Politics is a cancer

Politics is a cancer that has entered the arena.    It is very clear that the recent disgraceful order of the Supreme Court of Illinois in relation to JoAnne Denison's case is political.    How else could a legitimate court sitting in the United States of America allow the orgy of corruption to play out that has occurred in the Denison disciplinary case.

In particular:

1) JoAnne's (and my personal call) call for an HONEST INVESTIGATION of the obvious criminal felonies that are evident in the Mary Sykes case 09 P 4585 (Cook County) is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, Article 1 of the Illinois Constitution, State and Federal Statutes, and the core values of America.     These protections are self evident even though a bunch of heavy clouted political elite and a corrupt judge are involved.

2) pursuant to lawyer rule 8.3 , 18 USCA 4, and the Himmel case in Illinois not reporting the felonies observed to be committed by the heavily clouted miscreants and the judge would be grounds for disciplinary action (and possible criminal prosecution)   The particular:

1. The Gloria Sykes affidavit (co-owner of Mary Sykes safety deposit box) reveals the theft (felony) of a million dollars in gold coins
2. Judge Connors on page 91 of her evidence deposition taken by the IARDC admitting to her being corrupted.    This is particularly significant as the Court file reveals
1. No proper service of process on Mary Sykes pursuant to 755 ILCS 5/11a - 10.
2. Improper venue.   
3. failure to address Petition for protective order filed by Mary prior to the guardianship proceeding
4. Lack of hearing as to Mary Sykes' competency required by ADA, 755 ILCS 5/11a - 3b and 10
5. numerous other strange happenings - including the very very strange proceedings involving Judge Stuart and the personal funds of Gloria Sykes.
3. The fact that two guardian ad litem were appointed in a case where it was obvious that Mary Sykes was perfectly competent - The August 2009 hearing before Judge Connors in which it was revealed that the petition could not obtain anyone to testify that Mary was incompetent -- and one of the two guardian ad litem recommending an individual who was used all the time; 

 3) Matters involved in the Disciplinary hearing, to wit:

• Judge Stuarts perjury reported by Court watchers - she testified on direct under oath as to a material fact denying that she had Gloria Sykes, a non-party, chained and intimidated to induce Ms. Sykes to reveal where she had her own personal funds.    NB.   Judge Stuart on cross examination admitted that she was not telling the truth.
• the Court reporter's transcript having this sequence of reported processing eliminated.
• the obvious 'fixing' of the proceedings allowing the disciplinary commission to not be required to meet the standard of proof, provide a scintilla of evidence that any statement made by the attorney was even vaguely inaccurate etc.
• the breach of the law that specifically prevented Mr. Larkin from engaging (for the protection of the public and in particular the attorney respondent) a non-licensed Court reporter.   Of course Larkin ignored the law, his ethical responsibilities, and his public trust.

We appear to be just about to leave the era of POLITICAL CORRECTNESS and group thought.   Many of us have swallowed hook line and sinker many of the words and phrases of our government without thinking about them, and thus we have allowed cases such as JoAnne Denison case to pollute our democracy.    Denison is not the only case.   One of the most obnoxious disciplinary cases of this era has been the Lanre Amu matter.   Amu received an interim suspension of his law license even though Jerome Larkin, the IARDC, and the Illinois Supreme Court knew/or should have known that the Larkin complaint against him was totally false and a sham.   Even when Crains Chicago Business, a respected business publication made the very same allegations the Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission, its miscreat Adminstrator, and the Illinois Supreme Court would not acknowledge that a terrible injustice has occurred!

We, the people (the great unwashed) did nothing and we are still doing nothing; however, a recent article suggests that we might be stirring!

52% Say Clintons Should Be Part of Russia Probe

in Politics

FacebookTwitterEmail thisShareThis

RELATED ARTICLES

• Daily Presidential Tracking Poll
• Voters Like Congress More Than They Have in Years
• 63% Think Hillary Clinton May Have Helped Foreign Donors As Secretary of State
• Democrats See Russia as Election Culprit, Others Don’t
• Most See Russia as Likely Influence on Trump
• GOP Voters More Hopeful Than Democrats About U.S.-Russia Relations

Sign up for free daily updates

Wednesday, April 05, 2017

Voters are closely divided on the importance of Congress investigating whether Russia interfered with the last election, but if it does, they think the Clintons’ ties to the Russians should be part of the probe.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 50% of Likely U.S. Voters think Congress should expand its investigation of any possible ties between the Trump campaign and the Russian government. Forty-five percent (45%) say Congress’ time would be better spent dealing with economic and other policy issues instead. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

However, 52% believe Bill and Hillary Clinton’s private dealings with Russian officials should be included in the FBI and congressional investigation of the Trump campaign. Thirty-five percent (35%) disagree, but 13% are not sure.

As always these days, party affiliation seems to be a big deciding factor. Seventy percent (70%) of Democrats think Congress should expand its investigation of any possible links between the Russian government and the Trump campaign, but only 28% of Republicans agree. Yet while 69% of GOP voters say the Clintons should be tossed into the investigative mix, only 37% of Democrats like that idea.

Voters not affiliated with either major party favor expanding the congressional investigation by a 50% to 44% margin. Fifty-one percent (51%) of these voters think the Clintons should be part of the probe; 33% disagree.

(Want a free daily e-mail update? If it's in the news, it's in our polls). Rasmussen Reports updates are also available on Twitter or Facebook.

The survey of 1,000 Likely Voters was conducted on March 30 and April 2, 2017 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC. See methodology.

In mid-December, Democrats, still searching for a reason for Hillary Clinton’s loss to Republican Donald Trump, blamed the Russians, but other voters didn’t see it that way.

The older the voter, the more likely he or she is to say Congress would be better served focusing on economic and other policy issues.

Men agree more than women that Congress should focus on economic and policy issues. But men are much more supportive of including the Clintons in any Russia probe than women are.

Among voters who think Congress should expand its investigation of any possible ties between the Trump campaign and the Russian government, only 36% believe the Clintons should be part of that probe. Seventy-one percent (71%) of voters who believe Congress should focus instead on economic and other policy issues say the Clintons also should be investigated.

Voters show more faith in Congress now than they ever did during the Obama years.

Just after the election, 48% of voters said the election results were more a vote against Clinton than a vote for Trump. Thirty-five percent (35%) said they were more a vote for Trump, but 16% were not sure.

Sixty-three percent (63%) said in April 2015 that it’s likely some actions Clinton took as secretary of State were influenced by donations made to the Clinton Foundation. 

Most voters think Russia is a likely influence on Trump’s foreign policy but also tend to view critics of fallen National Security Adviser Michael Flynn as more interested in scoring political points than in U.S. national security. The president asked for Flynn’s resignation because the latter did not fully disclose all his private contacts with Russian officials.

Voters now regard Russia as a bigger long-term threat to the United States than China. Republicans are more confident than Democrats and unaffiliateds, though, that the U.S.-Russia relationship will improve. 

Additional information from this survey and a full demographic breakdown are available to Platinum Members only. 

Please sign up for the Rasmussen Reports daily e-mail update (it's free) or follow us on Twitter or Facebook. Let us keep you up to date with the latest public opinion news.

To me this poll suggests that indifference is no longer the National norm and the cancer of a corrupt judiciary is no longer acceptable.    The 18 USCA 371 cover-up is no longer tolerable.   

A note to Mr. Larkin -- I hear stirring out there!   The world may actually be watching as you foster your racist and fascist policies to protect criminals in black robes.   The blog MARYGSYKES exposing corrupt judges is not the equivalent of "Yelling Fire in a Crowded Theater!"    It is a civil and legal duty!!!!

Ken Ditkowsky

www.ditkowskylawoffice.com