- The evidence, with its sources cited in the linked files
noted below, shows that Judge Sotomayor compromised her integrity and impartiality
because she:
-
- 1. withheld personal financial information that she was
required to disclose by the Senate Judiciary Committee as well as by the
Ethics in Government Act of 1978 (5 U.S.C. Appendix), which imposed on
her the duty to file an annual financial disclosure report, so that her
failure to disclose began years before she was nominated, just as were
nominated for high office Tim Geithner, Tom Daschle, and Nancy Killefer,
subsequently exposed as tax-evaders;
-
- (In brief, she earned $3,773,824 since 1988 + received
$381,775 in loans = $4,155,599 + her 1976-1987 earnings, yet disclosed
assets worth only $543,903, thus leaving unaccounted for in her answers
to the Committee $3,611,696 - taxes and the cost of her reportedly modest
living.)
Click for pdf
-
- 2. likewise, withheld from the Senate Judiciary Committee
the incriminating DeLano case, 06-4780-bk-CA2, which reveals her participation
in a cover-up of concealment of at least $673,657 of a 39-year veteran
banker and bankruptcy officer, who pretended to go 'bankrupt' but who similarly
did not disclose required financial information, as part of a bankruptcy
fraud scheme run by bankruptcy system insiders and her peers below, whom
she protected by upholding their denial and denying herself every single
document in all creditor-requests, whereby she denied the creditor all
discovery rights, denied herself the facts to which to apply the law, and
thus denied the fundamental Constitutional guarantee of due process of
law, while aggravating the misery of countless debtors, creditors, and
the public at large to whom they must pass on their losses; Click
for pdf
-
- and
-
- 3. thus acted in keeping with her pattern of gross partiality
toward the close-knit class of judges established by condoning her judicial
colleagues' systematic dismissal of misconduct complaints against their
peers and by participating as a member of the Second Circuit Judicial Council
in the latter's denial of 100% of petitions to review complaint dismissals
during the 1oct96-30sep08 12-year reported period, thus injuring all the
complainants, litigants, and the public at large, whom she left at the
mercy of her complained-against peers, prone to retaliate with assurance
of impunity;
-
- cf. reference 1 supra, at 7 of 40; and N:51¶¶1-4
& N:39; Click
for pdf
-
- 4. a Follow the money! investigation of Judge Sotomayor's
financial affairs and of the concealed assets in the DeLano case by the
Senate, the media, and bloggers is necessary in order to give practical
effect "without respect to persons" nominated to high public
office or down on their luck while suffering the economic crisis to the
fundamental principle of our democratic government of "Equal Justice
Under Law". Click
for pdf
-
- You can help give effect to that principle of equality
under law by calling the senators, particularly those on the Judiciary
Committee, and bringing that evidence to their attention. To facilitate
doing so, the following file contains as much contact information as I
have gathered so far: Click
For pdf
-
- Try to talk to the senators' chief counsel for judiciary
matters, who is the staff member that deals with the matter in question.
You may ask for his or her name and fax number so that you may fax them
your statement or mine.
-
- You should also leave a terse, well-rehearsed voice mail
that goes to the point. For the sake of professionalism, leave your phone
number, but do not even dream that they will call you back. Anyway, every
call does make an impression by letting the senator know how the public
feels about the issue.
-
- Likewise, do not even consider mailing anything given
that up to three weeks may go by from the moment your correspondence is
delivered to the Senate mail security facility to the time it actually
reaches your addressee.
-
- If the receptionist tells you that you should call your
senator instead of the one you are calling, you can tell him or her that
you are not approaching that senator to ask for a passport, schedule a
visit to Washington, or request a recommendation to the military academy.
-
- Rather, the senator is acting on an issue that literally
affects every person in the country. Hence, you are exercising your First
Amendment right to petition a member of government to act in your and the
public's interest.
-
- Then you can ask, when a big company with a deep pocket
ready to disburse a campaign contribution approaches the senator to lobby
him on an issue, is it your response that it should go away and approach
its state senator?
-
- I encourage you to contact also local and national media
as well as bloggers to share with them the summarizing numbered paragraphs
above and their links to the evidence files.
-
- Make the senators and the media aware that by pursuing
that evidence so as to protect the integrity and impartiality of our judiciary,
they can become the BobWoodward/CarlBernstein of our generation or the
modern Senator Sam Ervin, who chaired the Watergate Committee and made
famous two questions that he doggedly asked of witnesses and other deponents,
which can be updated thus:
-
- What did the senators know about Judge Sotomayor's withholding
from them information about her financial affairs and the DeLano case,
and when did they know it?
-
- I welcome your comments on this article. Send it to Dr.Richard.Cordero.Esq@gmail.com
and cantab.net. I will at least acknowledge receipt within 6 hours. If
you do not receive such acknowledgment, then once more something or somebody
prevented either your email or mine from reaching its addressee. If so,
ask other people on your group or servelist if they had the same experience.
-
- Dr.Richard.Cordero.Esq@gmail.com
-
- Click For pdf
-
|