ranks as a class behind one of their own underattack.
6. Instead,you only need to show the appearance(jur:68fn123a),
C. The mindset of impunity: the policy established by the Supreme Courtand its manifestation in judges’ conduct
7. The wrongdoers’ mindset has been fostered by policy establishedby the Supreme Court itself. In Piersonv. Ray(jur:26fn25),it stated that judges’“immunityapplies even when the judge is accused of acting maliciously andcorruptly”.In Stumpv. Sparkman(26fn26),the Court even assured judges that “Ajudge will not be deprived of immunity because the action he took wasin error, was done maliciously, or was in excess of his authority”.
8. Such assurance has created the mindset of impunity. Once on the bench, forever thereno matter what. Self-restraintis superfluous because anything and everything is condoned.Self-indulgence has butcontempt fordiscretion.
9. Unaccountable judgesexercise abusively, not merely discretion, but even power overpeople’s property, liberty, and all the rights and duties thatdetermine their lives. They wield absolute power, the kind that‘corrupts absolutely’(27fn28).Abuse of discretion is an institutional uninhibited mental reflex.
10. As a result, federaljudges abuse discretion for their own benefit. Indeed(*>Lsch:21§A):
a. Chief circuit judges abuse judges’ statutory self-discipliningauthority by dismissing 99.82%(jur:10-14)of complaints against their peers; with other judges they deny up to100% of appeals to review such dismissals(jur:24§b).By judges immunizing themselves from liability for their wrongdoingthey deny complainants their 1st Amendment rightto “redressof grievances”, making them victims with no effective right to complain.
b. Up to 9 of every 10 appeals are disposed of ad-hoc through no-reason summary orders(jur:44fn66)or opinions so “perfunctory”(jur:44fn68)that the judges who wrote them mark them “not for publication” and “not precedential”(jur:43§1). Intheir own estimation, they are raw fiats of star-chamber power. Theyare as difficult to find as if they were secret; and if found,meaningless to litigants and the public, for most frequently theironly operative word is the one that betrays the expediency that motivates them: ‘affirmed!’ They are blatant abuse of discretion.
c. Circuit judges appoint bankruptcy judges(jur:43fn61a),whose rulings come on appeal before their appointers, who protectthem. In Calendar Year 2010, these appointees decided who kept orreceived the $373 billion at stake in only personalbankruptcies(jur:27§2)
d. That scheme was covered up byThen-Judge Sotomayor, e.g., DeLano(jur:xxxv,xxxviii),which she presided over. Whether it is one of the sources of assetsthat The New York Times, The Washington Post, andPolitico(jur:65fn107a,c) suspected herof concealing (65§§1-3)is a querythat youcan raiseat a pressconference(jur:xvii)to launch(jur:98§2)a Watergate-like generalized media investigation(ol:194§E)of her and the Judiciary through two unique national stories (seeinfra).
D. Wrongdoers and their accessories: What did they do or know and whendid they do or know it?
11. Not all judges are wrongdoers; but they need not be such to beparticipants in illegal activity that requires their resignation(jur:92§d) or impeachment.When they keep silent about the wrongs done by their peers, theybecome accessories after the fact; when they let their peers knowthat they will look away when the peers do wrong again, they become accessories before the fact(jur:88§§a-c).
12. In both cases, theybreach their oath of office(ol:162§§5-6),show dereliction of their collective duty to safeguardinstitutional integrity, and contribute to denying due process andequal protection of the law to all parties.
13. Thus, the question is properly asked of every judge: What did he orshe know about their peers’ wrongdoing and when did he or she knowit?
E. Actions to expose judges’ wrongdoing and become the Champion ofJustice of victims of wrongdoing and abusive judges
14. Republican Establishment Sen. McConnell has called yourcriticism of the judge in the Trump University case “your worst mistake”; and Republican Sen. Collins has askedfor you to apologize to the judge.
15. You can defend your criticism by showing that unaccountablejudges engage in institutionalized wrongdoing as part of theirhistory, policy, and mindset of impunity, which provides probable cause to believe that they abuse their discretion as part of theirway of doing business.
16. What is more, you can turn your own defense into that of thenational public, for ‘if judges can treat me unfairly, though I ama presumptive nominee, represented by the best lawyers, and able toappeal to the Supreme Court, how much more abuse do they heap onyou?’ So to become the voice of the Dissatisfied With The Establishment and its judicial and legal systems, you can:
a) denounce(jur:98§2)judges’ wrongdoing at a press conference and ask the media to conduct apinpointed, cost-effective investigation of two unique nationalstories,stated below,thatcan expose the nature, extent, and gravityof judicial wrongdoing;
b) invite the public to:
1) upload their complaints aboutjudges to your site(cf. infra362), search themfor patterns of wrongdoing supportive of motions for disqualification, remand, new trial, etc., and
2) demand nationally televised hearings on judicial wrongdoing and reform;
c) propose to the deans of Columbia and NYU law schools a course to research(ol:60, 112-118;jur:131§b) judicial unaccountability and reform as an independent third party(jur:128§4) working to the highest academic standards(infra3647) to produce the Report on Judicial Unaccountability and Wrongdoing in America and theRequired Reform; and
d) pioneer judicial unaccountability reporting as a business venture(jur:119§1).
15. By so doing, you can turn yourcriticism of a judgeinto a master strategic thinker’s move to:
a. pack(ol2:422) the Judiciary with your nominees to replace justices and judges forced to resign or removed;
b. reform(jur:158§§6-8;ol:129§3) the Judiciary to detect,prevent, and punish wrongdoing as warranted by(ol:135§A) the wrongdoing exposed; and
c. become thereby the Architectof the New American Judicial System.
16. Irespectfully request an opportunity to present this strategy to youand your officers.
Dare trigger history!(jur:7§5)…and you may enter it.
Sincerely,
Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon
NOTE1:G iven the interference with Dr. Cordero’s email and e-cloudstorage accounts described at * >ggl:1et 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.
NOTE2: This letter and supporting materials can be downloaded through this link:
http://www.Judicial-
The Two Unique National StoriesA. The P. Obama-J. Sotomayor story and the Follow the money! investigation
1. What did the President(*>jur:77§A),Sen. Schumer & Gillibrand(jur:78§6), and federal judges213bknow 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) ofconcealing assets, which entails the crimesol:5fn10 of tax evasion107cand 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 and other wrongdoing?(ol:154¶3)
2. This story can be pursued through theFollow the money! investigation(jur:102§a;ol:1,6
B. The Federal Judiciary-NSA story and the Follow it wirelessly! investigation
3. To w hat 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 NSA –upto 100% of whose secret requests for secret surveillance orders are rubberstamped(ol:5fn7) bythe federal judges of the secret court established under Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act– to:
a. conceal assets –a crime under 26 U.S.C. §§7201, 7206(ol:5fn10), unlikesurveillance– 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.
4. See the statisticalanalysis(ol:19§Dfn2
5. This story can be pursued through theFollow it wirelessly! investigation(jur:105§b;ol:2,6
******************************
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Sunday, June 12, 2016
How Trump can benefit you by turning criticism of a judge into exposure of judges’ wrongdoing
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thank you for commenting.
Your comment will be held for approval by the blog owner.