Friday, November 20, 2009


An Action Item.
Your Responses to Judge Gormley's Suspension

For those of you who have been through the family courts and wondered what just happened this email contains several resources judges use to determine whether or how much time you will have with your children. There are many good judges across the nation working to keep children and parents fully engaged with each other. On the other hand statistics continue to indicate Fathers are the parent overwhelmingly relegated to visitor, non-custodial or non-primary residential status even when that Father has joint legal and/or physical custody of the children and has been a 'hands on' fully engaged parent.

Our movement needs to be aware of an influential organization located in Reno, Nevada called the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges (NCJFCJ). For the better part of the past 60 years NCJFCJ has provided training and programming material for family court judges. Their influence in family law and the courts is significant. For those whose cases involve allegations of Domestic Violence or restraining orders you'll want to be aware of these two publications of NCJFCJ which address these issues and how the organization counsels judges to view your case when you come to court. Take a look at NCJFCJ's Burgundy Book and their latest Judges Bench Guide for safety involving child custody cases. There are a number of serious concerns within these documents, for example judges are instructed to ignore claims and evidence of parental alienation and strike them from the record.

Why This Matters For All of Us

The domestic violence movement wants child custody cases examined through the abuse lens. False allegations of abuse to gain advantage in divorce are recognized throughout the profession's literature. Attorneys writing in law journals complain about the practice of some colleagues who routinely file for a restraining order several weeks before filing divorce papers. Many of us recognize what's become known as the 'Silver Bullet Technique' or 'The Nuclear Option.'

On Tuesday, legislators in Suffolk county NY passed a law stating the county would now be required to establish a public domestic violence offender registry operating similarly to the sex offender registries. In passing this law the county legislators are claiming a 'first' in the nation and hope their example is replicated around the country. Thanks to Greg Fisher for passing on the vote results.
Earlier this year a legislator from Indiana sent ACFC this DV bill requesting comments. The bill passed. Financial sweeteners for the judiciary and law enforcement were included thereby assuring bill support from those communities. The result is Indiana has started establishing databases to track restraining orders on an inter and intra state basis. How long will it be before these databases become the portal for Indiana's public domestic violence registries as well? Not very. As an aside this law requires an officer to accept 'victims' statement that a restraining order exists even when proof of its existence is unavailable. What this means is immediate arrest without proof of violation.

Next year the violence against women act (VAWA) comes up for reauthorization in Congress. VAWA money funds Suffolk county and Indiana type activity around the nation. It has become very evident DV advocates intend to create databases around the nation then federalize those databases into a seamless national network, not dissimilar to the existing systems in place for child support collection.
While to some this data warehousing may sound like a good idea to protect victims of domestic violence it should raise significant red flags for citizens concerned about their ability to receive justice in our courts. There do not appear to be safeguards in place to protect innocents. Considering a judge recently ruled several West Virginia domestic violence program rules unconstitutional, an outcome similar to one last year in the California Woods v. Shrewy case and the case of Crespo v. Crespo heading to the NJ Supreme Court ever encroaching government into the private sphere of family life is a legitimate issue.

Are these victim safety or revenue generation programs? A review of Pennsylvania data reveals almost 50% (about 30,000 per year) of all restraining orders are withdrawn, dismissed or not extended on hearing. The cost to taxpayers for these orders is approximately $60,000,000 per year. Dr. Ben Foster authored this report several years ago on the cost of dismissed or false restraining orders in West Virginia. The Suffolk county DV registry program allows for going back five years from enactment to build the database and will charge 'offenders' a $25 per year fee to keep their information current.

Let's Take Action.

There is one more opportunity to stop the Suffolk county legislation. County Executive Steve Levy must sign IR 1314 for it to be effective. There is little doubt the Suffolk bill will become the model for a NY state bill in the near future. Contact County Executive Levy and politely urge him to veto the legislation. Drop us an email and let us know what you did. It doesn't matter if you're not a New Yorker, as the bill notes Suffolk County is looking to 'lead the way' and notes California, Nevada, Washington, DC and the UK are also considering these types of registries, so call or write from across the nation and let NY know the eyes of the country are on them.
County Executive Steve Levy can be reached at: or
Tel: 631 853-4000
or Snail Mail to:
Steve Levy, County ExecutiveH.
Lee Dennison Bldg.
100 Veterans Memorial Hwy.
PO Box 6100
Hauppauge, NY 11788-0099

Your Responses to Judge Gormley's Suspension

Our last newsletter carried information on Judge Gormley's suspension from the bench in Kentucky for bias. We asked for your thoughts on the matter and received 20 pages of comments. One of the best was "It's about time gender bias is recognized as judicial misconduct." There were a number of stories related to individual problems people have with judges and cases. All of these should reaffirm our committment to reform the family court and our nation's family law systems. Read the comments here.

Thanks to all of you who continue to work these issues, we appreciate your support. Please consider a contribution so we can continue this efforts, you can donate here.


Mike McCormick
Executive Director

Tuesday, November 03, 2009


Press Contact: Rebekah Pizana
National Coalition Director

Just two days prior to the U.S. Supreme Court hearings on life sentences for youth, Michael Farris, J.D., will appear on Fox News Channel’s Huckabee’s Opinion to discuss the issue.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE // November 3, 2009 // Washington, D.C. – The Supreme Court is scheduled to consider two of the most prominent cases of the year this coming Monday. Constitutional lawyer Michael Farris will appear on Gov. Mike Huckabee’s Fox News show on Saturday, November 7, at 8 p.m. ET to discuss whether the Supreme Court should allow the U.N.’s controversial Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) to resolve the issue.

The two cases on appeal, Graham v. Florida and Sullivan v. Florida, question the authority of a state to sentence juvenile violent offenders to life without parole. Amnesty International and other global organizations have filed briefs urging the Court to apply the U.N.’s CRC to Florida law as a matter of binding “Customary International Law.”

On September 21, Farris submitted an opposing brief on behalf of 16 Congressmen which argues that this use of international law is contrary to both the facts and the law.

The members of Congress who appeared on this amicus brief are Rep. Thaddeus McCotter and Rep. Doug Lamborn, co-chairs of the House Sovereignty Caucus, and Reps. Pete Hoekstra, Phil Gingery, John Fleming, Cynthia Lummis, Trent Franks, Dan Burton, Todd Akin, Gus Bilirakis, Robert Latta, Mark Souder, Jim Jordan, John Boozman, Todd Tiahrt, and Rob Bishop.

Farris and available House members will be present for credentialed press on the steps of the Supreme Court immediately following the hearings at 12:15pm on November 9.

Farris is president of, an organization which seeks to prevent U.S. ratification of the CRC and to protect the fundamental liberty of fit parents to direct the upbringing of their children, through an amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

Monday, October 12, 2009

Judge KOs shelter kickback scheme

By Carey Roberts
October 12, 2009

Every time we turn around, it seems, we hear of an abuse shelter being accused of discrimination, fraud, or other head-shaking irregularities. And now a judge has ruled the entire abuse shelter industry in the state of West Virginia is wracked by conflict of interest, gender bias, and financial kickbacks.

The ménage a trois involves a government agency, a well-heeled trade organization, and 14 domestic violence shelters located around the state. Here's how the scratch-your-back scheme works...Any time a couple gets married or divorced in West Virginia, they are required to cough up a $15 fee to the Family Protection Services Board. That tallies up to $380,000 each year, a tidy sum for sure. The Board then doles out the money to one of the 14 licensed domestic violence shelters around the state.

So far, so good.

And how does a domestic violence shelter become licensed? Actually, the Board doesn't set its own standards — that responsibility was outsourced to the West Virginia Coalition Against Domestic Violence.

Now the plot thickens, because the Coalition was long ago hijacked by a radical feminist ideology. I recently visited its website at and was jolted by this neo-Marxist cant: "violence against women is a political problem, a question of power and domination."That's right, shove aside the research showing women are just as likely as men to be the instigators of partner abuse. Forget former NFL quarterback Steve McNair, shot in the chest four times in his chest by his ex-girlfriend as he slept. Sweep under the rug the fact that alcohol abuse is linked to most cases of abuse.

In other words, the Coalition openly proclaims its belief that domestic violence is all about unfettered patriarchy. And this group is no seat-of-the-pants operation — the trade organization's annual budget of $1.2 million comfortably supports a staff of nine.

So if you're looking for objective criteria for shelter licensure, you won't find it at the Coalition. That's because the group decrees that in order to become a certified domestic violence advocate, you have to swear fealty to the feminist catechism that "domestic violence is deeply rooted in historical attitudes towards women."Whether you believe that statement is laughable, bizarre, or merely one-sided, you can't become certified in West Virginia unless you take the loyalty oath.

So the ideologically-driven Coalition establishes the certification standards. And the Board says before you can receive a penny of its money, at least one-third of shelter employees must be certified by the Coalition.

So where's the kickback arrangement?

Because all 14 abuse shelters around the state are members of and pay dues to — you guessed it! — the West Virginia Coalition Against Domestic Violence.

This good-ol'-girls club does not take kindly to other groups that want to partake of the state's abuse-prevention funding. So finally a group called Men and Women Against Discrimination had to file a lawsuit. The suit charged the policies of the Family Protection Services Board discriminated against male victims of domestic violence and deprived violence-prone women of access to perpetrator intervention programs.

When Judge James Stucky began to examine the case, he discovered bias pervaded the system from top to bottom. Take Judy Smith, one of the five directors of the FPSB and head of the Rape and Domestic Violence Information Center in Morgantown. Smith admitted — actually boasted — during her lawsuit deposition, "we do not shelter men in the shelter, even if it's empty."Judge Stucky found the discrimination to be so widespread and egregious that last week he issued a summary judgment, taking all parties in the case by surprise:

Noting the state legislature did not intend to restrict domestic violence services to the members of any one sex, he found the Board exceeded its statutory authority by delegating the standard-setting to a trade organization. "In practice this rule excludes any persons who does not adhere to the gender biased fundamental beliefs of the Coalition," ruled the judge.

Appalled by the illegal actions of an organization driven by a cult-like ideology, Judge Stucky concluded the Board's policies "are null and void."Civil rights advocates across the nation were elated. "Today, men and the women who love them have reason to celebrate," notes columnist Teri Stoddard. But she cautions the fight may not be over: "lawsuits like this will unfortunately need to continue across the country."

Sunday, October 04, 2009

Washington's red ink prompts run on pink paper

Notices to Congress exceed 2 million in campaign's first week
A run on pink paper? What?!

Send an urgent warning to every member of Congress to let them know you're watching. Click here. That's exactly what's happening, largely because of the "Send Congress a Pink Slip" campaign that has reached the 2 MILLION mark and is being called an "unprecedented success" and a historic grass-roots lobbying effort.

Under way since just last Friday, two million "pink slips" - individually addressed notices to each member of the House and Senate, complete with sender's name and return address - are on their way to the Capitol by Fed Ex courier letting every member of Congress know there's discontent back on the home front.

On Friday, another full pallet of pink paper was delivered to the printer who is doing the production work of the notices, and he has confirmed his newest order has put a "huge dent" in the overall supply of pink 8½x11 paper, so he already has placed an order for more to be prepared for the demand.

WND announced the "Send Congress a Pink Slip" campaign last Friday and it has already reached 40% of its stated goal of 5 million notices, individually addressed, personalized with senders name and address and delivered to all members of Congress by Fed Ex.

The idea was conceived by Janet Porter of Faith2Action and a WND weekly columnist.

"There is a revolution brewing across this country," she said. "People are angry about losing their country and they are ready for action. This campaign is just the latest evidence."

"I believe this is already the most successful grass-roots effort in history," said Porter. "After all the town halls and tea parties and the massive demonstration in Washington, Congress still hasn't gotten the message. Now it's time to show them just how serious we are with a message aimed at what they most care about – getting re-elected."

The "pink slip" each official will get is a reminder that they work for the taxpayers. Each is individually printed with the sender's contact information under the closing salutation "Signed, Your Employer:"

Click to see a larger version.

The warning lists four key issues that are deemed unacceptable to program participants:

A previous WND FedEx campaign blanketed Congress with over 705,000 personalized letters.

  • government
  • health care
  • cap and trade
  • "hate crimes"
  • any more spending

"If you vote for any of these, your real pink slip will be issued in the next election," it warns.

To send individual notices to all 535 members of Congress through the Postal Service would cost you $235 in stamps alone – and your letters would be waylaid for irradiation in Ohio before they got anywhere near the Capitol.

The "Send Congress a Pink Slip" program permits participants to Fed Ex 535 individually addressed pink slips to members of Congress, each one with the name and address of the sender for just $29.95.

"This is a program that only works with massive numbers of participants that bring paper and printing and shipping costs way down," explains Joseph Farah, editor and chief executive officer of WND, which has conducted similar programs in the past - this one being the largest and most ambitious.

Send Your Pink Slips to Congress Now

Thursday, August 27, 2009

A Revolution Needs Two Things: A Financial Crisis and the Youth of the Middle Class

Understanding the Perilous Times and a Biblical Response
By Brannon Howse

Conclusion: The hope and Christian response. Brannon gives specific and Biblical steps each Christian should be taking to live and thrive in perilous times. Brannon explains why this can be the finest hour for the church if we understand the times and know what God would have us to do. How do we prepare the remnant, our family members and most of all our children.

Understanding Parental Alienation

Friday, August 14, 2009


(Ron Branson’s response below –

From: Robert L. Cheney Jr. []
Sent: Friday, August 14, 2009 7:25 AM
To: JAIL4Judges
Subject: Unlawful Arrest by Court

Dear Jail4Judges:

Hello. My name is Robert L. Cheney Jr., and I have been in the Father's Rights movement for quite some time and have also been battling these California courts on the order of 25 years.

We just recently had a man, railroaded into prison in MARIPOSA COUNTY in California. (Very corrupt). This court is also working in conjunction with an out-of-control DIVORCE CASE in Merced County. Both courts are acting in unison and cannot arrest Daniel Vienna (the Father) enough! (They have repeatedly arrested him for an imagined crime (traffic).

The first case is a traffic infraction case (crossing yellow line, driving without license, obstructing officer (lie). We asked for Administrative Hearing with the CHP officer to which he denied the hearing (which was a default). We then made a Special Appearance at all times in the traffic case -- to which that court steam rolled over him, moved to jury trial which "convicted" him. At all times we made Special Appearance.

We then moved into the appeals court and demanded proof of jurisdiction ("Once jurisdiction is challenged it must be proven"). We had the definitive case law showing that when Administrative hearing is denied, the Superior Court loses
jurisdiction (double jeopardy). The court would not listen to the law. We've gone up through the courts on that issue and now are in the Federal Court on a REMOVAL (Fresno DCUS 1:09 CV 01124 ). Under Anthony v. Runyon, once it has been removed, the lower superior court loses jurisdiction.

He then had a divorce. The wife left him for a lesbian relationship and left him, the home and the family stranded. A "divorce" case then ensued in Madera County. He got a lawyer (Maurice E. Joy)--worst decision he ever made.

HIs lawyer drained him of everything (30K plus) and of course did nothing. When the money was gone, the lawyer then moved to be relieved of the case. Dan asked the lawyer to stay, asked the lawyer what is defense was (never answered), never provided a defense. Dan also asked for TIME to procure another lawyer (never given). The California Rules of Professional Conduct state that the lawyer cannot just leave, and that the lawyer stay and MUST secure his interests before leaving and MUST give him time to procure a new lawyer. THIS WAS NEVER DONE ... the court just STEAMROLLED OVER HIM AND THEN SEIZED HIS HOUSE! There was no hearing on this, even though we demanded it--and the court summarily granted the lawyers motion to leave the case, and then immediately seized this guys home (forcibly threw him off) and left the whole family homeless. This was done by both lawyers who wanted to be paid.

The Madera divorce court was told by the wife and her lawyer of the Mariposa court and his fight on that issue. Both courts then conspired against him. The Mariposa court put him up for arrest on a bogus FTA (when he appeared by paper -- and the date for that hearing was thrown in when they knew he was in LA). The court immediately put a 'bench warrant" out for him.

He applied for bail ($15000). They would ONLY let him have bail IF he booked. (No cause, as that case was a VOID JUDGMENT). They then upped the bail to $25,000...he got a bailbonds to pay it and the court finally accepted.

We asked for a DEMAND FOR PRODUCTION OF WARRANT under PC 842 which they never have given him in almost a year of asking for the alleged warrant. WE also asked for the affidavit in support. They refused.

Yesterday, at the hearing for production of warrant, they arrested him, EVEN THOUGH HE HAD SECURED THE BAIL. (That was shown to the Judge Dana Walton Mariposa Superior Court). He shuffled and then said he was still going to arrest him and 'exonerate' the bail. Dan then stated that the case was removed to Federal Court, and that this court didn't have jurisdiction. The judge had the clerk called the Federal court, and the clerk returned admitting that "yes, it was removed to federal court." They still arrested him anyways, violating his 8th Amendment right to bail and the jurisdictional prohibition that was on the record that the case had been removed and was pending in the upper federal court.

We have noticed that the courts are in a complete FREEFALL. Law is nowhere found in these courts. What has happened in this case is PURE ABUSE. I believe the discussion has to go from "working" with these courts TO COMPLETELY REPLACING THEM.


We would endeavor your help in this matter. An instant writ of habeas is going into the federal court today, but I doubt that the court will give any remedy.

We need help.

Please RSVP or call me at 530-327-xxxx.

Robert L. Cheney Jr.
Author: Suffering Patriarchy and,
Founder: Legends Legal Aid Society

Dear Robert!

Thank you for writing us. My name is Ron Branson. What you have experienced is typical when you deal with the courts and expect justice. Write this up as a cheap education on what the “law” is all about. I am often confronted with “educated” people who think they know the law, and set out to prove it in court from all parts of this country.

I could tell you story after story of my own personal experiences in the courts. This was in the days when I, like most every other patriot, thought I knew what I was doing. I had to be kicked to the curb and the boot stomped in my face and tortured with electricity until I came to know what the law was really about. I began to feel sorry for the law students who would come to the copy machine in law school to make photocopies as I began to educate them on how they were being brainwashed. I could not have learned what I have learned had I gone to Harvard Law School and earned a degree in law, and received a doctorate.

I have had the Deputy State Attorney General stand before the Appeals Court and yell angrily to the Justices, “Mr. Branson may not be an attorney, but he knows just as much as an attorney, and so you have to treat him as an attorney.” I did my best to retain my composure and not smile or make comment. The fact is, I deem most all of the government attorneys of which I have come up against as total idiots with law degrees, but unable to legally punch their way out of a wet paper bag. The only thing they had going for them is that they were government attorneys covered by the omnipotent judiciary. That is all!

Perhaps you may remember the scene in the movie, 1984 in which electrodes were attached to the subject, and he was asked by the Administrator how many fingers he was holding up. The subject, seeing four fingers, responded, “Four.” The Administrator nodded to the torturer and the electricity was applied. After a torture session, the Administrator nodded again, and the electricity was turned off.

The Administrator said, “I ask you the same question, how many fingers am I holding up?” The subject knew not to say four the second time, so he tried five. The same head nod followed, and he was again tortured with electricity.

The subject was then asked a third time how many fingers the Administrator was holding up. This continued until the subject stated, “How ever many you want it to be.” The Administrator said, “That is correct, and don’t you ever forget it.” The “Law” is whatever the “Administrator” wants it to be, and everything else is wrong!

So I congratulate you on your newly discovered knowledge of the law. You are one step ahead of all those people who think they know the law, when they are actually “educated idiots” naïve to believe that the law is what can be cited from a bound volume called “a law book.” You are now a great candidate for becoming a JAILer, i.e., one who has come to grasp the lesson of which you have now discovered. Great are your words, “AS FAR AS I CAN SEE, THESE COURTS ARE ONLY A DOMESTIC ENEMY.” You can’t imagine the value of lesson this is. It is more valuable than gold, and more to be coveted than precious rubies. My most difficult lesson is getting across to people what you have just learned. I call it the deprogramming of the delusional brainwashing most all go through. So long as people have ingenious ideas, I have to contend with them. But when they reach the bottom of their ingenious ideas, they become candidates for learning.

God bless you, Robert Chaney

Ron Branson

Friday, July 17, 2009

Reps. Smith, Wolf & Left Behind Parents Unveil Bipartisan Bill to Fight International Child Abduction
Christopher Smith

Contact: Jeff Sagnip
(202) 225-3765

WASHINGTON, DC, Jul 16, 2009 - Left behind parents from across the country joined Congressmen Chris Smith (NJ-4th) and Frank Wolf (VA-10) at a press conference today to unveil the “International Child Abduction Prevention Act of 2009” in front of the U.S. Capitol Building.

David Goldman, the father of kidnapped American boy Sean Goldman who is being held in Brazil, and other left behind parents who traveled from as far as California and Florida, spoke about the pain of not seeing their children for years, if ever, after an abduction, and expressed support for the bill.

“Over 2,800 American children are being held in a foreign country against the wishes of their American parent,” said Smith, who in June pushed legislation through the House to require the Department of Defense assist left-behind U.S. service members, and has legislation pending to revoke U.S. trade preferences favorable to Brazil until they comply with international child abduction law. “Most of these cases have been dragging on for years—years of loving relationship and happy memories that these parents will never get back even if they do see their child again someday.

Monday, June 15, 2009

Protect Parental Rights

Upholding basic rights to their children and family has become an ever-increasing problem for American parents, as the result of aggressive and unlawful intrusions by some of those who sit in positions of authority. This is done in defiance of our sacred Constitution. This authority has been too often wielded with flagrantly self-serving, even immoral standards and has not produced what is truly best for the Country, let alone those residing in it. Once upon a time, all Americans inherently knew that children were governed by their Mother and Father together. Yet more and more, those titles have become obsolete and subjugated to our judicial branch of government.

Children are daily being denied their own flesh and blood, denied their own birthright futures, terribly neglected and kept from the good things in life. How? Simply as the result of a ‘stranger’ signing a piece of paper, instantly denouncing our founding Constitutional principles of life, liberty and happiness, and mocking the time-honored and well-established law of our nation. Although it is as plain as the nose on our faces, parents continue to be alienated from their children on a nightmarish scale.

Thousands are alienated monthly. These innocent children are shredded and left to feel hopelessly abandoned, without explanation or understanding. Parental Alienation is a real and serious social problem. It should not be tolerated, accepted or ignored by anyone who truly cares about children and how they feel about themselves.

Please help bring back the values which have been stripped from so many families and children across America. Do your part right now by actively engaging in crucial support that is building for the Parental Rights Amendment to our United States Constitution. Visit the website; go to 'Congressional Sponsors' on the left side of the page to see if your Congressional Representative has signed on as a co-sponsor. If not, contact them and ask them to sign onto H.J. Res. 42 and S.J. Res 16 as a co-sponsor.

Kindest Regards,

Ms. Theresa Martin
National Board Director,
Parental Alienation Awareness Organization-United States
Hotline: (727) 565-4213

PAAO-US: Stopping Parental Alienation Across the United States

Saturday, June 13, 2009

Former Senator Nancy Schaefer - A Soldier For Truth And Justice

Nancy Schaefer is a HERO
because integrity matters

We really need many more people with this type of character and integrity to stand up in the face of opposition, even when it hinders your personal security. Although exposing corruption cost her the Senate, this type of character is very rare even among those who claim to stand for something.

Nancy Schaefer and Alex Jones expose the cruelty and corruption of Child Protective Services. The Corrupt Business of Child Protective Services:

Wednesday, May 13, 2009


For Immediate Release
Ms. Theresa Martin
Tel.: 727-565-4213

PAAO-US Stand Firm on Family Values
For The Sake Of The Children

Parental Alienation Awareness Organization – United States (PAAO-US) had many activities and events which took place throughout the nation in an effort to raise awareness about the issue of parental alienation. Many representatives approached their governor for a signature on a proclamation centered on protecting children from negative behaviors that destroy both children and families. The efforts and responses to those who earnestly seek to stop parental alienation are gaining a great momentum with both our general population and its governing bodies. However, the negative attention given to our Governor’s campaign rests on the assumption that all parental alienation is caused by abusers attempting to gain custody of children. Yet, those who gave that negative attention do not disagree with any of the signs listed in recognizing these abusive behaviors. We all know it is never OK to teach a child to lie or disobey a parent nor should it be acceptable to society. However, as the nay-sayers continue to spread such hurtful, misleading statements none of the children harmed in the process are helped. Good, bad or indifferent every child has the right to their God-given parent and every parent has the right to fulfill their obligations, unless proven in a court of law, by a jury of your peers that you have been abusive, unfit or neglectful. What God has joined together, let no one separate.

There have been plenty of studies, research, documents, testimonies, experiences and data collected over the past 20 plus years on the effects of PA and the importance of maintaining a relationship with both parents that it is time to push for this information to be recognized as the behavioral form of abuse that it is in order to save a child. The experts are those who live with parental alienation every single day so constantly attacking parental alienation, parental alienation syndrome or those who claim it happens will not resolve anything and really doesn’t exemplify unconditional love. Even with flaws and imperfections, we are still provided for in abundance yet none deserve the sun to shine upon our heads. How amazing is that?

Despite the media negativity, two governors have again signed the Parental Alienation proclamations making 2009 the first of such occurrence. Governor Bob Riley of Alabama and Governor Mitch Daniels of Indiana have stood firm on their belief that these behaviors are harmful to children and families therefore; we must continue to raise awareness while we educate all parties involved with high-conflict custody cases. PAAO-US is very pleased to acknowledge this supportive effort. Please remember these proclamations are for all residents in your state to use for their own purposes, in a unified effort, to stop parental alienation across the United States. The people of those States continue to meet with child advocates, family centers, local support groups and, of course, their legislatures to better educate and recognize April 25th as Parental Alienation Awareness day.

With the motto “To your child, you are a hero” we are moving forward, cheering people to recognize the United States Federal law that parents are valued. This July 26th is known across America as Parent’s Day so; please ask your local leaders to sign a proclamation. This spin-off campaign was promoted in 2008, and the first to sign was Mayor Tom Dolan of Sandy City, Utah. To view this signed Parents Day proclamation click here. Along those same lines of wanting to preserve parental rights, please be supportive of H.J. Res. 42 sponsored by Representative Peter Hoekstra proposing an amendment to the U.S. Constitution stating that the liberty of parents to direct the upbringing and education of their children is a fundamental right. Please visit to learn how you can help support this nationwide effort.

PAAO-US seeks to empower parents and tools recommended are the ‘I Wonder’ book written for each targeted parent. These coloring/activity books are a wonderful way to spend quality time with your young child helping them to understand the negative feelings brought on by alienation. Coloring Away Pain Foundation together with a nationwide organization called Divorce Care for Kids makes it possible to take this subject directly to the parents in your local area. Using these resources together with the video ’A View for the Bench’ and the latest book entitled ‘I Don’t Want to Chose’ by Dr’s. Andre and Baker, we can support and educate about hostile aggressive parenting, preventing severe alienation from happening. PAAO-US thanks the good Dr’s., Coloring Away Pain Foundation and Divorce Care for Kids for making this all possible. We are hopeful you will contact your local DC4K center, for a teaming effort, to help parents deal with the affects of being alienated from their child/ren.

Parental Alienation Awareness Organization-US Ranked 5th among small Public Advocacy causes in new members on MySpace Causes, recently. You can continue your support making Parental Alienation a federal crime in the United States by signing the petition addressed to President Barack Obama.

A special thanks to all who assist the efforts of PAAO-US by providing and sharing informational links and standing firm on the belief that the United States government has no duty, neither right nor authority when making decisions based on our children’s bests interests.

PAAO-US: Stopping Parental Alienation Across the United States

Sunday, May 10, 2009

Stand By Me

No Matter Who You Are, No Matter Where You Go

- From the award-winning documentary, "Playing For Change: Peace Through Music", comes the first of many "songs around the world" being released independently. -

Sunday, April 12, 2009

Misconceptions, Perceptions, and Ethics

My look at the Family Rights Movement leadership, and the PAAO
by: Theresa M. Martin

Recently, a number of emails, message board and blog entries have been posted that show organizations and individuals involved with the Family Rights Movement in a negative light. I feel these communications do not serve the movement's goals, and only further infighting and discord among those persons and organizations involved. The various online communications (blogs, articles, etc.) are viewable from anyone performing a web search, and do not show a unified online front for the Parental Alienation Organizations (PAAO, PAAO-US), or any related groups (Fathers for Justice (F4J), United Civil Rights Councils of America (UCRCoA), etc.). In some cases, the infighting has escalated to a level previously unseen, and is poised to transition from online bickering to the very real issue of legal action being taken against certain individuals or organizations. Over the next few paragraphs, I will outline specific examples that have direct impact on me personally, and professionally (as an activist in the movement), and provide insight into my dealings with Torm Howse, Sarvy Emo, and the PAAO organization. I would like to directly address two issues in particular, and suggest ways that the various factions of the movement can 'get back on track'.

Torm Howse
A good case for a review of Ethics

Background: Torm Howse was known to me from online resources as a leader in the father's rights movement, and I perceived him to be a hard charging go getter. I met him in person for the first time in September 2006 at the National Family Law Reform conference held in Washington DC. Since then, Torm and I have worked on a number of projects that include the creation of the UCRCoA organization, creation of and the PAAO-US organization. We have also worked together on organizing and holding the PAAOWorkshop2007. Torm has helped me write and file legal documents for my personal family court case.

As with getting to know any person, I discovered over time that Torm (like all of us) has certain ethical flaws. I'll spare the audience the gritty details, but will offer these observations: As detailed in a recent blog post, Torm has wronged me (as well as others) personally. Torm's distorted ethics and morals have led to slanderous lying behavior, and I no longer feel comfortable being in the same room with him.

The issues brought up in the blog post are centered on Torm's offers to write/file legal documents, and not following through on work promised. All of the issues listed in the blog post are related to individual personal issues with Torm Howse, not his work for any of the organizations involved with Family Rights. I agree that these types of actions are unethical and wrong, but he should not be crucified or ostracized by members of the movement for these actions alone. As someone whom has been wronged, I understand the anger that is directed at him, but do not feel his actions justify jailing or imprisonment. Members of the family rights movement are supposed to be fighting against the government intrusion into our lives, not calling for the government to invade one individual's life.

Parental Alienation
Perceptions and Misconceptions Clarified

Background: My involvement in the family rights movement began in 2006 when I attended a conference in Miami hosted by Robin Denison of Over time, my involvement in the organization grew, and while planning the PAAOWorkshop2007 event, I was added as an official board member in the organization. As the organization became larger, there were many ideas discussed on 'next steps to take' and what areas to focus on. To keep up with the changes, there were a number of unofficial revisions to the newly formed organization's bylaws implemented by the organization's president, Sarvy Emo.

The US members of the organization started a governor's campaign, to get the governors of the states to sign proclamations stating that April 25th is Parental Alienation Awareness day. Many US members also held a firm belief that partnering with other organizations such as Fathers for Justice, American Coalition for Fathers and Children, J.A.I.L.4Judges, Fathers and Families (among others) would provide these organizations with needed information on Parental Alienation, as well as further the PA cause. Many US members also believed in a 'Shared Equal Parenting' concept: the belief that children need both parents. These three items did not go over well with Sarvy.

Ms. Robin Denison and I were invited to the DC Rally 2007 event to come and represent the PAAO (website now renamed organization. Robin penned a speech to which Sarvy did not agree. Sarvy made multiple edits to the speech, which was deemed unacceptable by the author. Robin and I announced that we would attend the event, and Robin would read the speech as originally penned. Sarvy and another board member, Neil, tendered their formal resignations to the board, and renounced all dealings with the organization. Robin and I did attend the DC Rally 2007, and Robin did read the speech as penned.

Two weeks after Sarvy and Neil sent in their resignations, I registered the domain, the PAAO-US organization as a legal entity (business with a federal tax ID number) in the United States. Sarvy stayed involved with the PAAO website (which became PAAO Canada) despite her official resignation.

The (my) and (PAAO Canada / Sarvy) organizations have a fundamental difference of opinion on how to further the Parental Alienation cause. Both organizations are trying to achieve similar goals, and got our starts from the same original organization. The PAAO-US organization has no legal ties, affiliations, or obligations to PAAO Canada. There was no requirement for asking permission to create or maintain PAAO-US.

Parting Thoughts

Though there are no excuses for blatantly violating laws, rules and/or agreements, in the world of parental alienation, these types of problems are a way of life. We learn to recognize the behavior, and take a firm stand against them. Individuals have been personally attacked with slanderous remarks, half truths, and false allegations (some baseless, others not). Organizations are currently fearful of associating with other groups or individuals for fear of having their names brought into this confusing melee of he-said-she-said.

Public perception is nothing more than blurred vision to the honest truth. Media (online or otherwise) can be manipulated, with very real impact to individuals and organizations. Posting scathing attacks on blogs, misguided notices on websites, and other negativity will not further the family rights cause, and essentially only serve to demonstrate individual person's self-serving agenda.

Personal: In the case of attacks directed at myself, I feel some of these attacks are fueled by envy, in an attempt to undermine my good name and the wonderful work which has been accomplished by the PAAO-US organization. I have only performed positive work for the unity of the movement by teaching all who deal with high conflict custody cases about parental alienation. Neither I, nor other Alienated Parents in the United States will ever stop fighting for their children. Attacking me personally does not serve the greater good, and only further sows seeds of discord in the family rights movement.

I'd like to take this opportunity to address a statement made by Mr. Torm Howse concerning my personal life: I am not planning on getting married (as noted by Torm Howse) nor am I planning on obtaining any future relationship commitments with him, or anyone else. I'd also like to add that Torm Howse did initially help to set up the website, but he is not a Director, Trustee or otherwise legally tied to PAAO-US no matter what he puts in his signature block. He has been asked to remove this part of his signature, but true to (unethical) form, has not done so.

Regarding PAAO/PAAO-US: The large 'Notice' on the website is a self-serving affront on the PAAO-US organization. People are well aware of what website they are on, and further aware of what organization they would be donating to or purchasing from. No 'authorization' is, or ever was required to use PAAO-US as a name. The fact that PAAO-US is a registered legal entity in the United States should have long ago put that issue to rest. The fact that Sarvy has registered other PAAO-US top level domains (thru an anonymous proxy to cover her tracks), is currently cyber squatting on those domain names, (and at one point had posted slanderous content using those domain names) is a good example of self serving behavior. What good comes by posting a notice on a website intended as a resource for alienated parents? How will cyber squatting on domain names further the cause of any organization?

Regarding the DCRally2008/DCFestival2008: Many organizations and people pulled together to make this happen. I feel that not everyone that should have been there was there. Some were not able to set aside their personal differences, and it showed. With any circumstance that causes strong emotions, it is sometimes difficult to separate the personal from the professional. For those who did pull together, I thank you from the bottom of my heart and apologize for the lack of professionalism displayed due to personal issues. For those whom declined to participate, please check your egos and unprofessional attitudes in at the door, and remain mindful of the overall goals of family rights, and your specific organization.

I feel the hard work that I put into the DC 2008 event went largely unnoticed and unmentioned. This shows a great lack of appreciation so, this year I am encouraging all organizations to come out and obtain a permit for anytime during July 18th-26th. I will be working with professional, reputable organizations that will follow through and ensure my safety in order for me to be seen and heard. I feel it is extremely important to stop parental alienation across the United States. Empowering the parents is where it begins, so let's all pull together for the 2009 event.

Saturday, March 14, 2009

Petition to Committee on Judicial Conduct

Review Petition to the Committee on Judicial Conduct
as A Template
and The Upcoming Judicial Conference Meeting

Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.

The following petition for review to the Committee on Judicial Conduct and Disability of the Judicial Conference of the U.S. contains the equivalent of a template that other judicial misconduct complainants can adapt to their own petition to the Committee for review of the dismissal by the Judicial Council of their respective circuits of their petition for review of their complaint dismissal by the respective chief circuit judges.

The emphasis must be placed on arguing that the Committee has, and should exercise, jurisdiction over the petition based on the facts of the complaint and applicable provisions of the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act ( ) and the Rules for Judicial Conduct and Disability Proceedings ( ).

See also the cover letter sent to U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, Jr., to request that he cause the Judicial Conference, as its presiding officer, to exercise jurisdiction over the petition and investigate it when the Conference meets next Tuesday, March 17, at the Supreme Court.

Separate meetings of the circuit judges, district judges, and the many specialized committees of the Judicial Conference will be held at the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts in Washington, D.C., between Monday, 16, and Wednesday 18, of next week; tel. (202) 502-2600, .

All those meetings are secretive so as to further protect judicial unaccountability. What would happen to democracy if all cabinet and Congressional meetings were held behind closed doors followed by no press conference, but merely a meaningless press release?


Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.


to the Judicial Conference of the United States
and its Committee on Judicial Conduct and Disability

of the denial of January 9, 2009
by the Judicial Council of the Second Circuit

of the petition for review of November 12, 2008

of the dismissal of October 7, 2008
by CA2 Chief Judge Dennis Jacobs

of the judicial misconduct complaint of June 9, 2008
against Bankruptcy Judge John C. Ninfo, II, WBNY
docket number 02-08-90073-jm [1]

Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq., Complainant and Petitioner, affirms under penalty of perjury as follows:

1. On January 9, 2009, the Judicial Council of the Second Circuit (the Council) denied (N:48) Dr. Cordero’s above-captioned petition (N:36) to review under §352(c) of the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act (the Act), 28 U.S.C. §351-364 (28 U.S.C. §# = §#) the dismissal (N:32) by CA2 Chief Judge Dennis Jacobs (the Chief Judge) of his judicial misconduct complaint (N:1) against Bankruptcy Judge John C. Ninfo, II, WBNY, for bias, prejudice, and abuse of judicial power in support of a bankruptcy fraud scheme and its cover up in connection with In re David and Mary Ann DeLano, docket no. 04-20280, WBNY (DeLano). To do so, the Council used its dismissal form and stated no reasons whatsoever, for it had none: According to its own statistics (N:39), reported pursuant to §332(g) to the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, which published them [2] pursuant to §604(h)(2), in the last 11 years, from October 1, 1996 to September 30, 2007, the Council publicly and privately censured 0 judges, “Ordered Other Appropriate Action” in 0 complaints, denied 100% of petitions for review for a total of 345, and referred 0 complaints to the Judicial Conference of the U.S. (the Conference) or its Committee on Judicial Conduct and Disability (the Committee).

2. This is a petition under §357 and Rule 21 of the Rules for Judicial Conduct and Disability Proceedings (Rule #) to the Conference and its Committee [3] for review of the Council denial and the appointment of a special committee given that both Judge Ninfo’s misconduct as described in the complaint (N:1) and the Council’s systematic denial of 100% of review petitions (N:39) constitute “conduct prejudicial to the effective and expeditious administration of the business of the courts” under §351(a) and the denial aggrieved Complainant Dr. Cordero.

Table of Contents

I. The Council developed and applied an unlawful and self-interested 100% petition denial policy N:53

II. The facts in the complaint state misconduct cognizable under the Rules N:54

A. Rule 3(H)(1)(A) using the judge's office to obtain special treatment for friends or relatives N:54

B. Rule 3(H)(1)(C) having improper discussions with parties or counsel for one side in a case N:56

C. Rule 3(H)(1)(D) treating litigants or attorneys in a demonstrably egregious and hostile manner N:57

D. Rule 3(H)(1)(B) accepting bribes, gifts, or other personal favors related to the judicial office N:58

III. Jurisdictional basis for the Committee to review this petition N:59

A. The petition rests upon a ground reviewable by the Committee because it challenges the Council’s merit relatedness ground for denying the petition N:59

B. The Committee is authorized by the Rules to review upon its initiative any judicial council order N:61

C. The Committee is charged by its jurisdictional statement to review upon petition any final council action and to monitor the implementation of the Act N:62

D. Dr. Cordero was aggrieved by the nature and content of the denial of his review by the Council, which thereby provided the Committee with another jurisdictional basis for reviewing it N:64

IV. Grounds for disqualification of Committee Chair Judge John M. Walker, Jr., CA2 N:66

V. Relief requested N:68

VI. Attachments

1. The DeLanos’ income of $291,470, mortgage receipts of $382,187, and credit card borrowing of $98,092, all unaccounted for N:70

2. Suggested subpoena for issuance by the Conference and its Committee and special committee, with useful contact information and list of key documents for tracking concealed assets N:71

3. Table of Exhibits after N:84

4. DVD containing this petition, all of the above, and the record of DeLano

[1] These documents are listed on the Table of Exhibits (after N:84) and appear after it. Their page numbers bear the format N:#, beginning with the complaint N:1. The page numbers in the Exhibits pertaining to the record in DeLano bear the format Letter:consecutive #, i.e. D:1→ US:2503.

[2] Http://; collected at

[3] Rule 21(c) provides that “Any member of the Committee from the same circuit as the subject judge is disqualified from considering or voting on a petition for review.” This provision so disqualifies Committee Chair CA2 Judge John M. Walker, Jr., since the subject judge is CA2 Bankruptcy Judge John C. Ninfo, II. Additional grounds for his disqualification are discussed in §IV infra.

Friday, February 06, 2009

Wake Up America!

Important February 11th Notice

6801 Western Ave.
Buena Park (Orange County), California

People everywhere are expressing concern about the direction America is headed. It is unfortunate that it takes such a great disaster to get the attention of the American People. In 1996 J.A.I.L. stated exactly what would be happening to America, setting forth the “What,” but not the “When.”

To quote a few paragraphs published by J.A.I.L. then word for word:

“In reality, the entire middle-class is planned to be obliterated, including you who are influential reading this. It is predetermined you be financially gutted. Your business is to be slowly depleted through "unfortunate" circumstances of debt foreclosure, bankruptcy, bad decisions, unable to meet tax obligations, poor business, and legislative control of your business and private property. ….

“Imagine for a moment the power of the Federal Reserve. They can shut down the housing market and cause all construction to cease with one phone call. They can just pick up the phone, place a call, and cause upheaval in the entire world market. They can send the stock market into a tailspin within minutes. They can bring about massive layoffs in all industries, or create a national depression at whim. They can do what no military power on earth can do, ruin the nation over the weekend and
never fire a shot. ….

“Congressman Charles A. Lindberg rightly said, ‘Under the Federal Reserve Act panics are scientifically created; the present is the first scientifically created one, worked out as we figure a mathematical problem.’ They turn the economy off and on like a faucet, and manipulate the stock market to their ends. ….

“The Banker's Manifest of 1892, as quoted from the book Economic Pinch by Charles Lindberg, Sr. says, ‘When through the process of law, the common people have lost their homes, they will be more tractable and easily governed.... People without homes will not quarrel with their leaders.’ ”

* * *

Even now at this very moment we are being lied to through the media that America is facing a series of unfortunate circumstances that will take time from which to recover. But the truth is that these days were long in the planning.

The Federal Reserve Bankers do not ever plan to be repaid in “dollars” held by the American People. You see, Federal Reserve Notes are not what they are after, for they can have all the $100 Federal Reserve Notes printed they wish for at approximately 2½ cents each. What the Federal Reserve wants is solid assets such as foreclosed homes, farm lands, businesses, factories, machinery, ships, autos, etc. They don’t need your/their paper “money.” The sooner everyone runs out of “money” the sooner they can foreclose on everything. Virtually all world events are manipulated by these bankers to this end!

Let me cite you two Scriptures that establish this banker- principle. James 4:1-2, “From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members? Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not.” Matt. 16:26, “For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?”

Thomas Jefferson said in 1802, “I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around the banks will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.”

We say we are concerned about terrorists both here and abroad, yet we “bail out” our greatest terrorists and place the Federal Reserve Bankers on staff to save us from certain economic collapse. What fools we are! No man can spend their way into economic recovery, or stimulate the economy by progressing further into debt. Wake up America! It is time to turn things around!

Join Us February 11, 2009

Key planners within the J.A.I.L. Organization are meeting on this date at Pastor Wiley Drake’s Church, 6801 Western Ave, Buena Park, Orange County, CA. starting with introductions at 1 pm. Pastor Wiley's telephone number is (714) 865-8132 / (714) 522-7201. Mike Lerman is the organizer for this event, and may be contacted at, or by calling (714) 308-4011.

The plans are to conduct this meeting in an informal manner. If you believe you can be an asset to the objective of turning this county around, please come and be in attendance. We will be honored with the presence and participation of long-time New York JAILer and regular supporter, Joseph McNicholl, out here visiting. Our objective is to discuss how we can upset the apple cart planned for the certain doom and demise of our country. It is obvious that God is judging America, and I know that God has ordained J.A.I.L. as the remedy for our country.

There are two hot subjects that are certain to be raised front and center for discussion:

Number One: It is no secret that many lawsuits have been filed around the nation in both state and federal courts regarding Art. II, Sec. I, Clause 5, “No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President…” To date, all of the court challenges, including to the U.S. Supreme Court, have been dismissed or are awaiting decision. It appears there is a deliberate attempt by the courts to avoid facing this question of jurisdiction, yet such concern is growing exponentially. The Court has determined that no person has the right to challenge the qualification of a presidential candidate to office unless they too are a presidential candidate to the same office. Behold, the courts are now faced with a challenge from presidential candidates Alan Keys and Wiley Drake.

To those of you concerned with the question of what interest J.A.I.L. may have with this issue, let it be known that this question deals with whether we have a Constitution or not, inasmuch as the courts are ignoring the Supreme Law of this nation which is bringing forth much attention. If we have no Constitution, then it raises the question as to what the remedy is. We already know the only remedy is the passage of J.A.I.L. within this country. If J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) wins anywhere, it wins everywhere, as there cannot exist an America that is “a little bit unconstitutional!”

Number Two: The Supreme Court of California is about to determine whether the People of California have jurisdiction to determine whether it is the People, and not the judges, who have the ultimate authority in California. The issue is known as Prop 8 passed by the People. The opposition is arguing in the courts that the People of California have no jurisdiction to vote for Prop 8. The judges are to “decide” whether they, as judges, are superior to the People and the Constitution. Obviously, this decision by the judges brings J.A.I.L. to the forefront of this controversy!

Hope to see you on February 11th.

-Ron Branson

PS – It is ironic that just yesterday M. Dane Waters, chairman of the National Organization of the Initiative & Referendum Institute contacted me. I wrote to him regarding our Feb. 11th event inviting him to come and be a part of our plan, and to speak to us. At this time, his presence is unconfirmed, but his organization is now located on the campus of U.S.C., where I was invited to be in attendance during their relocation celebration.

Friday, January 02, 2009

Ten Most Wanted Corruption Politicians for 2008

January 2, 2009

From the Desk of Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton:

Judicial Watch Announces List of Washington's "Ten Most Wanted Corruption Politicians" for 2008

First off, I hope you had a Merry Christmas and a great New Year's celebration. As you probably know, it has become something of a tradition for Judicial Watch to comb through its files at the end of each year to determine which politicians earn the dubious distinction of being the most corrupt in Washington. The following is Judicial Watch's 2008 "top ten" list in alphabetical order.

Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, today released its 2008 list of Washington's "Ten Most Wanted Corrupt Politicians." The list, in alphabetical order, includes:

Senator Hillary Clinton (D-NY): Let's start with the fact that Hillary Clinton is constitutionally ineligible to serve as Secretary of State in the Obama administration. According to the Ineligibility Clause of the United States Constitution, no member of Congress can be appointed to an office that has benefited from a salary increase during the time that Senator or Representative served in Congress. A January 2008 Executive Order signed by President Bush during Hillary Clinton's current Senate term increased the salary for Secretary of State, thereby rendering Senator Clinton ineligible for the position. (Congressional "fixes" do not address the constitutional issue. Her appointment would be in violation of the U.S. Constitution.) And then, of course, there is the long history of corrupt behavior that follows Hillary wherever she goes, including Chinagate, Filegate, pardons for terrorists, pardons for cash (for her brothers), White House fundraising coffees, Whitewater, Travelgate lies, doing business with the State of Arkansas while her husband was governor, Web Hubbell, smear campaigns, false financial disclosure forms, John Huang, Chinese generals, the Lippo Group, paid sleepovers in the Lincoln Bedroom, cattle futures fraud, and stealing White House furniture. (This corruption is still going strong. In 2008, Hillary also received an illegal foreign campaign contribution in the form of a fundraising concert by music icon Elton John.)

Senator Chris Dodd (D-CT): Question: Which member of the U.S. Senate took the most campaign money from corrupt institutions Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac? Answer: Chris Dodd, Chairman of the Senate Banking Committee. Given this fact there is little reason to wonder why Senator Dodd blocked reform proposals for Fannie and Freddie, calling them "ill advised." Dodd's willingness to protect Fannie and Freddie would alone merit a spot on the "ten most corrupt list," but there is much more. Dodd was also nabbed for accepting preferential treatment and loan terms from Countrywide Financial. The Connecticut Senator admitted earlier this year that he was told in 2003 when he refinanced two properties that he was being placed in Countrywide's "VIP Program," but said he believed this was simply a courtesy that had nothing to do with his position in the U.S. Senate. This is either a blatant lie or horribly naïve for a man who has served in the Senate for more than 25 years and currently chairs the Senate Banking Committee that regulates the mortgage industry. We're not buying it.

Obama Advisor Valerie Jarrett (D-IL): CBS News once called Chicago politician Valerie Jarrett "the other side of Barack Obama's brain." Residents of a housing project in Chicago simply know her as "slumlord." Jarrett is the former manager of Grove Parc Plaza, a controversial low-income housing project located in Obama's former state senate district. According to the Boston Globe, the housing complex was considered "uninhabitable by unfixed problems, such as collapsed roofs and fire damage... In 2006, federal inspectors graded the condition of the complex an 11 on a 100-point scale - a score so bad the buildings now face demolition." According to documents uncovered by Judicial Watch, Jarrett is also linked to a series of other shady real estate scandals involving convicted felon and former Obama fundraiser Antoin "Tony" Rezko. Jarrett has also been caught up in the Blagojevich scandal as Obama's Candidate #1 for his senate seat. Most of Blagojevich's corrupt negotiations with the Obama team centered on the possible Jarrett appointment. She remains mum on the scandal.

Rep. Jerry Lewis (R-CA): Rep. Lewis may share a name with a world-renowned comedian, but there's nothing funny about his addiction to influence peddling and earmarking. Lewis, the senior Republican on the House Appropriations Committee, is under investigation for approving hundreds of millions of dollars in federal projects to benefit clients of one of his best friends, lobbyist and former Congressman Bill Lowery. According to press reports, Lowery, partners in his company and their clients donated approximately 37% of the funds collected by Lewis' campaign PAC over a six-year period (an estimated $480,000) in return. Lowery has benefited handsomely from his relationship to Lewis. His company more than tripled its income between 1998 and 2004 with help from Lewis, while increasing its client base from 21 clients to 101 over that same time period. Despite these allegations, Lewis maintains his high-ranking position on the House Appropriations Committee.

President-Elect Barack Obama (D-IL): As Barack Obama assumes the presidency he already brings to the White House a large amount of ethical baggage. Obama's presidential campaign had some of the ethical trimmings of a Chicago ward election. It was marked with enormous corruption issues, ranging from its alliance with the sleazy ACORN operation's "voter registration" and "get out the vote" efforts to its acceptance of untraceable, and in too many cases, illegal online contributions. There are also Obama's corrupt dealings with convicted felon Tony Rezko and unrepentant terrorist William Ayers, his below-market rate mortgage loans, his stock dealings and related "earmark" votes in the U.S. Senate, and his missing or non-existent official papers from his years in the Illinois State Senate. His ongoing cover up of his and his team's role in the Blagojevich "pay-to-play" scandal is ruining his presidency even before he takes the oath of office.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA): Last year House Speaker Nancy Pelosi made the "most corrupt" list for sneaking a $25 million earmark for her husband into a $15 billion Water Resources Development Act passed by Congress. This year, Pelosi ran afoul of federal election law by participating in an illegal advertising campaign funded by Al Gore's non-profit Alliance for Climate protection. The advertisement featuring Pelosi ran at least 300 times nationally, including in the House speaker's district, during campaign season, representing an illegal in-kind contribution to her campaign. Perhaps more disturbing than this incident, however, is the fact that Speaker Pelosi has allowed corruption to run rampant in Congress and has ignored serious incidents of crooked behavior within her own party. Pelosi promised a new era of ethics enforcement during the 2006 campaign and she has failed to deliver. Instead, she continues to protect the worst of the worst of political corruption in the House of Representatives.

Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY): Rep. Charles Rangel, Chairman of the powerful Ways and Means Committee, took the unusual step of filing an ethics complaint against himself in 2008 related to scandals involving unpaid taxes and rent-controlled apartments. This act was clearly a publicity stunt, but regardless, the House Ethics Committee took the New York congressman up on his request, and even took things a step further by expanding the scope of its investigation. The initial transgressions that led to the ethics panel probe involve: Rangel's failure to pay taxes on $75,000 in rental income he earned from his off-shore rental property; his efforts to use his influence to keep hold of highly coveted rent-controlled apartments in Harlem; and misusing his congressional office to fundraise for his private Rangel Center. Now Congress is looking into whether or not Rangel preserved a tax loophole for an oil drilling company in exchange for funding for the Rangel Center as well.

Former Rep. Rick Renzi (R-AZ): Three-term Republican congressman Rick Renzi was indicted by a federal grand jury in 2008 for conspiracy, extortion, money laundering and wire fraud. He allegedly used his influence on a House Natural Resources Committee to orchestrate a land swap with the federal government that financially benefited himself and his associates. The 49-year-old lawmaker, who owns an insurance business, is also charged with embezzling more than $400,000 from insurance clients to fund his congressional campaign. A 26-page federal indictment lays out how the legislator and his business associates conspired to obtain federal government land by swapping land they owned together because the coveted public land sits above underground copper deposits. The indictment says that the congressman concealed nearly $1 million that he made for using his influence to seal the land deals. No wonder Renzi decided to retire this year.

Former Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK): "Uncle Ted" Stevens, the face of Alaska politics for 40 years and formerly the longest serving Republican in the U.S. Senate, was narrowly defeated in his campaign for re-election in November. But that's the least of his problems. Just days before the November election, Stevens was convicted on seven felony counts for accepting illegal gifts and then lying about it. The establishment of both political parties came to Stevens' defense, including former Secretary of State Colin Powell and Democratic Senator Daniel Inouye, but to no avail. The jury found Stevens guilty on all counts. And now Stevens faces the possibility of a 35-year prison sentence.

Rep. Don Young (R-AK): Carrying on Alaska's legacy of corruption, Rep. Don Young is also the subject of an influence peddling investigation. (You may recall it was Young who attempted to push through the $200 million "Bridge to Nowhere" boondoggle.) Well the Justice Department is also investigating the 18-term congressman for his corrupt ties to an oil services company, VECO, ironically the same company that furnished illegal gifts to Senator Ted Stevens. VECO allegedly used golf tournaments and pig roasts to illegally funnel cash to Young, which the 18-term congressman then failed to report on his financial disclosure forms. VECO Vice President Rick Smith has already pleaded guilty to bribing lawmakers to support oil-friendly legislation. The Alaska Republican also added a $10 million earmark for the construction of short stretch of road in Florida that benefited a wealthy campaign contributor. Real estate developer, Daniel Aronoff, had raised $40,000 for Young shortly before the earmark was inserted.


Former Senator John Edwards (D-NC): By day, former North Carolina Senator and Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards repeatedly professed his love for his cancer-stricken wife during media interviews and campaign speeches. By night, Edwards was carrying on an illicit sexual affair with a former campaign consultant, Rielle Hunter. Of course, Edwards denied the affair (calling it "tabloid trash") even after he was trapped in the basement of the Beverly Hilton hotel by reporters from the National Enquirer during one of his late-night liaisons with Ms. Hunter. While Edwards did finally admit to violating his marriage vows, questions remain as to whether or not he broke any laws. Edwards' former National Finance Chairman (who just passed away) paid large sums of money to Ms. Hunter, as much as $15,000 per month, in addition to covering Hunter's moving expenses. Were these "hush funds" paid out of Edwards' campaign coffers?

Former Rep. William "Dollar Bill" Jefferson (D-LA): William "Dollar Bill" Jefferson was nabbed in a sting operation accepting a $100,000 bribe from an FBI informant to broker business deals in Africa. During his conversation with the informant, who was wired, Jefferson famously remarked, "All these notes we're writing to each other, as if the FBI is watching." Well, the FBI was watching (and listening) and during a subsequent search of Jefferson's home, investigators found $90,000 in cash stuffed in the congressman's freezer. (The marked bills were later recovered by federal authorities.) Jefferson allegedly intended to use the money to bribe a Nigerian official over a business deal that would have enriched himself and his family. Jefferson was widely expected to return to Congress despite these serious allegations. However, in a December 2008 special election surprise, voters decided instead to send "Dollar Bill" into retirement.

Until next week...

Tom Fitton

Judicial Watch is a non-partisan, educational foundation organized under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue code. Judicial Watch is dedicated to fighting government and judicial corruption and promoting a return to ethics and morality in our nation's public life. Please make a tax-deductible contribution in support of our efforts.