Saturday, October 20, 2007

Evidence that J M Mukasey as Attorney General could not enforce law on wrongdoing judges

Evidence of J. Michael Mukasey's incapacity
to stand up to wrongdoing friends in the judiciary

The deliberations in the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee concerning
Judge Michael Mukasey, whom President Bush nominated for Attorney
are under way to determine whether to recommend his confirmation by
full Senate, which is expected to vote on it before the end of the
Time is of the essence for you to communicate your views on the
matter to
every senator.

The principal reason why another Attorney General is needed is that
AG Alberto Gonzales conceived his main function as that of serving and
protecting his friend and mentor, President Bush, rather than acting
the top federal law enforcement officer. An investigation is still
way to determine whether he tolerated, or even participated in, the
of U.S. Attorneys because they were investigating friends or
supporters of
the President.

Hence, a key consideration in confirming Judge Mukasey should be
he has the required independence and strength of character to apply
law even to his former friends and colleagues in the judiciary and not
misuse his office to obstruct any investigation of wrongdoing judges.
Let's see.

As chief judge of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District
of New
York, Judge Mukasey was a member of the Judicial Council of the Second
Circuit, the body of judges that must "make all necessary and
orders for the effective and expeditious administration of justice
the circuit". As such, he decided on petitions for review of denials
his colleague, the chief circuit judge, of judicial complaints
against his
peers in the circuit engaged in conduct "prejudicial to the
of justice", including bribery, corruption, prejudice, bias, and
of interests.

Yet, he participated in the systematic denial of such petitions
any investigation, thus leaving complainants as well as the public at
large at the mercy of peers of him that were actually, or gave the
appearance of being, unfit for judicial office.

Moreover, Judge Mukasey was between 2004-06 also a member of the
Conference, which is the highest policy-making body of the federal
judiciary and presided over by the Chief Justice of the Supreme
Court. As
such, he had access to the reports on conduct and disability orders
all the 13 judicial circuits.

Thus, as member of both bodies, he had actual or constructive
knowledge of
the shocking official statistics, which now stand thus: Between 1997
2006, 7,462 complaints were filed against federal judges, who only
disciplined 9 of their peers! Judge Mukasey and his peers granted
themselves immunity from the judicial self-discipline law.

Judge Mukasey did not stand up to his peers even when he repeatedly
received documentary evidence of a pattern of acts pointing to the
by judges in the U.S. Bankruptcy and District Courts in Rochester,
NY, of
a bankruptcy fraud scheme.

In one case, a 39-year veteran of the banking industry, still working
M&T Bank's bankruptcy department, filed bankruptcy petition 04-20280
claiming that he and his wife had only $535 in cash and on account,
IRS and mortgage documents show that they had earned or received
which is still unaccounted for because the judges covered for them by
requiring that they produce even their bank account statements!
( )

Judge Mukasey first covered for his peers by dismissing the evidence
his letter of March 2, 2004, though he had a statutory duty to report
to the U.S. Attorney. So before he becomes AG and must cover for his
friends, lest he incriminate himself, he must be investigated.
( )

Note: If you have any problem downloading either of these files, copy
address, paste it in the address bar of your browser, and press enter.

Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home