The Overthrow Of The
American Republic
Part 36

by Sherman H. Skolnick
The Judges and the Shadow Government

In law, there is a principle described as customs, practices, and usages. In simple terms, it means certain habits that those who rule us use by way of conducting themselves. BUT, these ingrained ways are generally not written down, yet are clearly understood as the accepted and established way of government.
For example, in the South for a hundred years after the American Civil War, or as southerners call it The War Between The States, the customs, practices, and usages, were that whites would not respect the Equal Protection of the Law guarantees as to blacks. Lynchings were condoned, and whites would eat their picnic lunch while watching blacks hanging from a tree. The Ku Klux Klan, although dominated some fifty per cent by FBI agents and informants, was more or less allowed to run wild and terrorize blacks. Some Federal judges, such as in Mississippi, were known to chase blacks out of their courts while hurling racial slurs against them. It was a customs, practice, and usage, that blacks had separate fountains to drink water from, in public facilities.
In Chicago, we spoke to an Afro-American lawyer, formerly a government official, who told us how the federal courts in Chicago likewise mistreat black attorneys, even now. He decided not to make any public statements about the same. Italian-American lawyers told us similar things from first-hand experience. Namely, that lawyers of color and of certain ethnic groups, are looked down upon by the Chicago federal judges, some of whom are persons of color themselves. That is, the judges prefer "pin-stripe" suit attorneys, WASPs (White Anglo-Saxon Protestants). No, it is not as blatant as having black attorneys drinking from a separate fountain. BUT, their petitions are routinely rejected, so that they cannot hope to make a living in the Chicago federal courts.
Some of the accepted ways of the judiciary, state and federal:
[1] The buying and selling of judgeships in courts at all levels. We discussed this in a website item "Buying a Judgeship". Because of certain circumstances, some of this is even coming out in the monopoly press. Such as "Ex-Judge gets 27 months in bribery case; U.S. still probing whether he paid for seat on bench". Chicago Tribune, 7/26/2002.
A popular website (<>, 6/19/03)referred to a story in a major New York publication:
"In an admission that has New York Supreme Court [actually a lower court] in an uproar, a retired Brooklyn judge said he paid $35,000 to a Democratic leader more than three decades ago to get a seat on the bench, New York Newsday reports. The payment, says Thomas R. Jones, 89, was 'IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CUSTOMS AND PRACTICES OF THE DAY', though he added, 'it was not right then, it's not right now' ".(Emphasis added.)
The article went on to discuss how judges and lawyers knew that certain lawyers were "bagmen", used as go-betweens of lawyers and corrupt jurists.
In our website series on "Coca-Cola, CIA, and the Courts", we mentioned how a known criminal-type bought the bench for Chicago Federal District Judge Blanche M. Manning[(312)435-7608]. An elite federal investigative unit, contacted us.
Government investigators: "Your story, also in the court record, that Judge Manning's judgeship was bought, is not correct."
Citizen's Committee to Clean Up the Courts: "What is wrong with our court statement and our website story?"
Government investigators: "You state that her judgeship was bought for one million dollars by a known power-broker, described as a mobster. It is not a correct amount. Our inquiry has determined that the power-broker paid two million dollars."
Citizen's Committee: "So, is that all you found wrong with our position on the buying of that Judgeship? That we mentioned a lower amount?"
Government investigators: "Yes, you have stated a wrong amount."
He did not inform us what, if anything, would be done against the Judge and her patron/judgeship buyer.
Since the buying of judgeships is a known custom, practice, and usage, what are the obvious conclusions? Such as, the criminal-types, or political power-brokers, that buy the judgeship and install someone of THEIR choice, then are in a position to profit in some way from the judge thus put in place. Some call it, pulling on the chain. (In the New York example, however, the retired Judge claimed it did not effect his rulings. Really?)
[2] The handling of court records. No accountability. There is a practice moreso in the federal courts in the U.S., of the judges NOT SIGNING THE COURT RULINGS by them, particularly so in civil cases. So, were you, as we have for decades, to have examined decisions by U.S. District Judges and then their supervisors, the reviewing courts, U.S. Courts of Appeal, it is quite evident the Judges DO NOT SIGN THEIR NAME.
What is the rationale, off-the-record, and behind-the-scenes? Namely, that many of the federal court decisions are NOT made by the Judges who are simply a front. The decisions are made by law clerks, also "minute clerks" as they are referred to. In plain lingo, we have long since known that to corrupt the judiciary, you have to lean on their secretaries, their minute clerks, their law clerks, sometimes just the court bailiffs or deputy marshals, or their ghost-writing law professors. Further, in some instances, the decisions are written by former law school students or present or former law professors, particularly so where the judges are former law professors.
We have given as examples of corrupt practices, that three Chicago Federal Appeals Judges, and one judge on the U.S. Supreme Court, are all formerly from Rockefeller's University of Chicago Law School. (7th Circuit Judges Richard A. Posner (312) 435-5806); Frank H. Easterbrook (312) 435-5808, were law professors, and 7th Circuit Judge Diane P. Wood (312) 435-5521, was Dean of the Law School. U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, was a professor there.)They commit perjury, in violation of the federal criminal code, in that they have failed to disclose that they, on the bench, represent the Billion Dollar stock and bond portfolio of Rockefeller's University of Chicago. This disclosure, which they have not made, is an annual mandatory judicial financial disclosure, failure to reveal the same by their signed form, being perjury, under federal law.
What is the problem with the judges, as is their custom, practice, and usage, not to sign their name to their rulings? The ghost-written decisions in important cases, not every case, contain judicial perjuries. That is, the established undisputed facts in the court record show it is DAY. To make a corrupt and arbitrary ruling, the judges' rulings say it is NIGHT, and apply NIGHT case law.
The litigant "loser" and/or their attorney is puzzled. Rarely, if ever, do lawyers confront the corrupt judges with their judicial perjury. Funny thing, since the decisions are often ghost-written, the judges, supposely in all candor, could say, but never do, "I did not write that. I know nothing about that decision. You can't hold me responsible and accountible. Why? Because I also did NOT sign it." It is a corrupt and rotten way of carrying out the unwritten customs, practices, and usages, of the Bench and the Bar.
[3] The U.S. Constitution, Seventh Amendment provides:
"In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, AND NO FACT TRIED BY A JURY SHALL BE OTHERWISE RE-EXAMINED in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law." (Emphasis added.)
The state and federal courts in this nation have been set up similar to a church hierarchy, with a lower court (the local church), a reviewing and appellate court (the regional or local Archbishop of the Church), and the higher court (The Vatican, the Pontiff, the Pope).
By the 7th Amendment of the Bill of Rights, the reviewing and appellate court and the highest courts, are forbidden to re-examine, that is, to change, re-determine, the facts submitted to a jury and made into a jury trial court verdict.
The 7th Amendment in important cases, not every case, is again and again violated by feudal lords, sitting as Archbishops on the bench and throne of power as appellate, reviewing, and highest court judges. They commit judicial perjuries, picking so-called new "facts" out of the air, and thus justifying a corrupt and arbitrary ruling in dealing with a jury trial verdict of the lower court. To survive, members of the Bar dare not complain about these judicial perjuries which constitute a fraud upon their own Court by the reviewing, appellate, or high court judges, actually made, as earlier stated, by ghost-writers, and allowed, permitted, condoned, and acquiesced in by the judges.
[4] The U.S. Constitution sets up a system of government into three departments, Legislature, Judiciary, Executive. It is a violation of these provisions, for example, for the Legislature to sit as a Court. In enumerating the powers of Congress, Article I, Section 9, "No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed."
Bill of Attainder is to have the Legislature and/or the Executive branch, designate, without a judicial determination, that a person is an "enemy of the State", a "terrorist", or a "criminal". During periods of public ferment, such as the Civil Rights and Anti-Viet Nam War era, the FBI and the American CIA, secretly designated U.S. citizens as "enemies of the State" and similar labels in the records of those agencies. And, circulating those secret rulings, following up on that, secret government operatives, fingered political activists to have their phones sabotaged, their private residences and offices broken into and records of membership stolen, and other injuries done to them as law-abiding citizens, such as fire-bombing their cars, causing wheels to somehow fall off their car while in motion, and inserting provocateurs into peace parades. These secret records justified the FBI/CIA in assassinating Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., to prevent "the rise of a Black Messiah" and to punish him fatally for having one-year prior to his political murder having made a speech in New York. Dr. King said he intended to go to Viet Nam to urge black GIs not to murder yellow-skin people in someone else's civil war. In other website stories, we mentioned how William Rehnquist headed a secret Justice Department unit doing such things. Later, when he became a Justice on the U.S. Supreme Court, he ruled that there should not be a court remedy for these wrongs, and in so doing, did not disqualify himself in respect to his own prior actions as to the same.
In prior website items, we told how Hillary Rodham Clinton, while First Lady (which is NOT an official government position), nevertheless mis-used government power to put persons such as us, on her "enemies list" to harass and terrorize us. Courts, as we mentioned, refused to consider our plight and to x-out these Bills of Attainder issued against us and others, without judicial determinations.
Furthermore, the Federal Courts have become, more and more, super-Legislatures, passing "case laws", binding on everyone, the same as if done by Congress.
There have been no actual remedies for violation of the Separation of Powers, the three department system of the government. We have in the past mentioned about Chicago-area Congressman Henry Hyde who had two hats. First hat, he was, of course, a Congressman. Secondly, he was also head of the CIA's "black budget", supervising funds for dirty tricks including political assassinations. So he sat in the Legislative and Executive branches at the same time.
Since Judges are not intended to be representatives of the people, and are primarily chosen by the Ultra Rich, the U.S. is becoming more and more a nation ruled by Judges. We have in our website stories about the year 2000 Presidential election, told how the "Gang of Five", like a Military Junta, on the U.S. Supreme Court, installed George W. Bush as the occupant and resident of the White House, in so doing, the high court gang re-examined and re-determined the facts, even plucking supposed "facts" out of the sky.
Thus, more and more we are being ruled by the Judges without our consent as the governed.
More coming....Stay tuned.
Since 1958, Mr. Skolnick has been a court reformer and since 1963, Chairman/Founder, Citizen's Committee to Clean Up the Courts. Since 1991, a regular panelist and since 1995, Moderator/Producer of "Broadsides", a public access Cable TV program, cablecast WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS of Chicago to upwards of 400,000 viewers, each Monday evening, 9 p.m., Channel 21 Cable TV. Portions of some of the shows, via videostreaming, can be seen anywhere, anytime, through our website.
Office, 8 a.m. to Midnight, most 7 days, (773) 375-5741 BUT, please, DO NOT BOMBARD THIS LISTED PHONE WITH "JUST ROUTINE" CALLS, such as asking us our address which is part of every one of our website stories.
For a recorded phone message, updating our work, NOT an expensive call (773) 731-1100.
For a heavy packet of our printed stories, send $5.00 [U.S. funds only], plus a stamped, self-addressed BUSINESS size envelope [ #10 envelope, 4-1/8 x 9- 1/2 ] WITH THREE U.S. FIRST CLASS STAMPS on it, to Citizen's Committee to Clean Up the Courts, Sherman H. Skolnick, Chairman, 9800 So. Oglesby Ave., Chicago IL 60617-4870.
WEBSITE: <> [NOTE "s" after name].



This Site Served by TheHostPros