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 Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net and CorderoRic@yahoo.com.
Proposal for
production by
Donald Trump of his tax returns
and
Sec. Clinton of her 30,000 deleted emails
on ABC Good Morning America
at 8:05 a.m. on Saturday, October 8;
Donald Trump of his tax returns
and
Sec. Clinton of her 30,000 deleted emails
on ABC Good Morning America
at 8:05 a.m. on Saturday, October 8;
and for
denouncing unaccountable judges’
riskless wrongdoing;
launching the
media investigation of
the two unique national stories of
President Obama-Justice Sotomayor concealment of assets and
Federal Judiciary-NSA interception of emails; and
the two unique national stories of
President Obama-Justice Sotomayor concealment of assets and
Federal Judiciary-NSA interception of emails; and
calling for
nationally televised hearings
on judges’ 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
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
New York City
Visit the
website at, and
subscribe to its
series of articles
and letters thus:
Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net,
CorderoRic@yahoo.com, DrCordero@Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org,
Dr.Richard.Cordero.Esq@cantab.net
CorderoRic@yahoo.com, DrCordero@Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org,
Dr.Richard.Cordero.Esq@cantab.net
If you
believe that judges’
are held unaccountable and
risklessly dispense with dueprocess and equal protection of the
law for their convenience and gain, depriving
you, your family, friends, and
the rest of
us in our
country of our
property, liberty, and
the rights and
duties that shape
our lives, forward this
email to both
candidates.
Copy
and
paste in the
To: line of
your forwarding email this bloc of email
addresses:
leadright@gop.com, info@hillaryclinton.com, email@gop.com, donations@donaldtrump.com, contact@email.donaldtrump.com, info@nrcc-mail.org, teamtrump@trump2016.com, media@debates.org,
This is your opportunity to denounce judges’ unaccountability and riskless wrongdoing. Take action!
Share, post, and
republish this email in its
entirety as widely
as possible and
become a producer
of an event
that can change
the campaign and
decide the election.
Mr. Donald
J. Trump
Donald J. Trump for President, Inc.
725 Fifth Avenue
New York, NY 10022
Donald J. Trump for President, Inc.
725 Fifth Avenue
New York, NY 10022
Dear Mr. Trump,
In your first
presidential debate, you
challenged Sec. Clinton
to produce her
30,000 deleted emails
in exchange for
your production of
your tax returns.
While she did
not take up
your challenge, she
did not turn
it down either.
This opens the
opportunity for you
to raise the
stakes by making
a national announcement on
tweets, emails, at
rallies, and through
Gov. Pence at
his vice presidential
debate that will
build up enormous expectation
and focus the
attention on you:
a. At
8:05 a.m. on
Saturday, October 8,
the eve of
the 2nd
presidential debate, Donald
Trump will enter
through the right
door the studio of
Good Morning America
with George Stephanopoulos and
Robin Roberts of
ABC, the network
of the anchor of
that debate, Martha
Raddatz, and before
the cameras of
the national and
international media and
the eyes of
scores of millions
of viewers he
will be holding
a copy of
his tax returns
with a flash
drive on top
containing their digital
version in a
not-passworded pdf file,
none bearing any
redactions.
b. If
Sec. Clinton enters through
the left door
holding a copy
of her 30,000 deleted
emails with a
flash drive on
top containing their
digital version in
a not-passworded pdf
file, none bearing
any redactions, both
candidates will walk
to, and release them
on, a table
behind which there
will be five
people, the document
receivers, who indisputably
enjoy their trust:
1) Martha
Raddatz, anchor of
the second presidential debate;
2) the
moderator of the
second presidential debate,
Anderson Cooper of
CNN;
3) the
moderator of the
third presidential debate, Chris
Wallace of Fox
News; and
4) the
chairs of the
Commission on Presidential
Debates (CPD), Mr.
Frank J. Fahrenkopf, Jr.,
and Mr. Michael
D. McCurry.
c. If
after checking the
paper and digital
versions of those
documents at least
three of these
five document receivers
agree that Mr.
Trump and Sec.
Clinton have produced
what they are
supposed to, the
receivers will use
the flash drives to
make those documents
available on the
websites of ABC,
CNN, Fox, CPD,
and the websites
of the national and
international media represented
at that event. There
will be some
36 hours for
the media, the
viewers, and the
rest of the
world to analyze
the documents before the
debate the next
day.
d. If
one candidate fails
to show up
and produce the
expected documents to
the receivers, the
other will not
be required to
produce his or
hers, but may
do so voluntarily.
Obviously, if with
the cameras of
the world trained
on a door
the corresponding candidate
fails to enter
through it with
the documents in
hand, he or
she will suffer a
credibility-devastating
blow. One candidate stared
at the other
while calling the
other’s bluff, and
the other blinked
and crawled away.
On this
occasion, you, Mr.
Trump, can:
a. denounce unaccountable
judges, some confirmed
by Then-Sen. Clinton, who
risklessly engage for
their convenience and
gain in wrongdoing(jur:5§3; ol:154¶3) that
deprives parties and
the rest of
the public of
their property, liberty,
and rights, and
intercept their communications to
protect themselves, which
can set off
a scandal; outrage the
public of all
stripes; and rally
it behind Trump
as the only
Establishment Ousider who
can go to
Washington and disrupt
the corrupt and
corruptive system of
connivance between judges
and the politicians
who recommend, endorse, nominate,
confirm, and then
fear judges and
their power to
retaliate by declaring
a party’s legislative agenda
unconstitutional;
b. call
for a Watergate-like generalized media
investigation of the
two unique national stories
of P. Obama-Justice Sotomayor and
Federal Judiciary-NSA (infra);
c. demand nationally
televised hearings on
judges’ wrongdoing;
d. cause
the resignation of
judges, whose vacancies
you will get
to fill; and
e. attract the
attention of more
than 100 million people
who are parties
to more than
50 million cases
filed annually in
the federal and
state courts(jur:8fn4,5), or
parties to scores
of millions of
cases, and who
are at the
mercy of unaccountable wrongdoing judges;
they constitute a
huge untapped voting
bloc of people
dissatisfied with the
judicial and legal
systems, and form
part of the
largest segment of
the public and
the electorate: The
Dissatisfied With The
Establishment.
I[1]
respectfully request a
meeting with you
and your officers to
present this and
other proposals[2].
_______________________________
[1.]
This letter(†>ol2:481)
together with previous
ones(cf. †>ol2:463)
and supporting materials,
all of which
contain more proposals
appropriate for preparing
for the second presidential
debate, are collected
in the file
at:
Those letter
and materials are
based on, and
also found in,
my study of judges and
their judiciaries, which
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* †
The study
runs to more
than 965 pages
and is contained
in two volumes:
*
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
Visit the
website at, and
subscribe to its
series of articles
thus:
www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org
>+ New or Users >Add New
Dare
trigger history!(*>jur:7§5)…and
you may enter
it.
*******************************
A. The P.
Obama-J. Sotomayor story
and the Follow the
money!
investigation
What did
the President(*>jur:77§A), Sen.
Schumer & Gillibrand(jur:78§6), and
federal judges(jur:105fn213b) know
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) of concealing assets,
which entails the crimes(ol:5fn10) of tax
evasion(jur:65fn107c) and
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)
This story
can be pursued through
the Follow
the money! investigation(jur:102§a; ol:1, 66), which
includes a call
on the President to
release unredacted all
FBI vetting reports
on J.
Sotomayor and on
her to request that
she ask him
to release them.
That can set
a precedent for
vetting judges and
other candidates for
office; and open
the door for
‘packing’ the
Federal Judiciary after
judges resign for
‘appearance of impropriety’.
B. The
Federal Judiciary-NSA story
and the Follow it
wirelessly! investigation
To what 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 –up to
100% of whose
secret requests for
secret surveillance orders
are rubberstamped(ol:5fn7) by
the federal judges of
the secret court
established under Foreign
Intelligence Surveillance Act– to:
1) conceal assets –a crime under
26 U.S.C. §§7201, 7206(ol:5fn10), unlike surveillance– by electronically transferring them
between declared and
hidden accounts(ol:1); and
2) 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.
See the
statistical analysis(ol:19§Dfn2) of
a large number of
communications critical of
judges and a
pattern of oddities(ol2:395, 405, 425), pointing to
probable cause to
believe that they
were intercepted.
This story
can be pursued
through the Follow
it wirelessly! investigation(jur:105§b; ol:2, 69§C).
Dr. Cordero
respectfully requests an
opportunity to present
to Mr. Trump
and his officers
the proposed investigation by
the media(ol:194§E) and law
school professors and
students(ol2:452) of
these two unique national
stories of judges’
wrongdoing.
******************************
