XXXX
XXXX
XXXX
XXXX
XXXX
XXXX
XXXX
XXXX
XXXX
XXXX
XXXX
XXXX
XXXX
XXXX
XXXX
Website Navigation
The Issues
and
Proposed Solutions
( Website Homepage )
Understand the ELS Federal Tax Fraud Scheme
Legal Opinions and
Documents related to the
ELS Tax Fraud Scheme
Chronological List of
Website Documents
Washington State
Precedential
Railroad Right-of-Way
Opinions Thru Brown

Judges Protecting Judges:
The Legal Fraternity

by John Rasmussen

Please read a disclaimer for the statements I make on this website accusing judges, politicians and activists of criminal actions.



Is there a Legal Fraternity?

         There's a fraternity of legal professionals. By "legal fraternity", I am describing the informal coalition of judges, lawyers, clerks, law professors, law school deans, legal reporters, and the others who are considered legal professionals. I'm not speaking about a formal organization such as the Bar Association. Instead, I'm describing the fraternity that encompasses the whole legal profession, an informal fraternity with unwritten rules, but rules none the less. There is a pecking order in this fraternity, and I can write with certainty that the top position in that pecking order is occupied by the judges. There is an undeserved reverence for judges in our society. The title of judge might have deserved that respect at one point in our history, but now that title should bring feelings of fear and loathing from the public. This is because there is massive corruption in the judiciary of our federal and state courts. This corruption evolved in a judiciary that has been given great power along with little or no legitimate accountability. Anyone who understands human nature, knows that great power and no accountability will always breed corruption. That's the way humans behave, and to believe that judges might rise above that temptation is completely foolish.



The Members of this Legal Fraternity:


The Judges:

         I believe our judiciary can be broken down into two types of judges. One type of judge has no respect for the law, the Constitution, or for the rights of those they have sworn to serve. This type of judge might worry about his decision being overturned, but he believes that he is in no danger of being held responsible for the harm he does. This type of judge is so wrapped up in himself (herself) that he is incapable or finding anything wrong in his dishonest actions. From my experience in federal court, I am certain that Federal District Judge Barbara Jacobs Rothstein is a perfect example in this type of judge. Read my annotated version of King County v. Rasmussen (2001) to understand.
        (My statements describing wrongdoing or criminal actions on this webpage are a First Amendment expression of my opinion.)

         The other type of judge is far more dangerous to the survival of our Nation. This judge actually believes in the law, and tries to live up to his or her oath. The problem is that this judge tolerates, and therefore enables, the first type of judge. This judge is the most dangerous to the survival of our Nation because he or she has the capacity to see the harm the first type is doing, but does nothing.

         I see no evidence that there is any other type of judge.

         My case, King County v. Rasmussen, was ultimately about whether a group of powerful folks in King County, Washington, could commit federal tax fraud and steal land from their neighbors in order to establish a bike trail. I attempted to bring the criminal issues to Judge Rothstein's court, but she struck all evidence of the crime, denied my right to present the facts before a jury, and issued a grossly flawed decision that covered-up the tax fraud scheme. When I appealed to a Ninth Circuit panel, and later to the Ninth Circuit en banc, not one judge stood up for the truth or for my rights as a citizen. I have no idea what percentage of judges are completely crooked and what percentage tolerates and enables their dishonest colleagues, but I know from my experience that the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals is no longer a legitimate judicial body because of judges illegally protecting their fellow judges.
        (My statements describing wrongdoing or criminal actions on this webpage are a First Amendment expression of my opinion.)

         What can we do to regain our legal system? I have some suggestions, but it takes the will of the people to make that happen. The first step is education, the process of understanding we have a problem that will destroy our Country, if not corrected. That's what is happening here.

      Understand the critical part played by judges in the East Lake Sammamish federal tax fraud scheme.

The Lawyers:

         As I stated above, the judges are at the "top of the food chain" in this fraternity of legal professionals, and they will devour anyone who exposes their dishonesty, questions their actions, or stands in their way. There is little criticism of judges by the other members of the legal fraternity, because of the ability of the judges to retaliate. The group most vulnerable to the wrath of judges is the lawyers. Judges will destroy the career of a lawyer who criticizes or brings a complaint of misconduct against them.

         For example, I have a friend of more that forty years that has a law practice near Yakima, Washington. A number of years ago he was appearing with a client before Federal District Judge Alan A. McDonald in Eastern Washington Federal District Court. Judge McDonald made a prejudicial statement against my friend's client from the bench during the trial. That is a clear violation of judicial ethics. On the insistence of his client, my lawyer friend filed a complaint of misconduct against the judge. The complaint was valid, but when a three judge panel from the Ninth Circuit Court heard the matter, they irrationally supported their fellow federal judge. The Ninth Circuit panel barred my friend from practice in federal court for a year, and forwarded the matter to the Washington State Court for review and similar punishment. Normally the Washington State review panel simply echoes the result and punishment doled out by the federal panel. But in this case, the disciplinary panel for the Washington Courts rejected the arguments made before the federal panel, agreeing with my friend. Apparently the federal judges had crossed some vaguely defined ethical line, and the State judges would have no part of their injustice. As a result, my friend was able to continue to practice law in the State, but was barred from federal court for a year. A lawyer barred from state and federal court for a significant period can easily lose his law practice and be forced out of the legal profession. In this case with my friend, there is much more to this story. Judge Alan A. McDonald, was selected in 2002 as one of America's worst judges by Reader's Digest Magazine. The U.S. House of Representatives passed a resolution condemning his antics on the bench. But, Judge McDonald continued his unethical habits, remained unpunished, and "served" as a federal judge in Eastern Washington until his death in 2007.
        (My statements describing wrongdoing or criminal actions on this webpage are a First Amendment expression of my opinion.)

      Read More on the Sad Case of Federal District Judge Alan A. McDonald.

The Bar Association:

         Much of the problem with our out-of-control judiciary evolves from the policies of the Bar Association. It appears that the Bar Association believes that the best way to deal with dishonest judges is to hide their crimes. The Bar Association does this by disbarring lawyers who criticizes judges. With no criticism of judges, the public is given the false sense that all is well in our judicial branch. This has had the effect of encouraging judges to do whatever they want on the bench, in violation of their oaths, the law, and the Constitution.
        (My statements describing wrongdoing or criminal actions on this webpage are a First Amendment expression of my opinion.)

         When an organization takes away the right of its members to expose corruption in its ranks, that organization must then take on that responsibility itself. If the Bar Association disbars members who rightly criticize judges, then the Bar Association must evaluate and expose the corruption in our judiciary itself, or be held responsible for covering-up that corruption.
        (My statements describing wrongdoing or criminal actions on this webpage are a First Amendment expression of my opinion.)

The Law Schools:

         I'd love to find out what is being taught as ethics in our law schools. Have they been honest with their students about the corruption in our federal and state courts? Have any students given up the idea of being a lawyer in the dishonest system of law that we have developed?

         I've written the dean of one law school about the crimes committed by Ninth Circuit judges in the cover up of the ELST federal tax fraud scheme. No reply. Once this website is established, I'll be writing to law schools, challenging them on this ethics question. I strongly suspect that there is an acceptance of the illegitimate power federal and state judges have granted themselves, rather than outrage at the abuse. I believe that the law schools are afraid to criticize dishonest judges because they rely on their association with judges to give status and credibility to their schools, and any criticism of a judge is perceived as an attack on the judiciary as a whole. I believe that our arrogant judiciary would not hesitate to unfairly punish a lawyer simply because he graduated from a law school that was critical of the judiciary.
        (My statements describing wrongdoing or criminal actions on this webpage are a First Amendment expression of my opinion.)

The Clerks:

         Apparently, the best move for an ambitious new lawyer is to become a clerk for a judge. I assume the higher and more important the court, the more prestigious the clerk position. Since I can easily see the criminal actions committed by federal judges with my case, I know that the law clerks are even more aware of the dishonesty of our federal and state judiciary. The appointment of top law school graduates to clerk positions, simply establishes a training program for future crooked judges. I believe that a number of law clerks were aware of the involvement of their federal judges in the ELS federal tax fraud scheme, but none blew the whistle on their judge's criminal actions. Law clerks are being trained by our judges to accept criminal activity in the judiciary. If we-the-people choose to reclaim our rights in our courts, we will need to consider a ban on any former law clerk holding a position as a judge. Our law clerks are damaged goods. The one exception would be a clerk who quit and criticized his/her judge of misconduct. I doubt that has ever happened. Our law clerks are being taught to be future crooked judges. This must stop.
        (My statements describing wrongdoing or criminal actions on this webpage are a First Amendment expression of my opinion.)

The Press:

         Many legal reporters are lawyers. Perhaps they stopped practicing law and became reporters because of the situation I describe on this page. So, why aren't they reporting the corruption in our judiciary? It appears the problem is that they need access to judges and the courts in order to do their reports. It's my understanding that newspapers and news media who displease judges are denied access to the courts and judiciary. Legal reporters need access to do their reports, and also need a friendly relationship with other legal professionals in order to lend credibility to their reporting. Many of our legal reporters have the credentials to convince the public that we have a serious problem with our courts, but they do not make those reports. (My statements describing wrongdoing or criminal actions on this webpage are a First Amendment expression of my opinion.)

         This unwillingness to report the corruption in our judiciary is supported by their employers. The massive corruption involved in the East Lake Sammamish federal tax fraud scheme was described to the King County newspapers many times. The newspapers refused to report the crime to their readers. Perhaps they did this because the owners and editorial staff had an agenda which was served by not reporting the truth to their readers, or perhaps they did this in order to maintain access to the courts by the judges. The public should know if our newspapers are selling out their rights to report judicial corruption under "Freedom of the Press" in order to keep access to our courts. Please read the public letter I wrote to The Seattle Times about its refusal to report the ELS tax fraud scheme to its readers.
        (My statements describing wrongdoing or criminal actions on this webpage are a First Amendment expression of my opinion.)

      View my August 30, 2009 public letter to the owners, editors, and staff of The Seattle Times.

The Outsiders:

         With respect to this judicial fraternity, the American public is an outsider. I'm an outsider. I actually believed in our judicial process when I took the ELS federal tax fraud scheme and my property rights to court. It took me a long time to understand just how corrupt our judiciary has become. After Federal District Judge Barbara Jacobs Rothstein issued her dishonest decision against me, I believed that I would receive justice on appeal to the Ninth Circuit three judge appeals panel. When that panel supported Rothstein's dishonesty and refused to recognize my rights as an American, I still thought that I would get justice with my en banc appeal. The Ninth Circuit refused my en banc appeal. The most dishonest decisions by appeals courts are the decisions to deny legitimate appeals, the decision to do nothing in the face of their responsibility to correct the errors of a lower court. (My statements describing wrongdoing or criminal actions on this webpage are a First Amendment expression of my opinion.)

         I still believed that the dishonesty of the Ninth Circuit would be corrected by the United States Supreme Court. The United States Supreme Court refused to consider my appeal. The United States Supreme Court knows that it corrects a higher percentage of Ninth Circuit decisions than appeals from the other circuit courts, yet it does nothing to correct the root problem. The root problem is a Ninth Circuit judiciary that freely destroys the rights of Americans who appeal to its court. Federal judges must be impeached by Congress. That is almost impossible, considering the inability of congressmen to consider any issue other than how to raise funds to stay in office. The United States Supreme Court is about the only body which can exert influence on the Ninth Circuit to clean up its act, but the United States Supreme Court does nothing to protect Americans from the dishonesty of Ninth Circuit judges.
        (My statements describing wrongdoing or criminal actions on this webpage are a First Amendment expression of my opinion.)

         After many years of having my rights destroyed by dishonest judges and defective appeals courts, I now understand how the fraternity of judges works. Those who read the dishonest decisions responsible for the East Lake Sammamish federal tax fraud scheme, will understand too.
        (My statements describing wrongdoing or criminal actions on this webpage are a First Amendment expression of my opinion.)

      Understand the ELS federal tax fraud scheme and read the dishonest decisions which covered-up the crime.