I am indeed disappointed

I am indeed disappointed that Senator Kirk was not responsive in the Gore case.    I hope that at this point in time he realizes that was a mistake and will act to put the miscreants out of business.    So far my score is not very good.   All I asked for was an HONEST investigation and you can measure the results.    When we first approached Senator Kirk we did get a response and that was encouraging.   It was double discouraging when the response I got from Senator Durbin was to get a copy of one of his silly speeches on social security.     Just about every other public official felt abused by being asked to request law enforcement to do an HONEST investigation.   Gloria Sykes traced the problem directly to "liberal political powerhouse" ****** and found financial tie-ins.   The Brewer case disclosed to me a relationship to the 'heath care industry.'      When the trail revealed where and the amount of money involved, I understood that my days as a licensed lawyer were numbered unless I retreated.    I made a choice.    

Kirk is running for re-election and it is in his best interest right now to stand up and be counted.   If he wishes to play dead he will not be elected as the Civil Rights of the ordinary man are a real consideration at this point in time.     His opponent lost two legs fighting for America - this gives her a "leg up!"   Even though Kirk was in the military he is a person who has to meet the question: "what have you done for me today!"     His opponent's legless body answers the question of her dedication.

There is another reason I have faith that Kirk will take a leadership role in protecting our Bill of Rights.    He is a potential victim.    It is in his own personal best interests to wrap himself in the flag and become an advocate for Illinois to not abandon Article 1 of its Constitution or its adherence to the Bill of Rights.     A North Korean democracy may be profitable for the political class - but, some members will be scarified  

Under the current scenario (as illustrated by the Sykes and Gore case) it would not surprise me to have PS show up as the lawyer for a person who decides that Kirk is a potential victim.    Obviously, a probate court jurist will be appointed as guardian ad litem to inform the court as to how mentally incompetent Senator Kirk has become because of his stroke, and Dr. A or Dr. S can be counted on to not only provide testimony but the certificate.   The roster of guardians has been disclosed on the blog Probate Sharks.     Any one or more of the individuals will suffice to provide the distraction that will allow for the 'elder cleansing.'   In Sykes the decision as to incompetency was made by the two guardian ad litem and the attorney for the petitioner.    The judge just rubber stamped.    (Thereafter, the cover up continued unabated to this day).

Thanks to Mr. Larkin's intimidation of lawyers who might complain about such technicalities as jurisdiction, venue.appropriateness, statutory compliance etc,  as in Sykes no hearing is necessary and Senator's family need not be notified in accordance with the statute - By clairvoyance a corrupt jurist will determine that they had knowledge.   This will suffice - as remember we are dealing with a 'wired case.'      By hindsight it is very clear that the family members will have knowledge - they will be fighting tooth and nail to send some time with their loved one!     They certainly will have knowledge when the Senator disappears from sight into a convenient nursing home or similar facility.     By the time the Senator's loved ones find out the railroad is complete,  it will be too late and the Senator will be isolated, his assets with be redistributed, and his liberty and humanity will be a thing of the past.    NB.    Any one of us is a potential victim!     This criminal enterprise in light of the interim suspension of JoAnne Denison may reach right into the Supreme Court.    If anyone doubt it, let them explain how the blog MaryGSykes is a danger to the public!!!!!!!!    47 USCA 230 bars the action that the Illinois Supreme Court has taken even it is ignores the clear mandates of the United States Supreme Court in reference to the First Amendment.    320 ILCS 20/4 give JoAnne Immunity for disciplinary action ( me too!) 

I am certain at this point in time that the Senator is aware of the Gore case and the Sykes case and exactly how the 'railroading' occurs and how easy it is to accomplish.   The fact that Mr. Kirk is a senator makes the process a little more difficult to occur, but, it appears to few lawyers are not intimidated by the threat that Mr. Larkin will institute disciplinary proceedings if they interfere.   (Adam Stern made that very clear the first time he saw me raise my ugly head in the Sykes case.    Judge Connors also made it clear.   The difference between me and most other lawyers is that from day one it was hammered into me that if a 'bully' wanted a piece of me, I should allow him to have it.   Of course, I want something in exchange =  I broke my share of noses *****     I learned that backing down to a bully is an efficient way to perpetuate the problem.    

This brings us to the issue of preventing the victims to obtain legal assistance in their fight.    As most lawyers are cowards and buckle when they receive a IARDC complaint letter concerning something that they did or not do in our scenario - DO NOT EXPECT  a spirited fight for your rights.    All I did was ask for an HONEST investigation, and all JoAnne did was write it about in her blog.    

The net is Senator Kirk should realize that he = just like the rest of us - is vulnerable to the American Holocaust and if he does not stand up and address this assault on the First Amendment ******.

Democracy is not a spectator sport.    It also guarantees that today you might be "hot stuff" but tomorrow you might have MS in your future!    

I've sent a bcc copy to Matt Abbott in Senator Kirk's office.     I hope that he will forward a copy to Senator Kirk and he will read the blogs Probate Sharks and MaryGSykes.    It is time to put Jerome Larkin and his cronies out of business.    

NB.    In both Gore and Sykes there is over a million dollars of assets that are unaccounted for and which I believe were never listed on any disclosure of income tax forms i.e. 1040 or 1041.     As conspirators each has a joint liability.    Thus, all co conspirators have the responsibility to pay or see that the income tax liability to the State and the USA are paid.    Larkin and his group of miscreants thus had better filed tax returns disclosing the missing money in the Sykes and Gore estate!     If they are prosecuted as a civil matter Mr. Larkin and his co-conspirators have the burden of proof!     Removing the profit of corruption is poetic!

 

Ken Ditkowsky

www.ditkowskylawoffice.com

Dear Senator Kirk, America is in crisis

Dear Senator Kirk,

Your ProbateShark also appeals to you to halt the assault on the dead, dying, aged and disabled by the Probate Court of Cook County. The Probate Court of Cook County has been converted into a criminal financial crime enterprise with nursing home beds being the currency of choice. Please help.  Lucius Verenus, Schoolmaster, ProbateSharks.com


Dear Senator Kirk,

America is in crisis. Hundreds of senior citizens and other diabled people are being deprived of their liberty, property, civil and human rights while the political elite condone this outrage. Attorney JoAnne Denison is one of handful of attorneys who have a finger in the dike attempting to hold off the growing threat to our democratic scheme. The enemy is us! We have allowed a small group of individuals to take over a significant portion of the mechanism that administers parens patrie and turn it into a cash cow. The Gore case a million and half dollars disappeared. In Tyler seven million dollars. In Sykes a million dollars plus.

As seniors are old - what does it matter! It is apparently more important to protect the miscreants than the seniors as illustrated by the threats that appear in the Sykes transcript directed to the attorneys who might (or did) speak out and the current ARDC complaint against JoAnne Denison. The words of the Illinois Supreme Court and the United States Supreme Court are ignored by government (including the Illinois attorney registration and discipline commission.

The inappropriateness of this instant disciplinary case and the usurpation of jurisdiction over an attorney’s free speech is manifest by the Supreme Court cases cited supra, and the decision of the United States Supreme Court in Zauderer v. Office of Disciplinary Counsel of Supreme Court of Ohio, 471 U.S. 626, 643, 105 S. Ct. 2265, 2278, 85 L. Ed. 2d 652 (1985). The right to speak out for unpopular causes such as the right of the elderly not to be victimized by ‘judicial officials’ such as Farenga, Stern, Schmiedel, Troepe and similar persons is also protected speech in every State including Illinois. Indeed, the Illinois Supreme Court has held:

“The Constitution does not permit government to decide which types of otherwise protected speech are sufficiently offensive to require protection for the unwilling listener or viewer. Rather, absent the narrow circumstances described above (home intrusion or captive audience), the burden normally falls upon the viewer to ‘avoid further bombardment of (his) sensibilities simply by averting (his) eyes.’ Cohen v. California (403 U.S. 15,) 21, 91 S.Ct. 1780, 29 L.Ed.2d 284.” 422 U.S. 205, 210-11, 95 S.Ct. 2268, 2273, 45 L.Ed.2d 125, 131-32. Vill. of Skokie v. Nat'l Socialist Party of Am., 69 Ill. 2d 605, 619, 373 N.E.2d 21, 26 (1978)”

Speech is an essential mechanism of democracy, for it is the means to hold officials accountable to the people. See Buckley, supra, at 14–15, 96 S.Ct. 612 (“In a republic where the people are sovereign, the ability of the citizenry to make informed choices among candidates for office is essential”). The right of citizens to inquire, to hear, to speak, and to use information to reach consensus is a precondition to enlightened self-government and a necessary means to protect it. The First Amendment “ ‘has its fullest and most urgent application’ to speech uttered during a campaign for political office.” Eu v. San Francisco County Democratic Central Comm., 489 U.S. 214, 223, 109 S.Ct. 1013, 103 L.Ed.2d 271 (1989) (quoting Monitor Patriot Co. v. Roy, 401 U.S. 265, 272, 91 S.Ct. 621, 28 L.Ed.2d 35 (1971));

Citizens United v. Fed. Election Comm'n, 558 U.S. 310, 130 S. Ct. 876, 898, 175 L. Ed. 2d 753 (2010)

Indeed, the Blog administered by Attorney Denison might be offensive to the ‘judicial officials’ who foster or participate in Elder Abuse and Financial Exploitation of the Elderly, however, in light of clear protections of Article 1 of the Illinois Constitution and the First Amendment to the United States Constitution it is respectfully submitted that the Illinois ARDC does not have either the authority or the jurisdiction to regulate Ms. Denison’s Blog or the speech of those who demand and call out for an honest investigation by law enforcement of the actions of Farenga, Stern, Schmiedel and the other judicial officials who have acted sans jurisdiction to deprive Mary Sykes and other seniors of their liberty, their property, civil rights and human rights.

Ken Ditkowsky

http://www.ditkowskylawoffice.com/

White House could get senators' list of picks soon

Editor's note: Illinois' two U.S. senators, Democrat Dick Durbin and Republican Mark Kirk should tread carefully regarding the selection of an attorney with the Katten Muchin firm. The many complaints made to your offices and other law enforcement bodies regarding the selection of a mentally handicapped person as a guardian for a 99 year old disabled ward of the Probate Court of Cook by a Katten Muchin attorney should place a shadow on your selection process. Check out Alice Gore's complete Court Docket at link below: Lucius Verenus, Schoolmaster, ProbateSharks.com

http://probateshark.blogspot.com/2012/10/the-alice-r-gore-memorial-post.html

U.S. attorney candidates narrowed to 4 finalists

White House could get senators' list of picks soon

By Annie Sweeney, Chicago Tribune reporter

November 25, 2012

Advertisement

With the selection of a new U.S. attorney for Chicago in its last stages, a short list of finalists is expected to be sent to the White House soon, a source close to the process said.
Who would succeed Patrick Fitzgerald has generated buzz in Chicago's legal circles for months as a local bipartisan panel of attorneys and judges worked through applications from some two dozen lawyers, narrowing the list first to eight, then to four.
Three white men and a black woman — all former federal prosecutors in Chicago — remain under consideration for the powerful law enforcement post, traditionally the chief corruption buster.
Illinois' two U.S. senators, Democrat Dick Durbin and Republican Mark Kirk, are conferring on the candidates, the source said. The senators could send their picks to the White House in the next two weeks. The source cautioned that they also could submit a nominee different from the four finalists selected by the panel.
Durbin and Kirk are expected to forward at least two names to the president.
The four selected by the panel are all partners in high-powered Chicago law firms. Several sources close to the selection process identified them as Jonathan Bunge, Zach Fardon, Lori Lightfoot and Gil Soffer.
Lightfoot, a partner at Mayer Brown, would be the first African-American and first woman appointed to the post in Chicago. While working for the city from 2002 to 2005, she headed the Police Department's Office of Professional Standards, which investigated complaints of misconduct by officers.
Bunge, a partner at Kirkland Ellis, led the federal prosecution of police officers in south suburban Ford Heights who were convicted on racketeering and bribery charges.
Fardon, a partner at Latham Watkins, helped win the conviction of former Gov. George Ryan in 2006 as part of the Operation Safe Roads probe. Fardon, who grew up in Tennessee, also brings administrative experience, serving in the No. 2 post in the U.S. attorney's office in Nashville before entering private practice.
Soffer, a partner at Katten Muchin Rosenman, served as associate deputy attorney general in Washington during the final year of President George W. Bush's administration. He also was appointed to an Illinois state ethics commission in 2009.
Among those who did not make the panel's cut were Patrick Collins, who led the prosecution of Ryan, and U.S. District Judge Virginia Kendall, a former federal prosecutor who has been on the bench since 2006.
Fitzgerald stepped down in June after serving a record nearly 11 years as Chicago's chief federal prosecutor. He joined the law firm of Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP in Chicago late last month.
Durbin, who traditionally makes the pick as the state's ranking Democratic senator with a Democrat also sitting in the White House, has pledged that the selection process would be bipartisan. He and Kirk each appointed three members to the panel that has reviewed and vetted the applicants. Bipartisan support is traditionally needed to advance a name through the Senate confirmation process.
"You need a leader who's experienced and seasoned enough to exercise the judgment that is necessary for such a powerful job," said Juliet Sorensen, a former federal prosecutor in Chicago and now assistant professor at Northwestern University Law School. "The reality is it is a 24-hour office, and no office has unlimited resources. The U.S. attorney needs to understand the specific law enforcement priorities and challenges in the district."
asweeney@tribune.com
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-us-attorney-20121125,0,267924.story

KawamotoDragon.com