A Terroristic Divorce

The constitution is very clear and concise about the authority of the sheriff.

The problem arose when the Rules of Professional Conduct were enacted into law by the court, without the legislature and or the governor.

Efffective 4-1-88, there was no lawful way to prosecute injustice or judicial misconduct in Pennsylvania. The rules made it unlawful for a District Attorney or Attorney General to do so. This was intentional and deliberate – protecting the integrity of the court by mandating a conspiracy of confidentiality and ignoring their crimes.

It was made very clear in KIDS FOR CASH – when no one stopped the judge and everyone knew what he was doing was wrong. The immorality and lack of ethics demonstrated by judges and lawyers was shameful.

A fly in the ointment. The sheriff had constitutional authority to prosecute AND was not required to follow the Rules of Professional Conduct. SO… the judges and lawyers and courts diminished the authority of the sheriffs through litigation and case law. Basically removing all of the sheriffs constitutional power, BUT not doing it in the Constitution where people would notice.

The sheriff is the chief law enforcement officer in the county. NOT THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY who usurped the power.

from the Pennsylvania Sheriffs Association

The Sheriff is empowered to appoint deputies, and the deputies have the same powers as the Sheriff when performing their duties. the Sheriff is also invested with the power of the “posse comitatus” (the power or force of the county), which is the power to call upon “the entire population of the county above the age of fifteen, which the Sheriff may summon to his assistance in certain cases, to aid him in keeping the peace, and in pursuing and arresting felons.” Today, the Sheriff, like all law enforcement officers, is faced with unprecedented challenges. However, if history is a guide, there is little question that the Office of Sheriff will adapt, grow, and change to meet the needs of modern law enforcement. The Office of Sheriff is an integral part of the American law enforcement system; a descendant of an ancient and honorable tradition. Office of Sheriff in Pennsylvania The office of the sheriff was recognized in the earliest reports of English law. Throughout history, the sheriff was recognized as the chief law enforcement officer in his shire or county. This status remains today, unless it has been changed by statutory law. The sheriff is also given authority to appoint deputies which are necessary in order to properly transact the business of his office. The requirement for training of deputy sheriffs is specifically provided by stature, i.e., the Deputy Sheriffs’ Education and Training Act (1984 P.L. 3 No.2). However, based upon a Pennsylvania Supreme Court case, a deputy sheriff needs training similar to police officers to enable a deputy sheriff to enforce specific laws of Pennsylvania. A review of statutory law provides little guidance in addressing the issue of the duties, power, and authority of a sheriff. THE PA CONSTITUTION refers to the Sheriff as the Chief Law Enforcement Officer in the County. Case law provides that, although a sheriff’s primary responsibilities are to the courts, the sheriff retains all arrest powers he/she had at common investigation of crime. CASE LAW is NOT law. It is how the courts have applied the law. It can be proven that the courts acted to diminish the authority of the sheriff to avoid their own arrest for sedition, undermining the state and federal governments, abusing the power of their office under color of law, in a conspiracy where they have denied and prevented the constitutional rights of the people. More importantly, since the sheriff retains all arrest powers he/she had at common law, he/she has the authority to enforce the criminal laws as well as the vehicle laws of Pennsylvania.

The Rules of Professional Conduct once made law included a major problem… when victimized by an injustice, the target has no escape, no equal protection under the law, and no recourse. Returning to the courts to address the court’s injustice is an exercise in futility. Unfortunately, the victim must exhaust the state courts and be further victimized until being able to file in the federal courts… where the same failure of ethics and integrity requires appeal and escalation. It is understandable that these matters usually end in homelessness, prison or suicide. It was designed to be corrupt by the American Bar Association.

The Constitutional Challenge of Rule 1.6 is a case which is doing just that. The sacrifice of judicial integrity is embarrassing to the judicial branch of government in the state and the federal levels. They just spew back stupidity by making false, irrelevant and unsubstantiated and unsupported statements. And the next level of accountability does the same.

The issue is fully documented on the court record. Common Pleas Court. Superior Court. PA Supreme Court. Eastern District Court. Third Circuit Court of Appeals. Even a cursory review of the Challenge and the supporting cases demonstrate the problem AND THE DELIBERATE FAILURE OF THE COURTS TO ADDRESS THE INJUSTICE WITHIN THE JUDICIARY.

The victim has no choice but to persevere and continue to pursue the case in higher courts… with each court shamefully acting by embarrassing itself in their opinions and briefs. The courts clearly demonstrate their lack of any ethics, morals or integrity and their complete disdain for the US Constitution.

The Challenge is now heading before the US Supreme Court and the US Congress. The ABA undermined the judiciary and usurped the power of the legislatures in every state and federally. JUSTICE IS COMING

“If you want to do something evil, do it inside something boring.” – John Oliver

How many people have read the Rules of Professional Conduct?

How many NON-LAWYERS have read the Rules of Professional Conduct?

The Rules of Professional Conduct directly apply only to lawyers and legal professionals, but collaterally some of the laws are unconstitutional. Once a person is affected by the unconstitutional aspect, they lose their rights.

No Constitutional protections. No equal protection under the law.

Oh, and your lawyer is not allowed to tell you about it, or explain it, or fight against it. They would be disciplined or disbarred.

NO HELP. NO ESCAPE. NO HOPE … until you find out why.

Every lawyer is required to follow Rule 1.6 even after their death. So even a retired lawyer, or a disbarred lawyer, is not lawfully allowed to present the issue. What better way to conceal deliberate crime, judicial corruption and terroristic legal actions – like foreclosure based on fraud, child trafficking, financial ruin by false litigation, false incarceration….

The 90+ pages of laws enacted by the state supreme courts which undermine justice and make judicial misconduct and corruption impossible to expose and prosecute within the state, and further avoids attention unless someone violates the RULES and asks for federal intervention.

Even when the report of corruption is investigated and prosecuted by the federal government, the person who reported it is disciplined for violating the Rules.

A review of the Rules requires more than a cursory review of the rules. Each rule contains comments which are fully incorporated into the rules and explain how each rule is to be applied and interpreted. Most of the comments further refer to another rule by cross reference.

The needle in the injustice haystack… Rule 1.6 – CONFIDENTIALITY OF INFORMATION.

The unconstitutional aspect is buried in a book of laws you do not have to follow,…
inside a rule which every lawyer understands to be attorney-client privilege, …
where on the surface the rule requires all misconduct, or the appearance of misconduct to be reported,…
but, in the comments section every requirement to report the misconduct is excused…
and there is a MANDATE to conceal anything which adversely affects the integrity of the judiciary or the legal profession.

The American Bar Association has demonstrated their knowledge that IF YOU WANT TO DO SOMETHING EVIL, DO IT INSIDE SOMETHING BORING.

And if you dare to survive to expose their crime,
every aspect of your life will be destroyed…
EVERY ASPECT…
to conceal their crime.

When CAROLYN TORNETTA CARLUCCIO learned that the corruption of the judiciary was documented and on the court record, she issued a deliberately defective and void court order where she lacked jurisdiction – throwing me out of my home, selling it illegally, disposing of EVERYTHING I owned.
She knew her order was defective and void.
She knew her actions were not part of her judicial immunity.
She knew other judges would not expose her crime.
She knew her actions would negate the judicial immunity for the entire matter.
The matter has been before 20 judges of the Montgomery County Judiciary.
Their terror and injustice is documented on the court record since 2007.
The matter has been stalled on Appeal in the Superior Court of Pennsylvania.
The county judges know they have committed treason.
The county judges know the Appeals Court will become involved in concealing their treason.
At the time she issued her MALICIOUS defective and void order and subsequent orders designed to cause desperation and suicide, Carolyn Tornetta Carluccio was the President of the Montgomery County Bar Association.
Carolyn Tornetta Carluccio’s prior employment in the US Attorneys Office grants her an exemption from any investigation by that office.
Carolyn Tornetta Carluccio believes herself to be untouchable.
Carolyn Tornetta Carluccio brags about her breach of ethics in Real Estate dealings where she has had a clear conflict of interest.
Carolyn Tornetta Carluccio is a carefully and deliberately constructed judicial sociopath, and to hear her floundering from the bench MAKING INCREDIBLE SHIT UP you discover she is completely stupid.

The crimes remain unprosecuted because District Attorney Risa Ferman can’t prosecute a judge.
The crimes remain unprosecuted because Attorney General Kathleen Kane can’t prosecute a judge.
The crimes remain unprosecuted because Attorney General Linda Kelly couldn’t prosecute a judge.
The crimes remain unprosecuted because Attorney General Tom Corbett couldn’t prosecute a judge.
The crimes remain unprosecuted because the FBI will not enter a jurisdiction without an invitation from the District Attorney or the Attorney General.
The crimes continue.

There are now three Appeals before the Superior Court of Pennsylvania… each being prevented and obstructed by the judges… Carluccio, Page and Weilheimer.
The appeals court judges will become involved in the treason of the lower court judges.

The Federal Court judges have demonstrated their corruption, treason and conspiracy to conceal the matter.

Their terror has not stopped. I face it every minute of every hour of every day… since 2007. They won’t stop. There is no incentive for them to stop. They believe themselves to be untouchable. There is no relief. There is no escape…

It became necessary to find out why… and I found Rule 1.6 which undermined every court in the United States. Written by the American Bar Association to deliberately undermine JUSTICE. They have succeeded in undermining and nullifying the entire Judicial Branch of he American government.

Sedition… by an Organization… Conspiracy of CONFIDENTIALITY.

It could have been resolved at any time by judges and lawyers who recognized the UNCONSTITUTIONALITY.
When I ‘made a federal case out of it’ it could have been resolved, but the federal courts stuck their heads up their asses.
So it is going to require an Act of Congress for me to get divorced… and they exposed the deliberate corruption of the American Bar Association and their effective overthrow of the United States Government… Everything that goes before the judiciary is without jurisdiction as it is biased by the sedition and treason of the ABA and missing a very essential element of due process.

“Occam’s Razor” is a principle which suggests that “all things being equal, the simplest answer is usually the right one.”

Rule 1.6 is the simplest answer to the corruption and injustice in the United States and the nationwide indications that the United States Constitution is being ignored and people are losing their constitutional rights.

Rule 1.6 demonstrates it’s fault and can be applied to EVERY story of injustice, judicial corruption, failure of law enforcement to act and deliberate acts of lawlessness within the law enforcement community.

Kids for Cash Sandusky @ Penn State The National Foreclosure Crisis The Injustice in Family Courts The Injustice in Criminal Courts Malicious Abuse of Power Under Color of Law

If you have a matter which defies explanation, write it in the COMMENTS section below. I can likely explain it by applying Rule 1.6

Rule 1.6 is unconstitutional, unethical, immoral, corrupting, and an unnecessary mandate within any system of justice.

Rule 1.6 has undermined the Judicial Branch of the United States government. The actions in the Constitutional Challenge of Rule 1.6 has demonstrated that the federal courts refuse to address their responsibility for the ‘law’ and have further engaged in an unconstitutional and fraudulent conspiracy to deliberately deny, obstruct and prevent the rights and privileges guaranteed by the United States Constitution.

THE BEAUTIFUL THING is that once Rule 1.6 removed, all the laws currently in place are good.

Justice restored.

All the reforms which failed because of the secret override enabled by Rule 1.6 begin to actually function. As it stands the reforms may have only been attempts by the corrupt to misdirect attention from their conspiracy to conceal their involvement and responsibility.

Met and exchanged documents and supporting information at Senator Pat Toomey’s office in Philadelphia this morning. The Constitutional Challenge of Rule 1.6 was presented.

The meeting covered the who, what where, why, how and when in a very short time… with supporting articles and references.

Requested Senator Toomey review and assist in editing of the request for congressional intervention. (Draft Copy)

The meeting ended with us offering to be available to address any questions and provide support and evidence of any issue which is challenged.

Senator Toomey is NOT a lawyer and is NOT MANDATED under Rule 1.6 to ignore injustice and judicial corruption.

JUSTICE IS COMING.

---

After the meeting at Senator Toomey’s office, we walked to Senator Casey’s office a few blocks away. Though Sen. Casey’s misinformed contact person had refused to arrange any meeting with us, we provided the handouts which were given to Senator Toomey and offered to address any questions or issues which Senator Casey might have on the matter.

We also requested Senator Casey’s review and input regarding the the request for congressional intervention document. (Draft Copy)

Senator Casey IS a Lawyer and IS MANDATED under Rule 1.6 to take no action which adversely affects the integrity of the judiciary and the reputation of lawyers… even when those actions deny constitutionally protected rights.

Senator Casey’s father was the Governor of Pennsylvania in 1987/1988 when the Rules of Professional Conduct were promulgated and enacted into law by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.

---

The Constitutional Challenge of Rule 1.6
requires the action of the United States Congress
to address a problem created by the Judicial Branch
which by its own authority
enacted a mandate for injustice
which sacrifices the judiciary’s integrity and
prevents the court from lawful action to resolve the problem.

---

The Constitutional Challenge of Rule 1.6 exists because of a necessity. Litigants in the American Courts have experienced a loss of constitutionally protected rights and privileges. The state courts fail to consider their responsibility for the loss of constitutional rights of a litigant which leaves the litigant without any recourse.

The litigant is forced to petition the court to address the loss of rights, however the court fails to recognize and acknowledge responsibility. Further, the court fails to realize that the litigant has no choice but to return to the court for justice which will never occur.

The litigant realizes he has lost his rights, BUT it is not until the matter can be removed to a higher court that the evidence which demonstrates and corroborates the loss of rights presents itself.

The lower court is permitted to take any actions to deny, prevent and obstruct justice in the Appeals court. The Appeals court neglects to address the actions or enforce the Rules of Civil Procedure or the Rules of Appellate Procedure. There is no protection under law accorded to the victim.

Judges issue orders without regard for the rule of law, proper procedure, due process or a lack of jurisdiction.

The victim soon learns that a defective and void court order is more powerful than the United States Constitution. No judge will review the order and address the defects and lack of jurisdiction. Case law, precedent and procedures are summarily dismissed and ignored by the court.

This is a deliberate result of the action intended when the judge issued the defective and void order. Judges refer to these orders as ‘unappealable’.

There is no escaping the damage when the court is not lawfully permitted to address the injustice caused by the issuing judge;
when district attorneys will not take any action to prosecute the corruption;
when the attorney general will not take any action to prosecute the corrupt judge;
when the judicial conduct board will take no action against the judge;
when the clear lack of jurisdiction additionally removes the judge’s immunity;
when federal law enforcement will not respond to your complaints unless invited into the jurisdiction by a District Attorney or Attorney General;
where both the District Attorney and Attorney General are lawyers who according to the Rules of Professional Conduct may not take any action which adversely affects the integrity of the judiciary.

The victim litigant is isolated and further victimized while every court and every level of law enforcement fails to act in any regard to the injustice and the collateral crimes which occur based on the defective and void order.

Without empathy or mercy, the court annihilate the litigant with only possible futures for the victim litigant. (1) Homeless/destitute, (2) incarceration or (3) suicide.

At this point, it became necessary to determine why everyone believed their inaction contrary to the law and the responsibilities of their office and their oath was acceptable.

After evaluating the relationship of those involved (ALL LAWYERS AND JUDGES) a review of the Rules of Professional Conduct revealed that Rule 1.6 of the Rules of Professional Conduct made every failure to act lawful. The failure to act to address the injustice and judicial corruption was MANDATED by law.

The cross references within the Rules of Professional Conduct revealed the needle in the haystack of injustice. Rule 1.6 Confidentiality of Information. The courts and law enforcement were not doing anything and refusing to explain their inaction, or misrepresenting their inaction as a lack of jurisdiction. The Attorney General had jurisdiction to act, but lacked a lawful ability to act pursuant to Rule 1.6.

Rule 1.6 prevented the prosecution of judges for injustice and corruption. The intent to abuse the power of the judiciary and violate the public trust was deliberate, intentional, undeniable and demonstrative of a conspiracy concealed by every level of state and federal court.

Reacting to the FBI’s Operation Greylord which decimated the Cook County Judiciary and Courthouse, the American Bar Association encouraged the Code of Professional Conduct be enacted by the state supreme courts into law. The Rules of Professional Conduct replaced a discretionary ethical aspect with a MANDATE to maintain confidentiality where information would adversely affect the integrity of the judiciary.

Instead of promoting a strong sense of ethics, morality and integrity in the judiciary, the enacted Rules of Professional Conduct would MANDATE participation of each judge to sacrifice their integrity to conceal the injustice and corruption of the judiciary.

Whenever an injustice caused by Rule 1.6 was exposed and prosecuted, the state supreme court modified Rule 1.6 to close the loophole. These edits on the record provide breadcrumbs which reveal evidence of the true intent and purpose of enacting Rule 1.6 into law.

By the state Constitution, the County Sheriff is the Chief Law Enforcement Officer in the county. The Sheriff has the constitutional authority, the resources and the staff available to him to prosecute the injustice and corruption of the judiciary.

Yet contrary to the state constitution, the County Sheriffs have a greatly diminished role in law enforcement and take no action to enforce the law. It seems that there was a series of cases where the constitutional power and authority of the County Sheriff was progressively diminished. A Sheriff is not required to be a lawyer.

The only available law enforcement authority who was NOT mandated by the Rules of Professional Conduct, the Sheriffs, were convinced of their diminished law enforcement role by the judges and lawyers. The actions of the each level of state court improperly reducing the constitutional authority of the County Sheriff demonstrates the intention of the judiciary and the lawyers to abuse the authority of their position under color of law to avoid responsibility and prosecution while enabling an ability to commit deliberate criminal injustice and judicial corruption.

In a perverse and twisted irony, the Sheriffs responsibilities include protection of the judges on the county bench. The Sheriffs are protecting the criminally corrupt judiciary who undermined the Sheriff’s constitutional authority in furtherance of sedition. The Sheriffs were criminally and deceptively manipulated to participate in injustice and judicial corruption while denying equal protection under the law to the victims and the public.

---

THE CONSTITUTIONAL CHALLENGE OF RULE 1.6

Growing out of necessity, the challenge did not arise out of malice, seeking to restore the constitutional rights of the People, to restore the integrity of the judiciary, and the reputation of legal professionals.

By taking the approach to the matter as a preemptory challenge to the constitutionality of a state law, the challenge deliberately avoided the usual 1983 abuse of power dismissal doctrine.

The Challenge referred to their cases within the state ONLY for the purpose of evidentiary support demonstrating the loss of rights, loss of liberty, and denial of any respite from the constant litigation, false allegations and threats of future litigation.

The lack of any aggressive assignment of blame was perceived as weakness or foolishness by the court. EVEN WITH THE CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUE CLEARLY EXPOSED, the court demonstrated with unapologetic arrogance the deliberate intent for the judiciary to continue in their injustice, to persist in the sedition of each state government, to abuse the authority and power of the court without regard for the rights of the People or the United States Constitution.

While failing to substantiate statements in fact or law or doctrine, the federal court continued to carelessly issue orders and opinions without regard for relevance or consistency. The judiciary was determined to perpetrate a fraud and sacrifice their integrity.

The Rule is clearly and deliberately unconstitutional. Yet, knowledgeable judges and lawyers, senators and representatives, and government officials continued to perpetuate the injustice.

The matter should have ended immediately with the judiciary accepting responsibility and indicating RULE 1.6 is UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

However, the court actively participated in actions which ignored the law and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure; undermining the default by every state attorney general (the only option which could have avoided adversely affecting the integrity of the federal judiciary); removing the state attorneys general from the matter; deliberate misrepresentations on the court docket; refusing to allow the Attorneys General to indicate their default; failing to certify the constitutional claim with each state; and failing to notify the United States Attorney General in this matter of national significance.

A LAW WHICH IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL, IS A NULLITY. Informed and knowledgeable judges and lawyers were continuing to sacrifice their reputation and integrity based on a nullity. The delusion of the court’s flawed, unsubstantiated and irrelevant statements in opinions and “supporting” documents continued without any cognizance of reality or fact or law.

When filing with the district court, the plaintiffs did not intend to cause the judge to embarrass and humiliate himself in orders and opinions. Had the default been permitted, the court would have not been required to be directly involved and compelled to undermine the case and sacrifice the courts integrity.

When the court improperly accepted the late, incorrectly filed, irrelevant and undistributed filing from Randall Henzes purportedly on behalf of Pennsylvania Attorney General Kathleen Kane, who had already defaulted in the matter, the Court created a requirement to be directly involved in the rulings and opinions in the matter. The nature of the case would require the court to conceal the facts, misrepresent the case and sacrifice the integrity of the court in a futile attempt to protect the integrity of the court.

On Appeal to the Third Circuit Court, the Appellants could do nothing to prevent the improper manipulation of the docket and the documents in the matter; the disappearance of fifty five state attorney general from the matter; the clerk of courts instructions to the state attorneys general to NOT PARTICIPATE in the Appeal; the failure of the clerk to respond to issue raised regarding the actions of the personnel in the clerk’s office; further fraud and misinformation in the court’s incomplete unsigned Per Curiam ruling and opinion; the unsigned court order denying reconsideration or rehearing en banc.

It is not the litigants intention for the Supreme Court of the United States to disgrace themselves by ignoring the matter and denying certiori; or, by reviewing the matter and sacrificing the integrity of the highest court in the United States for the illusion of judicial integrity which been usurped and undermined by corruption and injustice since the mid 80’s.

RESPECTFULLY, The litigants request the United States Congress address the Constitutional Challenge of Rule 1.6 and permit the Supreme Court of the United States to maintain an illusion of judicial integrity.

As survivors of the systematic injustice and extreme corruption which lead to the discovery of the unconstitutional ‘law’;
and
the lawful presentation with an emphasis on resolution of the constitutional issue;
and
without irresponsibly attempting to cause civil unrest in the United States
while
the United States Attorney General and the Department of Justice prosecute the criminal sedition of the American Bar Association
and
the corruption of the judiciary at every level of the state and federal courts;
and
actions to restore the authority of the County Sheriff in accordance with the state constitution;

The litigants respectfully request the prompt resolution of this matter and restoration of the the rights of the People in accordance with the United States Constitution .

Enough is enough. It is time to act responsibly. REBOOT.

It is in every American’s best interest that Congress act at this time.

We demand the United States Constitution be respected honored and fully enforced by the Judiciary, the US Congress and the President.

---

THE AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION – A RICO organization

WHAT COULD BE THE MOTIVATION?
Who are the fans of injustice? …the fans of the lack of integrity demonstrated by the United States Judiciary? …the fans of judges who lose their integrity when they write fraudulent and twisted orders and opinions? …the fans of corruption which goes unprosecuted? …the fans of the power attained by undermining and usurping the authority of the judicial branch? …the fans of a multiple decade conspiracy to deny and undermine the U.S. Constitution and the People of the United States?

The membership of the American Bar Association is the only beneficiary from the injustice caused when their guideline set of ‘trade rules’ which were discretionary were enacted into law and became MANDATORY.

With malice aforethought, the ABA created an industry where their membership could thrive financially by charging litigants who could never expect to escape a deliberate mandatory injustice and abuse of power of the judiciary.

Concealing the Rule under attorney client privilege, the ABA aggressively enforces the Confidentiality of Information with disciplinary actions and requires that confidentiality continue even after the death with its members.

The ABA conspired with, trained and misinformed its members to keep from exposing their sedition as the organization usurped the authority of every state judiciary.

JUSTICE IS COMING. EVERY PERSON MATTERS.

Senator Bob Casey Jr.’s office called after a meeting request was sent along with an explanation of the issue we wish to discuss.

Cathy called back on Friday and was making excuses in her message. Phone tag ensued.

When finally we connected, Cathy asked for an explanation of the issue. I gave her a verbal description of the issue we wished to discuss. It was quite clear she had NOT read the documents sent to Senator Casey.

Cathy kept trying to create an excuse to end the call. No matter how incorrect her thought was, Cathy persisted while I pointed out her failure to comprehend the issue.

Cathy indicated that the US Congress can do nothing. She was wrong.
I politely explained to her the US Constitution’s Separation of Powers.

Cathy persisted in saying that no branch has interaction with the judiciary. She was wrong.

Cathy insisted that the Congress had no oversight of the Judiciary. She was wrong. We are not seeking oversight. She was battling a strawman logical fallacy.

Her next action was to feign insult because I told her any third grade civics student knows the separation of powers.

Cathy was insulted at being wrong. Cathy persisted in indicating that she knew better than me. Though, CATHY DOES NOT KNOW ME OR MY BACKGROUND AT ALL.

When I asked her background and experience, Cathy became more offended – and did not respond. Cathy indicated that the Senator has no jurisdiction to meet with us on this issue.

RIDICULOUS. Cathy was wrong.

Cathy hung up.

---

The Constitutional Challenge of Rule 1.6
requires the action of the United States Congress
to address a problem created by the Judicial Branch
which by its own authority
enacted a mandate for injustice
which sacrifices the judiciary’s integrity and
prevents the court from lawful action to resolve the problem.

---

THE PROBLEM WITH CATHY…

Cathy started the conversation with her mind made up.

Cathy had indicated she doesn’t know the issue.
– She asks for information about the issue. She is barely listening except when she is trying to interject a reason to hang up… BUT because she has not been paying attention, her excuses fail.

Cathy has asked for more information and it was provided.

Cathy incorrectly indicates that a US Senator and the US Congress have no interaction with the Judicial Branch, no Constitutional authority, and that Senator Casey has no jurisdiction to conduct a meeting on the Constitutional Challenge of Rule 1.6.

CATHY IS WRONG and ABSOLUTELY COMMITTED TO BEING WRONG.

Instead of indicating a willingness to check her information, Cathy puts herself in a position of looking completely foolish.

Instead of accepting the responsibility, redirecting to a proper authority, or finding the correct information (even if just to challenge my information), Cathy places herself in a position of gatekeeper and hangs up the phone.

The litigation has been unending since 2007, I have been blocked by gatekeeper tactics before. They can hang up the phone. They take no responsibility. They may act like they know everything and nothing at the same time. They frequently act like it is their first day on the job. The flawed misinformation tactics prevents and denies and obstructs and stalls.

WHAT COULD BE THE MOTIVATION?
Who are the fans of injustice? …the fans of the lack of integrity demonstrated by the United States Judiciary? …the fans of judges who lose their integrity when they write fraudulent and twisted orders and opinions? …the fans of corruption which goes unprosecuted? …the fans of the power attained by undermining and usurping the authority of the judicial branch? …the fans of a multiple decade conspiracy to deny and undermine the U.S. Constitution?

The membership of the American Bar Association is the only beneficiary from the injustice caused when their guideline set of ‘trade rules’ which were discretionary were enacted into law and became MANDATORY.

The ABA created an industry where their membership could thrive financially by charging litigants who could never expect to escape a deliberate mandatory injustice. Concealing the effect of the Rule under attorney client privilege and aggressively enforcing the Confidentiality of Information till death with its members, the ABA prevented its members from exposing their sedition as the organization usurped the authority of every state judiciary.

Cathy. YOU KNOW NOTHING.

The Constitutional Challenge did not arise out of malice. It grew out of necessity. It was presented and filed without accusations and blame. A responsible approach to an issue which required careful presentation to the entire country.

By taking the approach to the matter as a preemptory challenge to the Constitutionality of a state law, it removed the emotionally charged cases of the victims who simply wanted their constitutional rights to be restored in the state where they could then return for JUSTICE. Their cases became evidentiary support demonstrating the loss of constitutional rights.

This responsible approach was perceived as weakness or foolishness by the court. EVEN WITH THE ISSUE CLEARLY EXPOSED the court demonstrated the deliberate intent for the judiciary to continue in their injustice, to persist in the sedition, to abuse the authority of the court without regard for the US Constitution.

While failing to substantiate statements in fact or law or doctrine, the court continued to carelessly issue orders and opinions without regard for relevance or consistency. The law mandated that the judiciary sacrifice their integrity.

The Rule is clearly and deliberately unconstitutional. Yet, knowledgeable judges and lawyers, senators and representatives, and government officials continued to perpetuate the injustice.

The matter should have ended immediately with the judiciary accepting responsibility and indicating RULE 1.6 is UNCONSTITUTIONAL. However, the court actively participated in actions which ignored the law and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure; undermining the default action by every state attorney general; removing the attorneys general from the matter; deliberate misrepresentations on the docket; refusing to allow the Attorneys General to indicate their default.

A LAW WHICH IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL, IS A NULLITY. Informed and knowledgeable judges and lawyers are continuing to sacrifice their reputation and integrity based on a nullity. The delusion of the court’s flawed and irrelevant opinions and “supporting” documents continued without any cognizance of reality or fact or law.

It is not necessary for the Supreme Court of the United States to disgrace themselves by ignoring the matter and denying certiori; or, by reviewing the matter and sacrificing integrity for the illusion of judicial integrity which has not existed in the United States since the 80’s.

The litigants request the United States Congress address the Constitutional Challenge of Rule 1.6 and permit the Supreme Court of the United States to maintain an illusion of judicial integrity.

It is clearly a mistake to ignore or fail to comprehend the carefully thought out actions of the litigants. As survivors of the systematic injustice and extreme corruption, they discovered the unconstitutional ‘law’ and lawfully presented a workable resolution to the government.

It is in every American’s best interest that Congress act at this time.

We demand the United States Constitution be respected honored and fully enforced by the Judiciary, the US Congress and the President.

---

---

CIVICS LESSON FOR CATHY

The Constitution is the Supreme Law of the United States.

Senator Casey is a member of the United States Senate.

The United States Senate and the United States House of Representatives form the Legislative Branch of the United States Government.

The Legislative branch makes the law and has the power to initiate constitutional amendments.

First, the Legislative branch makes the law.
Second, the Executive branch executes the law.
Last, the Judicial branch interprets the law.
Each branch has an effect on the other.

Legislative Branch

Checks on the Executive

– Impeachment power (House) – Trial of impeachments (Senate) – Selection of the President (House) and Vice President (Senate) in the case of no majority of electoral votes – May override Presidential vetoes – Senate approves departmental appointments – Senate approves treaties and ambassadors – Approval of replacement Vice President – Power to declare war – Power to enact taxes and allocate funds – President must, from time-to-time, deliver a State of the Union address

Checks on the Judiciary

-Senate approves federal judges -Impeachment power (House) -Trial of impeachments (Senate) -Power to initiate constitutional amendments -Power to set courts inferior to the Supreme Court -Power to set jurisdiction of courts -Power to alter the size of the Supreme Court

Checks on the Legislature – because it is bicameral, the Legislative branch has a degree of self-checking.

– Bills must be passed by both houses of Congress – House must originate revenue bills – Neither house may adjourn for more than three days without the consent of the other house – All journals are to be published

Executive Branch

Checks on the Legislature

– Veto power – Vice President is President of the Senate – Commander in chief of the military – Recess appointments – Emergency calling into session of one or both houses of Congress – May force adjournment when both houses cannot agree on adjournment – Compensation cannot be diminished

Checks on the Judiciary

– Power to appoint judges – Pardon power

Checks on the Executive

– Vice President and Cabinet can vote that the President is unable to discharge his duties

Judicial Branch

Checks on the Legislature

– Judicial review – Seats are held on good behavior – Compensation cannot be diminished

Checks on the Executive

– Judicial review – Chief Justice sits as President of the Senate during presidential impeachment

Pay attention Frank Fina.
Pay attention Randall Henzes.

If you want to destroy a case in the Pennsylvania Attorney General’s office… it’s simple.
All you needs to do is one misdeed which MANDATES the Attorney General into submissive silence.

The Attorney General’s clients include the people in her office. Like Frank Fina, Randall Henzes, Claudia Tesoro, etc…

Rule 1.6 Confidentiality of Information applies to revealing information about your client. Who is the Attorney General’s client?

So if any of the Attorney General’s ‘clients’ wants a prosecution in the toilet all they need to do is toss that monkeywrench…

---

PERHAPS, improperly sending all surveillance information to the FBI. Surveillance data obtained properly through a judge may not be shared with other jurisdictions.

IF THIS HAPPENS, Rule 1.6 prevents the Attorney General from speaking about it because she must represent her client.

LIKE WHEN Frank Fina sent all the information on a multi-year Philadelphia sting to the FBI… and THEN everyone accused Kathleen Kane of refusing to talk about it… even the lawyers who knew exactly why she couldn’t speak. Even Philadelphia District Attorney Seth Williams who blasted Kathleen Kane in the press… and hired Frank Fina into his office.

---

OR PERHAPS, after the Attorney General deliberately defaults on a national issue. Someone improperly files a document LATE with the court, doing it wrong and getting assistance from the clerk, and then failing to substantiate the matter sacrifices the integrity of the court.

IF THIS HAPPENS, Rule 1.,6 prevents the Attorney General from speaking about it or taking any actions to discipline the person in her office, or any action to retract it because it would reveal the corruption caused by Rule 1.6. The court has to protect the court without concern for justice.

LIKE WHEN Randall Henzes filed a document on September 6, 2013, which was not done properly so the clerk of courts MODIFIED (something they NEVER DO) the filing on September 9, 2013. Then submitting documents which couldn’t substantiate his claim, BUT the court’s integrity was at stake and the court is mandated to protect it no matter the injustice. The Attorney General’s office is required to protect the perpetrator even going so far as to assign another person to the appeal in the Third Circuit Court to respond without any substantiation of the claim. Because, they knew the court would not be able to lawfully rule in any other way than to protect the courts.

---

And all those lawyers, district attorneys, prosecutors, judges, etc… who ignored the Luzerne County Kids for Cash scandal for years… and then the Commission filed a completely fraudulent account of why it happened.

Rule 1.6… it’s the law that let’s crimes become conspiracies without any regard to the number of people harmed. The law which deliberately denies justice and constitutional rights.

---

All those foreclosures nationwide across the United States where people lost their homes based on fraudulent documents and fraudulent business practices and no one was prosecuted… Rule 1.6 mandates the silence of lawyers when their clients are stealing peoples homes through fraud. Without regard to how many millions are harmed. And no one goes to jail.

---

DO WE NOW HAVE AN IDEA ABOUT WHY JERRY SANDUSKY WAS PERMITTED TO DESTROY LIVES FOR YEARS?

And why they had so little regard for Joe Paterno that they allowed him to be blamed for their inaction in prosecuting and stopping Jerry Sandusky.

---

So next time you wonder WHY ATTORNEY GENERAL KATHLEEN KANE IS SAYING NOTHING keep in mind, that’s how we cover up injustice and corruption in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Your constitutional rights are being denied and ignored in the courts by the very people trusted to regulate themselves. THEY BLEW IT. And they mandated each other to keep the secret.

Enter the Constitutional Challenge Of Rule 1.6 filed by Pro Se litigants where every state attorney general defaulted to restore the constitutional rights of the people ion their state. UNTIL RANDALL HENZES threw the ‘monkeywrench’.

The clerk helped to hide the case somewhat… removing the attorneys general from the docket and not communicating with them. Or in the Third Circuit telling the state attorneys general to not participate.

It doesn’t matter who is watching or directly involved, the court, 55 other state attorneys general,… in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, one man (RANDALL HENZES) can prevent the lawful action seeking to restore the constitutional rights of every American citizen which have been denied by Rule 1.6 – CONFIDENTIALITY.

The Constitutional Challenge of Rule 1.6 will move on to the Supreme Court of the United States…. and concurrently to the United States Congress.

THEY THINK THE PEOPLE ARE STUPID.
TIME TO TEACH R-E-S-P-E-C-T.

JUSTICE IS COMING.

The Third Circuit Court of Appeals has demonstrated their tactics which while preventing the matter from going before any judges rules without any court appearances AND affirms that ruling by every judge in the Third Circuit.

The thing is that no judge signs anything in the Third Circuit. Yet, one must play along to the point of foolishness pretending.

– even when the attorneys general have indicated they were told not to participate.
– even though no order is ever signed
– even though the clerk of courts never provides the briefs to the judges
– even though the US Marshalls are watching the case
– even though the rulings are not based on facts (there’s been no hearings so everything has to be on the paper.)
– even though the technology demonstrates the clerk of courts misdirection

The evidence that the matter never went before any judge for review is clear. The fact that they think people are stupid and that the court persists in this disrespect is aggravating.

What’s wrong with these people? So afraid of facts? So afraid of justice? So afraid that they cannot substantiate their decisions based on the facts of the case THAT THEY MAKE UP STUFF and rule based on that.

The incomprehensible injustice of the American Court system.

Pray you never learn this fact first-hand.

So the matetr is off to SCOTUS, BUT with the knowledge that SCOTUS would never acknowledge that the United States Judiciary has been undermined by the American Bar Association in every state and given the full power to attack and destroy it’s critics.

Remember how many years Nelson mandela spent in prison. It was the South African Courts whichn put him in jail. It was the South African Courts which jailed it’s critics.

It is the South African Constitution that saw to it that the Judicial Branch of their Government would not have that power to undermine justice in South Africa ever again.

Senator Charles McIlhenny non-Lawyer Why has Senator McIlhenny neglected to inform the Pennsylvania Legislature of the Constitutional Challenge?

Senator Pat Toomey non-LAWYER Met with member of his staff – June 2014.

Senator Bob Casey LAWYER Just can’t get a meeting.

Attorney General Eric Holder LAWYER Could resolve the matter in a minute. The single most powerful decision maker in the matter. Just can’t get a meeting.

Attorney General Kathleen Kane LAWYER It would seem that Kane’s staff has undermined her sense of justice.

Senator Stewart Greenleaf LAWYER Judiciary Committee Chief of Staff notified. Just can’t get a meeting.

Governor Tom Corbett LAWYER Hand delivered. Just can’t get a meeting.

Newt Gingrich non-Lawyer Hand delivered. Awaiting response.

Representative Kate Harper LAWYER Knows all about the corruption and the Challenge of Rule 1.6. BUT, hasn’t done anything.

Representative Todd Stephens LAWYER Knows all about the corruption and the Challenge of Rule 1.6. BUT, hasn’t done anything … but offer to do something which he never does. OY!.

Representative Kathy Watson LAWYER REFUSES to meet on the issue.

In December 2013, during a meeting with Senator McIlhenny, he was asked to notify the Pennsylvania Legislature of the Constitutional Challenge of Rule 1.6

We have met with the Senator and his Chief of Staff on several occasions. They have been informed of the necessity of the challenge and the circumstances of the loss of constitutional rights.

As a non-lawyer, Senator McIlhenny may lawfully take action in this matter. He is NOT prevented by the Rules of Professional Conduct which prevent any lawyer from acting in this regard.

We drop by his office in Doylestown to follow up on a regular basis.

BUT, SENATOR McILHENNY HAS NOT DONE ANYTHING YET.

It’s been 6 months. THAT is unacceptable.

Have the lawyers in the Senate told Senator McIlhenny to STFU?