NOTE: If in
spite of all
the effort to
circumvent the ‘glitch’
in word processing or
emailing software that
creates “joinedwords” in
my
emails(†>ol2:426§C), this
email has them,
kindly overlook them
and let me
know at DrRCordero@Judicial-Discipline-Reform.organd Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net.
Federal judges
with life-tenure are
the Establishment by definition
Will President-elect Trump
drain the judicial swamp
or
let it fester
the Establishment by definition
Will President-elect Trump
drain the judicial swamp
or
let it fester
on the advice
of the Establishment insiders that
he is bringing into the White House and his cabinet and
to avoid judges’ retaliation against
his 70 pending business lawsuits,
thus leaving exposed to judges’ continued abuse
The Dissatisfied With The Establishment and
the rest of We the People?
he is bringing into the White House and his cabinet and
to avoid judges’ retaliation against
his 70 pending business lawsuits,
thus leaving exposed to judges’ continued abuse
The Dissatisfied With The Establishment and
the rest of We the People?
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://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org
M.B.A., University of Michigan Business School
D.E.A., La Sorbonne, Paris
Judicial Discipline Reform
New York City http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org
1.
President-elect Trump has
stated that what
follows in importance
a president’s declaration of
war is a
Supreme Court nomination.
2. Indeed, until
the Court upholds
the constitutionality of
a law, it
is little more
than a set
of wishful guidelines envisaged
by the 535
members of Congress
and the president and
expressed in black
ink on white
paper. Where would
Obamacare be today
if the Court
had held it
unconstitutional? In a
footnote in the
chronicles of the
Obama presidency.
3. P-e Trump
also campaigned on
the promise “to
drain the swamp
of corruption of
Washington insiders”. The latter
constitute the Establishment. He
accused Sec. Clinton
of being its
representative so that
if she won
the presidential election,
she would protect
the swamp and
its corruption would
continue festering.
4. It stills
festers although in
2006, Democratic Representative Nancy
Pelosi, before becoming
Speaker of the
House, famously declared
that “Washington is
dominated by the
culture of corruption” and vowed
“to drain
the swamp”(*>jur:23fn16).
She miserably failed
to do so
because she was
part of the
Establishment.
5. By contrast, P-e
Trump is an
outsider. He is
not tied, and
does not owe
his election, to
Establishment members. Far
from it, those who got
him elected are
precisely The Dissatisfied
With The Establishment.
6.
However, in light
of his nomination of
Washington insiders for
his White House
and cabinet, how
concerned should The
Dissatisfied be about
his becoming domesticated on
those insiders’ advice
to the Washington
ways so as
to become used
to the continued
festering of the
swamp, in general,
and its most
harmful portion, the
judicial swamp, in
particular?
A. The abused powers that generate the judicial swamp
“Power corrupts,
and absolute power
corrupts absolutely”. Lord
Acton, Letter to
Bishop Mandell Creighton,
April 3, 1887.
7. The status of
unaccountability is at
the source of
the capacity to
turn power into
absolute power that
ends up forming a
swamp of corruption.
1. Judges’ power to stay established: life-appointment and irremovability in practice
8. Federal judges are
appointed for life.
Worse yet, they
are irremovable in
effect: While 2,293
federal judges were
in office on
30sep15, in the
last 227 years
since the creation
of the Federal Judiciary
in 1789, the
number of them
impeached and removed
is 8!(*>jur:21§1).
The above
statistics originate in
the official ones
that the Federal
Judiciary must submit
by law(28 USC §604(d)(3); (h)(2); *>jur:26fn23a)
, to Congress every
year. They are
analyzed
in my study
of judges’ performance in
practice as opposed
to as prescribed on
rules printed on
paper. It is
titled and downloadable
thus:
Exposing Judges’ Unaccountability and
Consequent Riskless Wrongdoing: Pioneering the news and publishing field of
judicial unaccountability reporting. *†
Consequent Riskless Wrongdoing: Pioneering the news and publishing field of
judicial unaccountability reporting. *†
* Vol. 1:
http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf >all prefixes:page# up
to ol:393
† Vol.
2: http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf >from ol2:394
All the materials
corresponding to the
(blue text
references) herein
are found in
that
study.
9. Several justices have
been on the
Supreme Court for
around 25 years,
such as JJ.
Thomas (29), Kennedy
(28), Ginsburg (23),
and Breyer (22).
J. Scalia was
in office for
30 years. That
does not count
at all the
years that they
spent in the
circuit and district
courts.
10. For instance, while
J. Sotomayor has
been on the
Supreme Court only
since 2009, she
has been in
the Federal Judiciary since
1992, when she
was appointed a
federal district court,
followed by her
appointment in 1998
to the Court
of Appeals for
the Second Circuit.
Hence, she has
already been in
the judicial Establishment for
24 years.
11. As a
matter of fact,
the Federal Judiciary is
the quintessential Establishment. Its
judges are established
in power forever no
matter the quality
or quantity of
their performance or
conduct.
2. The power of connivance between appointing-politicians and their appointed judges
12.
Federal judges are
recommended, endorsed, nominated,
and confirmed by
politicians. For the
latter, judges are
“our men
and women on
the bench”. They stand
in an appointer-appointee relation(ol2:488¶¶3-6).
13.
Politicians hold judges
unaccountable in the
expectation that they
will hold the
laws of their
legislative agenda constitutional(jur:23fn17a)
and not retaliate(Lsch:17§C) against
the thousands of
lawsuits that the
government files every
year.
14. The
relation of power
between these branches
is out of
balance, but only
due to pragmatic considerations, not
because the Constitution
holds the Judiciary superior
to the other
branches. Far from
it. Nevertheless, the
result is that
judges neither fear
nor respect politicians.
3. Judges’ vast power of the office
15. Judges act
as a standing
constitutional convention, for
they give content
to the mere
labels of the
Constitution(jur:22fn12b), such
as “freedom of
speech, freedom of
the press”,
“due process”,
“equal protection of
the law”. They even
read into it
new rights never
imagined hundreds of
years ago by
a rural, religious, and
mostly illiterate society
and even diametrically opposite to
its
beliefs.
16. Judges interpret the
meaning and scope
of application of
every law. By
exercising that power
in its many
forms(ol:267§4), they
dispose of the
property, liberty, life,
and all the
rights and duties
that shape what
people can and
cannot do from
before their birth,
throughout their lives,
and after their
death(jur:25fn25, 26).
17. Judges abuse
their power by
the way they
make decisions: The
analysis of their
official statistics shows
that the 12
federal regional circuit
courts dispose of
93% of appeals
in decisions “on
procedural grounds, by
consolidation, unpublished, unsigned,
without comment”. They are
so perfunctory that
the majority of
them are issued
on a 5¢
summary order form
and/or marked “not
precedential”(ol2:453),
mere ad hoc,
arbitrary, reasonless fiats
of the judicial
swamp.
18. There
can be no
doubt that individually and
collectively judges wield
the broadest, farthest-reach-ing, and
most substantial power
of any public
officer, including the
most corruptive: the
power 'to tell
what is good
and evil' in
the contemplation of
the law, that
is, what is
legal and illegal.
4. Judges’ power to grab benefits
19. Judges abuse
their power to
grab the social, material,
and personal benefits
within their reach(ol:173¶93)
and for sheer
convenience.
20. The opportunity
to use power
to grab can
hardly be passed
up under the
influence of the
most insidious corruptor: money!,
lots of money! In
the calendar year
2010, the bankruptcy
judges alone ruled
on the $373
billion at stake
in only personal bankruptcies(jur:27§2).
The only ones
watching with power
to do anything about
its disposition were
the circuit judges
who had appointed
them and they
and the district
judges who could
remove them(jur:43fn61a).
With them as
their overseers, bankruptcy
judges could do
just about anything, except
being too greedy
and ungrateful.
21. In addition,
there is all
the money subject
to judges’ decisions in
probate matters, contracts,
alimony, mergers &
acquisition, taxes, product
liability, initial public
offers,
etc.
5. Judges’ power of growing well-connected
22. The arguments that
militate in support
of the two-term limit
for holding the
presidency, and of
P-e Trump’s promise to
push for legislation
limiting the number
of terms for
members of Congress
apply to judges too:
The longer a
person serves in
public office, the
more entitled they
feel and the
more their public office
becomes their personal
one.
23. That feeling of
entitlement is exacerbated
for federal judges, who
do not have
to run for
reelection and need
not fear in
reality being removed.
They and their
public office become
one and the
same.
24.
Moreover, as public
officers deal with
ever more people, they
become ever more
powerful through the
IOUs that they
have collected from
people who needed
their help; and
the more indebted
they become to
others whose help
they needed to
get their way.
Hence, to an
ever greater extent they
move from doing
the public’s business to
‘dealing for their
own account’.
6. Judges’ power of camaraderie
25. To be
in good standing
with the other
judges, a judge
only needs to
engage in knowing
indifference and willful
ignorance or blindness,
which are forms
of culpably looking
the other way(jur:88§§a-c)
and carrying on
as if nothing
had happened or
will happen.
‘Keep
your mouth shut
about what I
and the other
judges did or
are about to
do, and you
can enjoy our
friendship.’
‘I
will protect you
today against this
complaint and tomorrow
you will protect me
or my friends
when we are
the target of
a complaint’.
26. That is
how judges implicitly
or explicitly ensure
for decades their
social acceptance and
their self-preservation through reciprocal
protection. They know
from the historical record
that nobody will
charge them with
accessorial liability after
the fact that
they kept quiet
about or covered up,
and before the
fact of the
next wrongful act
that they encouraged
others to do
with their promise of
passive silence or
active cover-up.
27. By contrast, a
judge who dared
expose another judge’s
wrongdoing would be
deemed by all
the other judges an
unreliable traitor and
cast out their
social circle and
activities as a
pariah.
28. Such interdependent security(Lsch:16§1) gives
rise to the
judicial class mentality.
It is similar to
that found among
police officers, doctors,
priests, sports teams,
sororities and fraternities, etc.
It trades integrity
for the benefits
of
membership.
29. The more
time judges spend
in the Judiciary,
the more they
transition from peers
to colleagues, to
members, to friends,
and to co-conspirators(ol:166§§C,
D). So instead
of administering justice to We
the People, they
run their swamp
as a private
enterprise to make
it ever more
profitable, efficient, and
secure for themselves.
7. Judges’ power of self-disciplining
30. In its
Article III, the
Constitution only creates
the Supreme Court. All
lower courts thereunder
are created by
Congress, which can
also create tribunal-like administrative agencies
under Art. II,
Sec. 8; and
appoint judges directly
or by delegation under
Art. II, Sec.
2.
31. The Constitution does
not grant judges,
not even those
of the Supreme
Court, the power
to determine themselves what
constitutes “good
Behaviour” during which
they can “hold their
Offices”. Yet,
politicians have relinquished
that significant ‘check and
balance’ to the
judges by allowing
them to exercise the
power of self-disciplining(jur:21§1).
32. With the
connivance of politicians,
judges abuse that
power by dismissing 99.82%(jur:10-14)
of complaints against them
filed by parties
to cases and
any other members
of the
People, as well
as denying up
to 100% of
petitions to review
those dismissals(jur:24§§b-d).
33. The relation of
political
protectors-judicial protégés is
anathema to the
objective analysis of
complaints against judges
and the fair
and impartial treatment
of complainants. That
is why judges
have no inhibitions about
abusing their self-disciplining power
to arrogate to
themselves self-exemption from
liability.
34.
Complainants have no
other source of
relief. They are
left to bob
with their complained
about harm in
the middle of
the swamp.
8. Judges’ power to show contempt for We the People and our representatives
35. We
the People, the
masters in “government of,
by, and for
the people”(jur:82fn172), hired
judges as their
public servants to
deliver the service
of administering justice according
to the rule
of law.
36. But judges need
not serve the
People to stay
established in office.
Voters neither elect
nor reelect federal judges.
Judges stay even
when they disserve
the People. There
is no downside
to disservice, for
they can neither
be demoted nor
have their salary
reduced.
37. To enjoy
their lifelong stay
on the bench,
judges only need
to serve their
constituency: each other.
If they stand
together, nobody can
bring them down...unless their
swamp is drained
through exposure, as
proposed below.
9. The power to retaliate
38.
Judges’ power to
retaliate is not
limited to declaring
each of the
pieces of a
president’s or party’s
legislative agenda unconstitutional.
39. Judges have
a panoply of
ways to engage
in chicanery: They
can:
a. sign
search and seizure
warrants broader than
they should be,
narrow them or
refuse to sign
them altogether;
b. grant,
deny, or impose punitive,
bail;
c. admit
or exclude evidence,
evidentiary and expert
witnesses, and their
testimony;
d. uphold
or overrule objections and
raise others on
their own motion;
e. cause
documents’ docket entry
dates to be
moved forward or
backward;
f. lose
and misplace documents and
make them reappear
at will;
g. meet
with some parties in
the absence of
other parties;
h. grant
or deny the
sealing and unsealing
of documents and
leak, or profit
from, sealed information;
i. grant
or deny hearings and
leave to appeal;
j. ignore
or grant more
or less than
the relief requested;
k. enter
judgment consonant with
or notwithstanding the
verdict;
j. grant
a reduction or
increase in the
amount of compensation; etc.(Lsch:17§C)
40. But judges’ power
of retaliation has
one important limit:
They cannot retaliate
simultaneously against a
large number of
professional and citizen
journalists participating in
a concerted effort to
drain their swamp
through investigation and
exposure, especially if
the effort was
launched by the
president to deliver
on a campaign promise.
Such massive retaliation
would unmask their
actions as coordinated
abuse of power
to conceal their
liability for, and
preserve, their swamp
benefits.
B. Judges unaccountability is the key corruptive component of the judicial swamp
41.
Unaccountability is the
attribute that distinguishes judges individually
as public officers
and collectively as
a class, the
judicial class, a
privileged one. Their
privilege is at
once the source and
the result of
their powers, which
they leverage to
preserve and exploit
their privilege by
adopting a black
robe first mentality and
letting it guide
their professional and
personal “Behaviour”.
42.
Judges’ privilege is
the product of
corruptive components:
a. a sense
of entitlement to their
office for life;
b. the assurance of
being held unaccountable by
others and the
capacity to assure
themselves their self-exemption from
discipline, never mind
liability to others,
which give rise
to a sense
and the reality of impunity;
and
c. the most
corruptive of all
powers: the power
to decide what
is lawful or
unlawful and thereby
make anything either right
or wrong...or simply
go away.
43. People are
not merely elevated
to the federal
bench. Because they
are allowed, and
manage, to do
from there whatever they
want without being
worried about its
adverse consequences regardless
of the nature and
quality of their
behavior and performance,
they are given
access to a
status that no
person is entitled
to receive or
grab in ‘government,
not of men
and women, but
by the rule
of law’(ol:5fn6):
Public Servants Above
their Masters –We
the People- and
their Law.
44. Conferring a
federal judgeship amounts
to issuing a
license to engage
in wrongdoing for
profit as a
member of an
independent, sovereign, and
most powerful corrupt organization.
Since P-e Trump
wants to drain
the Establishment swamp,
he must begin
by draining the
one that dominates
it: the judicial swamp.
C. P-e Trump’s first step: a press conference to call on the public and the media to expose the corruptive judicial powers and the resulting swamp
45. P-e Trump
can call a
press conference(ol2:489¶¶10-11) to
declare that
the system of
justice that he
accused of being
rigged in favor
of Sec. Clinton is
actually rigged against
We the
People(ol2: 437¶4),
constituting a key
portion of the
Establishment swamp, so
that as a
prerequisite to nominating
J. Scalia’s successor
and ushering in
a fair and
impartial system, the
depth of its
corruption must be
plumbed. He
can thus become
the People’s
Champion of Justice.
46. In that
vein, P-e Trump
can:
a. make an
Emile Zola-like I accuse!(jur:98§2)
denunciation of
politicians/judges’
connivance;
b. ask
the public to
submit their judicial
complaints(ol:311¶2; 362¶4) and the
decisions of the
judges in their
cases(ol:274, 304) to his
website for the
public to examine
them in search of
the most persuasive
evidence: commonalities forming
patterns of wrongdoing;
c. call
on professional and
citizen journalists
to investigate the
two unique national
stories(ol2:440, 480¶¶2-3) of President
Obama-Justice Sotomayor and
Federal Judiciary-NSA.
1) Judges are
required by their
own Code of
Conduct to “avoid even
the appearance of
impropriety”(jur:68fn123a). Therefore,
journalists only have
to show, rather than
prove, that judges
appear to engage
in improprieties, never
mind criminal conduct,
such as concealing
assets to evade
taxes and launder them
of the taint
of unlawful origin(jur:65fn107a,c).
Such showing will
cause outrage so
intense in the
public(ol2:461§G) as
to provoke resignations
among judges(jur:92§d);
d) announce nationally
televised hearings on
judges’ wrongdoing to
be conducted by
the Department of
Justice with the
assistance of the
FBI to expose the
corruption’s nature, extent,
and gravity, and
determine the scope
of the needed reform(jur:158§6-7)
1)
This is as
unrealistic and improbable
as other millenial impossibles
were that have
become everyday realities,
e.g.:
(a)
public education for
the boys of
the poor, even
their daughters;
(b)
the extension of
voting to unlanded
men and even
women;
(c)
the abolition of
slavery;
(d)
labor unions and
the right to
strike;
(e)
the right to
paid holidays;
(f)
limitations on the
workweek;
(g)
public assistance;
(h)
maternity leave;
(i)
the rights of
the disabled;
(j)
abortion rights;
(k)
gay marriage;
(l)
universal health care;
etc.(jur:xlv§G)
e) demand that
Congress convene the
constitutional convention that
34 states have
formally called, thus
satisfying the constitutional requirement of
Article V for
amending the Constitution, and
advocate the adoption
of term-limits for
judges and the
establishment of citizen
boards of judicial
accountability and liability(jur:160§8);
f)
encourage top universities
to join forces with
the national media
and journalism schools,
advocates of honest
judiciaries, and groups
of victims of
wrongdoing judges to:
1) organize a
national conference on
judges’ unaccountability and
riskless wrongdoing (jur:97§1), and statistical, linguistic,
and literary auditing
techniques(jur:131§b);
2) publish print
and/or digital journals
on judicial unaccountability and wrongdoing(jur:97§1) with articles
for scholarly and
general
audiences;
3) devise and
disseminate templates for
the public to
report judicial wrongdoing
as one of
the sources together with
other techniques(ol:42,
60) for
compiling the Annual
Report on Judicial
Unaccountability and Wrongdoing
in America(jur:126§3);
4) create an
institute(jur:130§5) of judicial accountability and
reform advocacy.
D. Action that you can take to ensure that the judicial swamp is drained
47. You too
can contribute to
draining the swamp
by calling on
P-e Trump, the
anti-Trump movement, the
Sen. Sanders’ revolution,
and local and
national media to
demand that the
judicial swamp be
drained.
48. To that
end, you can
share and post
this article in
its entirety as
widely as possible
(if you are
a commercial publisher,
first ask Dr.
Cordero for permission),
and forward it
to the following
bloc of email
addresses:
donations@donaldtrump.com,
contact@email.donaldtrump.com,
leadright@gop.com, email@gop.com, info@nrcc-mail.org, teamtrump@trump2016.com, DrRCordero@Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org, corderoric@yahoo.com, info@ourrevolution.com, contact@firedupconservative.com
49. I offer
to make a
presentation of this
article in person
or by video
conference upon request.
Contact me through
this bloc of
email addresses:
Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net, DrRCordero@Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org, Dr.Richard.Cordero.Esq@cantab.net, RicCordero@verizon.net, Corderoric@yahoo.com,
Visit the
website at, and
subscribe to its
series of letters
and articles thus:
www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org> +
New or Users
>Add New
Dare trigger history!(*>jur:7§5)...and you
may enter it.
NOTE:
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.
******************************
