Sunday, January 3, 2010

10-01-03- Overview of PACER & CM/ECF - the largest shell game fraud in the history of mankind...

Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts: PACER Service Center

Please notice the large-scale fraud in United States courts across the country - in operation of PACER & CM/ECF the courts' dual case management and public access systems.

The Fraud:

The U.S. Courts have completed the installation, with no authority at all, of the dual systems, Pacer & CM/ECF, separate and unequal, where the courts can segregate parties at will.
Those segregated into Pacer (attorneys who are not authorized by the court for a given case, and invariably all pro se filers and all prisoners who file petitions) are unable to distinguish the valid and effectual court records among the large volume of invalid and ineffectual records posted online, since they are denied access to the NEFs (Notices of Electronic Filings).
Therefore, litigations are conducted under such conditions - where some parties, but not others, are left in the dark relative to the validity and effect of any records posted in the docket by the court during litigation.
Such conditions in litigations in United States Courts, are likely to be found by International Human Rights Courts to be extreme violation of Human Rights by the United States Government and United States Courts.

The solution:
We must demand publicly accountable validation (certified functional logic verification) of such systems in the courts - pursuant to federal and states Rulemaking Enabling Acts.

Linked Records:

The Usual:
See full size image

"This case should demonstrate that the FBI will pursue all allegations of judicial corruption vigorously, as public corruption violations are among the most serious of all criminal conduct and can tear at the fabric of a democratic society," said John F. Pikus, special agent in charge of the Albany division, in a prepared statement.

10-01-03 Introduction and invitation to participate in Rulemaming by Thomas E Baker

"...the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure will continue to be the outstanding system of procedure in the world."

AN INTRODUCTION TO FEDERAL COURT

RULEMAKING PROCEDURE

by Thomas E. Baker*

   Toward the end of September 1990 at a closed meeting in

Washington, D.C., the Judicial Conference of the United States

passed on a substantial set of proposed amendments to the rules of

practice and procedure of the federal courts. The new appellate rules

authorized local circuit rules on electronic filing, required a jurisdictional

statement in the appellant's brief and eliminated some

inconsistencies in the notice rules for admiralty appeals.3 The new

civil rules related to pretrial scheduling orders, discovery in international

litigation, claims of privilege, subpoenas of nonparties,

alternate jurors, the standard for entry of judgment as a matter of

law, procedures for special masters and substitution for a judge

who is unable to continue. Most important, a completely redrafted

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4: (1) authorized service as provided

by the state in which a defendant is served, as well as the forum

state; (2) permitted nationwide personal jurisdiction in federal question

cases; (3) emphasized and encouraged waivers of actual service;

and (4) clarified and economized service of process by and on the

federal government, The most substantial changes occurred in bank-

ruptcy procedure, where the rules have been redrafted in wholesale.

   These reforms were made necessary, in large part, by far-reaching

recent legislation: the Bankruptcy Judges, United States Trustees,

and Family Farmer Bankruptcy Act of 198613 and the Retiree Benefits

Bankruptcy Protection Act of 1988,J4 Even the Official Bankruptcy

Forms have been redrafted.

...

V. AN INVITATION

My last entreaty addressed to my lawyer-reader is to become

involved in the rulemaking procedure. My principal reason for writing

this article is to demystify the procedure so that attorneys will accept

this invitation. Suggestions and recommendations on any of the

federal rules may be sent to:

   Mr. James E. Macklin, Jr.

   Secretary

   Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure

   Administrative Office of the United States Courts

   Washington, D.C. 20544

The standard procedure is to acknowledge in writing such suggestions

and recommendations and to refer them to the appropriate Advisory

Committee.

Lawyers should take the time to read, study and respond to the

proposed rules during the commentary period. Urge the appropriate

committee of your bar associations or take it upon yourself to appear

and testify at the public hearings. Members of the bar, obviously,

have an important stake in changes in federal procedure and, necessarily,

bear a public responsibility to contribute their expertise.

   In closing, I cannot improve on the exhortation of a young,

somewhat hyperbolic procedure professor, who in 1954 was just

beginning his own involvement in rulemaking: "If the careful work

of the Committee is followed by real participation and informed

comment from the bar, the amendments finally adopted should ensure

that the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure will continue to be the

outstanding system of procedure in the world."[69]

____________

* Professor of Law, Texas Tech University; B.S. cum laude, Florida State University,

1974; J.D. with high honors, University of Florida, 1977. By appointment of Chief Justice

William H. Rehnquist, the author serves on the Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure

of the Judicial Conference of the United States. The views expressed herein are those of the

author alone. A previous version of this article appeared in the Texas Lawyer. See Baker, An

Invitation to Get Involved, Texas Lawyer, Sept. 3, 1990, at 22, col. I.

The full article was posted at:

http://inproperinla.com/00-00-01-91-01-01-baker-thomas-e-introduction-to-federal-rule-making.pdf

69. Wright, Amendments to the Federal Rules: The Function of a Continuing Rules

Committee, 7 VAND. L. REv. 521, 555 (1954).

10-01-03 WSJ on corruption at the United States Courts - added a comment.

DECEMBER 31, 2009, 8:02 AM ET

Judicial Misconduct: The Mice Guard The Cheese

By Nathan Koppel

Does the federal judiciary do a good enough job investigating misconduct complaints against its fellow judges?

It’s an oft debated topic that gets a particularly detailed airing today in this Houston Chronicle piece.

A spate of recent high-profile complaints against judges, including the sexual-abuse charges against former Texas federal judge Samuel Kent (pictured), has prompted experts and members of Congress alike to call for reforms and more disclosure of federal disciplinary decisions, the Chron reports. (Click here and here for LB coverage of the Kent case.)

Comment added:

by Joseph Zernik

Please notice the large-scale fraud in United States courts across the country - in operation of PACER & CM/ECF - the courts' dual case management and public access systems:

1) The U.S. Courts have completed the installation, with no authority at all, of the dual systems, Pacer & CM/ECF, separate and unequal, where the courts can segregate parties at will.

2) Those segregated into Pacer (attorneys who are not authorized by the court for a given case, and invariably all pro se filers and all prisoners who file petitions) are unable to distinguish the valid and effectual court records among the large volume of invalid and ineffectual records posted online, since they are denied access to the NEFs (Notices of Electronic Filings).

3) Therefore, litigations are conducted under such conditions - where some parties, but not others, are left in the dark relative to the validity and effect of any records posted in the docket by the court during litigation.

4) Such conditions in litigations in United States Courts, are likely to be found by International Human Rights Courts to be extreme violation of Human Rights by the United States Government and United States Courts.

5) The solution: publicly accountable validation (certified functional logic verification) of such systems in the courts -- pursuant to the Rulemaking Enabling Act.

10-01-03 Calling for reconsideration of international credit policies towards the United States government

Date: Sun, 3 Jan 2010 12:42:31 -0500 (EST)
From: jz
To: "Ambassador of the People's Republic of China,Members of the Basel Accords Committee,and Bank of International Settlements (BIS)

Subject: Please reconsider credit policies towards US govenment in view of
continued recklessness.

January 3, 2010

Dear Ambassador of the People's Republic of China, Members of the Basel Accords Committee, and Bank of International Settlements (BIS):

Copied below is yet another example of the ongoing failure of US banking and financial markets regulators, and the ongoing blatant violations of the law by US financial institutions. Any statements made by United States government officers in testimonies before United States Congress of "shoring up" the United States regulatory system cannot be reasonably taken at face value. One must accept reality for what it is: The administration of President Obama and United States Congress lost control of United States financial institutions and United States banking and financial market regulatory agencies, which are flaunting their disregard for United States laws, international banking accords, and international credit agreements.

The United States government can no longer plausibly be deemed as either a good-faith party to the Basel Accords or a good-faith borrower in international credit markets.

Reckless conduct by United States government agencies exposes United States and world financial markets to unknown risks, and those holding reserves in US denominations - to imminent losses on a large scale. Needless to say, the United States treasury and United States economy are in no position to assume such risks, raising the odds of an imminent catastrophic failure.

With the dawn of a new decade, it appears that the only measure that would possibly bring the United States government into treating its own citizens and the rest of the world with some degree of integrity would be tightening of credit policies. United States government may argue that such move by lenders would result in immediate untowardly effects. However, continued flow of credit under current terms must be considered unreasonable in view of the increased and unpredictable risks to lenders. Moreover, continued flow of credit under current terms must be deemed as harmful - since it is seen by United States financial institutions and regulatory agencies as a license to continue their ongoing dishonest, deceptive, reckless conduct.

An alternative, proactive approach, which should also be considered, would directly link credit polices to demonstrable performance by United States government towards establishing publicly accountable validation (certified functional logic verification) of large database management systems at public corporations, at financial institutions, at regulatory agencies, at the United States courts and in correctional facilities. It was the introduction of fraudulent database management systems at all levels over the past three decades, which lends the United States ungovernable today.

Additionally, the Swiss government should be urged to pass and enforce laws, which would prohibit senior United States government officials (including, but not limited to United States judges) and officers and directors of publicly traded United States corporations from making deposits into numbered Swiss bank accounts while in office. Efforts should be made to keep the personal fortunes of such persons tied to the fate of the United States dollar.

Such actions by lenders would not only stabilize markets and dramatically reduce operational risks, but would also restore the Human, Constitutional, and Civil Rights of all who reside in the United States.

Truly,

Joseph Zernik
Los Angeles County, California

http://inproperinla.blogspot.com/
Patriotic pics of sharon stone, beyonce knowles, and charlize theron,
To be added soon- deep house music!

________________________________________________________________

At 06:44 03/01/2010, Yolanda Gibson-Michaels wrote:

RE: Re: Urgent Read: SEC Mary Schapiro call to investigate FDIC Inside Trading by Tyler Durden

Mary Schapiro Must Immediately Investigate The FDIC's Confidential Information Leak In Another Blatant Insider Trading Case, Then Resign
Submitted by Tyler Durden on 12/04/2009 17:39 -0800

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation

FINRA

Fund Flows

Goldman Sachs

Insider Trading

Mary Schapiro

non-performing loans

Real estate

Sheila Bair

The degree of insider trading in this market is getting ridiculous. And the strangest thing is those who are executing on blatantly obvious material, non-public insider information, are no longer concerned the least bit about getting caught as they realize that the "mighty" SEC will do nothing against them, courtesy of the example the SEC has set by finding absolutely nobody "responsible" (except, of course, the regulator's own future employers who thus get immunity from prosecution) for the greatest market heist in history in which over $5 trillion has been transferred from the middle class to the Wall Street oligarchy (future providers of paychecks for SEC staffers).

Today's grotesque example of the SEC's futility to act as even a modest deterrent to insider trading activity: New York Community Bancorp (which, just so happens, is a $602 million recipient of TLGP debt), whose stock surged in the final minutes of trading for reasons (then) unknown. As reader QevolveQ pointed out at 5:30 pm, the activity in both the stock and the calls of the company was many standard deviations away from average and raised major red flags. Those questions were quickly put to rest when it became known at 6:33 pm that NYB would in fact receive FDIC subsidies to acquire newly failed AmTrust Bank in a transaction that would be "immediately accretive to earnings." And how wouldn't it be:

Under the terms of the agreement, the Community Bank did not acquire any of AmTrust Bank’s non-performing loans serviced by AmTrust Bank or any other real estate owned; construction, land, or development loans; private-label securities, or mortgage servicing rights, nor did it acquire any of the assets or assume any of the obligations of the holding company.
No, those would conveniently be funded by Ms. Bair herself. The cost to the FDIC, and US taxpayers, to make NYB a richer enterprise: $2 billion. This is value that will go straight to the bank's bottom line. As a result of this middle-class subsidy it was a certainty that its shares would spike.
The smoking gun here comes straight from a quick observation of NYB's intraday P/V chart: the jump at 3:24pm on statistically significant volume is a clear signal that someone was fully aware of the soon to be announced transaction:

Furthermore, as QeQ highlights, "8,933 of the Dec 12 calls traded vs. 2,244 OI, finishing +300% on the day." A very solid return for a few hours of trading. The block trades are visible below: one set of 2,500 Dec $12 calls bought at $0.20, followed promptly by two more 2,500 blocks around $0.25. With the stock poised to open much higher than its closing price, someone is sure to make a killing.

It is practically certain that the NYB stock and option transactions came courtesy of a insider tip. And as NYB is both a ward of the state, courtesy of its TLGP umbilical cord, and as the bank would soon become $2 billion richer as a result of some more middle class-to-Wall Street fund flows, it is very likely that the FDIC itself is the source of such leak. We truly hope that one of D.C.'s most ineffective and useless females (if grossly, grossly overpaid for her "work" in 2008) will analyze whether the agency headed by another such female has been responsible for yet more illegal insider trading activity. That the government is only capable of promoting unpunished criminal activity would not surprise anyone at this point. And as this will be one of those cases when everything is handed to the SEC on a silver platter, we don't doubt that some minor scapegoat will be put away to make it seem like the most worthless organization in the world earns its $1 billion annual budget fair and square.

What is chilling is the complete disdain that insider traders now flaunt when it comes to fear of retribution by the "regulators." And when Ms. Mary "$3.3 Million" Schapiro is done catching any and all masterminds behind this dastardly deed, we would all be very grateful if she could leave her keys, her chauffeur, and her masseuse as she packs her banker box full of Wall Street indulgences on the way out of public office once and for all -

Ms. Schapiro, the public does not want you betraying its trust any longer. Now please go work for Goldman Sachs where your continued betrayal of U.S. interests will be welcome and compensated much better than the meager $3.3 million you made at Finra. The sooner you get into a job that requires efforts more consummate with your diminished capacity, the sooner you can continue counting the $5-$25 million in cash payouts you slurped up from FINRA's defined benefit plans.