The U.S. Legal System
and All Things Related Blog

How the U.S. Legal System Targets People It Doesn’t Like and Protects People That It Does

2025-08-31T23:18:03-07:00

On June 2, 2025, the local crime syndicate, minor league division (local police department) decided to give me a call. This was as a result of pressure from the California Superior Syndicate. They apparently called the police because they don’t particularly like my relentless filing of about 100 petitions for a writ of mandate. That’s OK. I don’t particularly like having more than $1,000,000 in money and property stolen from my family and me by members of the world's largest crime syndicate—the U.S. legal system.

Every time the California Superior Syndicate rejects one of the filings, I refile it again. I also add 10 percent more filings just because they stubbornly keep rejecting—and I’m going to force it down their throat whether they like it or not. I warned them I would do this. They didn’t listen. It started with about sixty filings. They’ve recently stopped rejecting because they know I will just refile, so I now file new petitions anyway and keep increasing the attachment size: from 10MB to 35MB and from 100MB of total daily file space usage on their servers to 1GB currently so they fill up even faster. I warned them I would do this too. Again, they didn't listen.

I had previously had about the same number of hearings (sixty) with the state regarding certain financial assistance. I withheld filing the petitions until I had a sizable stack so that I could clog the court in one fell swoop. I noticed the timestamps on the rejections. It was taking them way more time to reject than it was for me to file. It took them several hours, but it only took me a matter of minutes.

After about the third iteration, I got a call. The ID displayed as the local state county office instead of the local police, which is understandable since probably 99 percent of the population would not pick up a call from the local cop shop—myself included. But since this branch of the world’s largest crime syndicate called, I decided to have a little fun.

As soon as I found out who it was, I went from defense to offense in less than three seconds. The representative said that I hadn’t broken any laws and that they weren’t going to take any action against me, but stated that I was “frustrated” with the legal system. I immediately corrected this person. Firstly, I said I wanted to be prosecuted. Unfortunately, nobody within the syndicate wants to put me in front of a jury—for obvious reasons—I will absolutely destroy them. Secondly, I said I was not frustrated. I said I was freaking pissed!

Then I launched into how I’m sick and tired of the crime and corruption, that they’ve violated more than sixty statutory laws, twenty-two of them felonies, of those at least twelve were federal felonies—one of which carries a 20-year maximum prison sentence—and how people from all over the world contact me about their problems with the syndicate, the two books I’ve written, the many speaking engagements I’ve done, the fact that the domestic terrorists (federal agents, or the major league.....whose @sses I still kick regardless of which league it is) have been here numerous times and that I tell them to screw every single time, etc., etc. It was a non-stop pummeling for about five minutes. It was glorious.

Towards the end, I said that until someone prosecutes these criminals, I’m not going to stop until I take a bath with a hairdryer, hang myself from a doorknob, or shoot myself twice in the back of the head. The person on the other end of the line wasn’t the brightest bulb in the chandelier. She asked if I intended to hurt myself or commit suicide. After about thirty seconds of uncontrollable laughter, I had to explain how extremely difficult it would be to shoot oneself twice in the back of the head.

I said to check out www.stloiyf.net/case.html, go down all the rabbit holes, and then call me. Then the local Boy Scout troop will know why I’m so damned pissed. She said she wasn’t sure if they’d call back. I assure you they won’t. For 99.99 percent of the population, they would have arrived in person to talk and intimidate. Since the domestic terrorists know they can’t intimidate me or get what they want out of me to build their BS case against me, they are now simply calling by phone but talking face to face with other people instead. One day close to the middle of May, they paid the landlord of the complex where I live a visit.

I remember the look on her face when I told her months prior that they would one day show up and question her. She looked at me like I was crazy. Sure enough, they did. She told me about the general conversation. When they asked about me as a resident, she said I was “one of her best tenants.” There are well over 150 units in this complex. Her answer is not at all what the terrorists wanted to hear. It makes building their “case” exceedingly difficult now.

They were hoping she would have said I was into drugs, prostitution, illegal gambling—anything these criminals could use to incriminate me. Sadly for them, their bubble is being burst at every turn. Incidentally, she did in fact tell me of this conversation later in the day they arrived and that she did think I was certifiably crazy when I told her they would appear and ask about me. I also told her she doesn’t have to tell these—or any other—criminals sh!t when they ask about anyone.

Interestingly, I got a call towards the middle of June from a “private number.” I almost never pick those up unannounced, but just like when the boys in blue called, I thought it was the state hearings division since they always call either that way or from a generic county ID. The person identified himself as calling on behalf of the Social Security Administration and asked if I was still living in a certain state. As soon as I heard that, I replied with two words. The first rhymes with “truck,” and the second rhymes with “blue.” I then immediately ended the call. He called right back. Within fifty milliseconds of answering, I provided the same two words and terminated the call once more. He tried yet again—same response. One more time, but I let it go to voice mail. I wish there was a way to block those numbers.

I’ve never heard of the SSA calling anyone for anything. If it had truly been the SSA, they would mail the person for correspondence. Since the number was yet another “private number,” the call could have really been from the Federal Bureau of Iniquity or the Department of Injustice, which I strongly suspect it was. They are trying every possible angle to take me down. Unfortunately for these corrupt circus monkeys, I’m three steps ahead of them.

Being persistent little creatures, they once again tried to get at me—through someone else. Sara got a voicemail from the syndicate—LA Police Division—on June 16, 2025. It was a short message asking her to return the call about “a matter.” We both agreed to let them spin themselves into the ground with several more calls before possibly engaging them.

The whole point of this rant is that everyday people have to know what lengths members of the world’s largest crime syndicate will go in order to pursue someone. Their mantra is: attack the people we don't like, protect the people we do, and then contrive a “crime” to complete the former. This is something right out of Lavrentiy Beria's playbook under the Stalin regime: "Show me the man, and I’ll show you the crime." When directed at me, know what I say? Good luck with that, criminals.

Every time the syndicate issues an "order" or a "judgment," they commit several more crimes.....which makes me even more untouchable because I keep the evidence of said crimes backed up in several secure places as we recommend in Stack the Legal Odds in Your Favor. The criminals are making it more and more difficult for themselves to put me in front of a jury. Just with the evidence I have now, I will unquestionably crush them like the maggots on society that they are.

Incidentally, Sara and I would like to let readers know that our blog has been selected as one of the Top Ten Anti-Corruption Blogs out of more than one thousand. We are honored to have been bestowed this distinction and will continually try to meet the requisite standards by doing our best to fight corruption in the American "justice" system every day.

How to Know if the Government Is Tracking Your Emails

2025-07-27T22:48:29-07:00

This could be one of the most important blogs in our 9-plus-year history. It concerns our illustrious legal system—a.k.a. the world’s largest crime syndicate—and the things that it does to everyday people mostly unnoticed. These are things that could severely and negatively impact you or your loved ones. Read on; but fasten your seatbelt first. It’s going to be one helluva bumpy ride.

A few years ago, I decided to look for browser-based email tracking. I was fighting a liar/lawyer at the Department of Injustice, Kristin Tavia Mihelic, who belongs in prison for numerous crimes. Her lies were so prolific, I thought it would be helpful to be able to bag her lying in every single email correspondence. It turns out that Streak email tracking is the tool I chose for this task. We had no business relationship with them then nor do we have now. The email tracking portion is free, installs easily, and works nearly flawlessly. Sara and I recommend it in chapter 7 of Stack the Legal Odds in Your Favor. Certain other plug-ins, such as Shopback and Topcashback, may interfere with its operation, however, so just keep this fact in mind.

The Streak email tracker allows you to track when an email is opened, how many times it is opened, any links formatted as straight text inside it that are clicked, and where it is opened. The latter is accurate from a PC with a physical, local ISP connection, but from a mobile phone connection, the results can display just about any city in the originating country because of the way cell towers use repeaters and whatnot.

False positives are not possible, but false negatives are. This has to do with the software implementation and means that if an email shows as being read, it has definitely been read, but if it shows as not being read, it could still have been read. There are a few reasons for this which are beyond the scope of this post. If links show as being clicked but the email shows zero views, then this is an indication of a false negative. The email has certainly been read.

After the syndicate had committed innumerable crimes against me and stolen over $1,000,000 in money and property from my family and me, I was understandably pissed. I began sending daily complaints to the Federal Bureau of Iniquity and DOI along with hammering the syndicate in several other ways. It began a war with me. I will certainly finish it. I had originally started with filing just one online complaint every few months, but since nobody at these criminal-run organizations lifted a toxic finger to right an enormous injustice, the complaints became more and more frequent—until they reached the current limit of 10 to each of the two criminal-based organizations every day.

So, rather than go after the individuals committing the crimes, the syndicate decided to go after the person reporting the crimes and fighting the criminals responsible for them. This was also a big mistake. When I make calls to the glorified, unelected lawyer-criminals in black gowns, I hear a lot of clicking and static on the line. This is a telltale sign that the call is being monitored. I don’t mind, but it sure is yet another waste of taxpayer dollars. Incidentally, if I were to guess, I’d estimate that well over $3,000,000 of taxpayer money has been wasted to fight me thus far. Money continues to be wasted fighting me. Rather than using only a portion of the tax dollars judiciously to prosecute the criminals who have committed the crimes and have plenty left over, the syndicate would rather use the funds to protect the criminals so they can continue to victimize Americans—the ultimate slap in the face to all of us.

At one point in the past many months, I noticed something quite interesting with an email message to one of the crime syndicate members. I can’t recall which one, but my email had been read nearly instantaneously after sending it. Moreover, it was read not just in one location but in many—worldwide—Boardman, OR; London, England; São Paulo, Brazil; Sydney, Australia; and Frankfurt, Germany. To say the least, it struck me as quite odd. Days, maybe weeks, passed, and I sent another email to another person in government. The same thing happened. Note that these places did not vary. For every federal senator, judge, or public official from that point onward, the email would almost immediately show as being read in most or all of these locations, and links in the email would appear “opened.” I even noticed this when I emailed Jeff Bezos at Amazon.

Figure 1

It took me a bit to understand what was happening, but it is crystal clear now. I first thought, “Why would agents for the syndicate be monitoring my emails from overseas when I am emailing their minions here in the U.S.A.?” Noting the consistency of locations, the speed at which my emails were read, and the geographical distance between the locations where the messages were read makes the answer obvious. Nobody was physically reading any of the emails. What the syndicate is doing is completely automated.

They have server farms at all of these locations. They also have sophisticated software that is automated to open the emails, gather certain data/keywords from them, follow the links in order to gather more incriminating information, and store/red flag any of it in some massive database. Most likely, someone analyzes the output of certain algorithms that crunch this data and produce some calculated threat indicator along with a high-level report. The syndicate likely maintains a list of “terrorists” who are to be monitored. As I’ve said many times, there’s the FBI’s Ten Most Wanted Fugitives.....and then there’s me in a category all by myself.

The syndicate probably also maintains a list of targets—people in government who are to be protected. Added to this list are other high-profile people, Jeff Bezos being one. I can only speculate who is on the target list, but I would surmise all federal government officials, Hollywood stars, CEOs, and possibly certain mainstream media individuals. It appears that certain state government actors are also on this list: one being a criminal named Joseph L. Michaud, who is also a housing court judge in the People's Republic of Massachusetts.

It's no secret that there are data centers at all of the above locations. It's also no secret that the "parent company" of the syndicate, the U.S. government, is in bed with Amazon and other private companies. And it's no longer a secret that Amazon was awarded the NSA's formerly classified "Wild and Stormy" cloud computing contract to support the "agency's mission." While I can't prove a link exists between the contract and the inclusion of Mr. Bezos on the target list, it would be quite coincidental otherwise. However, I've learned that there are no coincidences with the syndicate—there are only planned occurrences.

The reason for the five different locations for data centers worldwide is for data security. If a tsunami hits Australia, the servers are safe in London. If nuclear war breaks out in Germany, the data is safe in Brazil. Keeping data safe is one of the primary tenets of software engineering. This is achieved through redundancy and geographic separation.

The first question, now, is: how could this all possibly happen—the syndicate being able to redirect emails? It happened because someone at the FBI or DOI made a phone call to Google and said, “Hey, we need to monitor this person. Put a packet sniffer on his outgoing emails.” Of course, Google folded over like an old card table. The term “packet sniffer” may not be entirely correct in this instance, but there is some way that the tech giant is working with the syndicate to make sure that my emails are sent to the aforementioned five locations in addition to the intended recipient. My emails are not intercepted. They reach their destination. It’s just that they also reach five other “destinations.”

It is important to point out that redirection may not be just based on the sender's or recipient's email address. It may also be based on the sender's IP address. Latest data from Streak show that it could be and strongly suggest that redirection can also be based on keywords within the email itself such as "governor" or "director." Amazingly, this is something straight out of the movie Enemy of the State, one of my top three favorites of all time not just because of Gene Hackman's stellar performance but because of the storyline. I'm not sure who the technical adviser was in that flick, but that person sure as hell was spot on.

The second and even bigger compound question is: to how many people is the syndicate doing this, and are you one of them? Thirdly, how would you ever know without email tracking? And the final question combination is: what about texting or other forms of electronic communication? Are they also being monitored? Well, the Utah Data Center is alleged to store every electronic transmission worldwide since 2014. I’m sure the output of the five data centers makes it there. I might even have my own personal storage space. Wouldn’t that be quite an honor.....

The crucial takeaway of this post is this: without having the tools to stay three steps ahead of these corrupt circus monkeys, I probably would have crumbled long ago, with my physical presence having been erased from planet Earth. Having Steak, knowing the syndicate’s “game plan,” and using other software applications are precisely what help me stay alive and keep my gigantic lead on them.

While a good portion of readers may not have anything to worry about right now, I highly recommend taking just a few simple steps to protect yourself and your loved ones. The syndicate can strike anyone at any time. Knowing some of the criminal things they do ahead of time is an incredibly huge advantage. Besides Streak, there are other protective tools. One, for example, is my first book, which was mentioned earlier, and another is You Have the Right to Remain Innocent, which is a book by Professor James Duane. These are the only two known books written in the last 100 years that protect people from the syndicate. Both are free on Kindle Unlimited, and both are in libraries nationwide. If you take no action now, you will only have yourself to blame later.

***EDIT 8-1-25: It now appears that the government is attempting to use strictly domestic servers as a front for their data collection. Over the last several days, my emails have been "opened" only in Phoenix, AZ, and San Antonio, TX. To clarify, they are using the IP address from which the message appears to be sent to determine what native host country will process the email at one of its data centers. The syndicate probably got wind of me knowing about what they are doing and had its engineers address this "security risk." What they seem to do now is limit the visible tracking to domestic locations by "reading" emails only in the suspected host country but then have their software system copy and paste message contents into another email—or another format entirely—and then forward it to the other countries for redundant storage. This way, people who use email tracking will be less likely to suspect they are being monitored if their emails are apparently being read in their own country.....unless, of course, they find and read this post.***

Incidentally, Sara and I would like to let readers know that our blog has been selected as one of the Top Ten Anti-Corruption Blogs out of well over one thousand. We are honored to have been bestowed this distinction and will continually try to meet the requisite standards by doing our best to fight corruption in the American "justice" system every day.

The Dishonorable Michael P. Vicencia Has Committed Several Crimes

2025-06-29T23:50:23-07:00

For those victims of the world’s largest crime syndicate (WLCS)—a.k.a. the U.S. legal system—what is presented in this post may not be that shocking. For those who have yet to become victims, you may want to remove all the breakables within a 100-foot radius before you begin reading. The WLCS has proved time and again that every single court here in Amerika is corrupt as hell. There’s no getting around that fact. Judges treat rules and law as mere suggestions—less than recommendations even—when inconvenient to themselves or their minions and refuse to work towards justice. Instead, they deliberately fight against justice. The pattern repeats itself.

If I write the letters “D,” “O,” and “G” on a sheet of paper and hold it up for the world to see, any everyday sane person who knows how to read will say that it spells “dog.” The WLCS, however, insists that it spells “cat.” In my cases, one or two such failures could be considered a mistake. 100-plus cannot. Members of the WLCS have intentionally and concertedly tried to stymie, mislead, and block justice. The relentless violation of rules and law by the WLCS shows without a doubt that its criminal elements know they cannot beat me fair and square and have to resort to crime and corruption in order to take me down. They have to violate civil and criminal law in order to do so.

Committing crimes all day long is what the WLCS does best. It is now standard operating procedure. Overwhelming evidence proves that members of the WLCS unceasingly falsify court “records” to bolster fraudulent narratives so they can justify predetermined outcomes. This happens not just to me but to Americans every day in every court in every state. Our "justice" system is wildly, off-the-rails corrupt, but, unfortunately, most people don't learn this until it is too late.

On April 1, 2025, the California Superior Court division of the WLCS filed into the docket my amended complaint, which I submitted pursuant to CA Code – CCP § 472, “A party may amend its pleading once without leave of the court at any time before the answer, demurrer, or motion to strike is filed.....” According to Rule 3.110(b), I had thirty days to serve the new defendant-criminals. This means I had at least until May 1, 2025, to serve them.

I called the court twice prior to April 15, 2025. On both occasions, I was told I could call in to the April 28 “hearing” using my phone. Neither person told me I needed Microsoft Teams. I thought it was going to be a standard telephonic hearing just like during the bankruptcy I was forced to file because of the fraudulent debt defendant-criminal Joseph Leonard Michaud orchestrated against me.

On April 28, 2025, I spent over half an hour trying to download the Microsoft Teams application while on the other side of the continent where my internet connection was marginal at very best and nearly non-existent at worst. Had I known I needed this app, I would have downloaded it before I left for Florida on April 15, 2025. And, of course, the court prevents “test driving” it beforehand by forcing litigants to wait until the day of the hearing. Well, by then it’s too late. Finally, nothing on the court’s related website page mentions anything whatsoever about the specifics for remote attendance, specifically any requirement for Microsoft Teams.

Figure 1

After struggling to jump through all the hoops, I waited patiently for over an hour to present my case. The judge, Dishonorable Michael Paul Vicencia, knew I was on the conference call along with over a dozen other waiting participants, but he ignored me anyway as he did them too. Suddenly, without warning, everything stopped. I had no idea what happened. Did he and others break for lunch? Was he coming back? Did my connection fail? Since I did not know the answers to these and other questions—although I will make them obvious shortly—I used the chat feature to send multiple messages. None were returned.

Rather than being outraged by the facts and evidence in my case that reveal massive crime and corruption and the violation of no less than sixty statutory laws (twenty-two of them being felonies), criminal-Vicencia decided to be complicit in the misconduct. Again on April 28, 2025, and in his enthusiasm to protect his criminal friends, he corruptly dismissed my case days before any sanctions could have been imposed per Rule 3.110. In fact, I had two hearings scheduled for May 6, the earliest date possible, one of which addressed a motion regarding exactly how thousands of defendants/criminals could be served. I’m almost certain Joseph L. Michaud called him—and committed more felonies alongside him—as he’s done on several occasions with other so-called judges and lawyers without black gowns in prior related matters in the People’s Republic of Massachusetts (at least three or four times there), in Rogue Island, and in BIG Blue (California). I have mountains of evidence that he’s made such nefarious phone calls and, in doing so, committed numerous felonies multiple times.

The first and last “hearing” was held on April 28, 2025, which should have never been held in the first place. More than 73 percent of the named defendants had already been served process pursuant to my correspondence with the chief clerk, Mr. David Slayton, and pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure - CCP § 415.30 (a) and Rule 2.251. More than 99.997 percent of the total defendants were added to my amended complaint filed on April 1, 2025. This means that 99.997-plus percent of them could have been served as late as May 1, 2025. This is clearly not what happened because Vicencia illegally and corruptly dismissed the entire action before that date.

Looking at the facts and evidence, it is indisputable what happened. I tried to file the amended complaint on March 28, 2025. However, the court rejected it and did not receive it until April 1, 2025. Rule 2.259(a)(1) states that a document sent electronically is “received at the date and time the confirmation of receipt is created.” The email highlighted below contains such a confirmation of receipt with a date of April 1:

Figure 2

Since it is not physically possible to file into a docket a document that has not yet been received, the amended complaint could not have been filed any sooner than 4-1-25, the date of reception. Most likely, people who enter information into the court’s version of the docket are unaware that the third-party software also tracks entries with a date and time stamp not only with a standard human readable format, but also with an internal real-time format that always stays chronological. This explains the displayed March 28 date stamp, but the third-party software shows the amended complaint being filed/entered no earlier than April 1:

Figure 3

They had a plan. This plan was hatched well before April 28, 2025. Apparently, the WLCS tried to wipe out all traces of its crimes by falsifying court records—once again. This has happened in every court in every state in every related case over the last decade. The court claims that it accepted the March 28 amended complaint filing on that day. This is a lie.

Notice there are three entries for “Confirmation” on 4-1-25 shown in Figure 4 with two coming almost on top of each other and the third being made four minutes later. That’s because the first person tried repeatedly to falsify the entry as 3-28-25 but did not have any luck because the third-party software kept showing the actual date of 4-1-25. It would have never crossed the software engineers’ minds that the WLCS would want to falsify records by designating an entry date—other than the actual date. After failing, the first person went and asked a second for help.....who was also unsuccessful at defeating the software. This explains the 4-minute delay. Unbelievably, obstructing justice by a judicial officer is only a misdemeanor in California, but falsification of court records is nonetheless a felony as is the federal counterpart, which carries a 5-year maximum prison sentence. See CA Code–PEN §§ 96.5 and 115 and 18 U.S. Code §§ 1001 and/or 1506, respectively.

Figure 4

The above image shows no rejection of the amended complaint whatsoever, but the evidence reveals it was indeed obviously rejected:

Figure 5

The falsely portrayed clean filing of the amended complaint without rejection shown in Figure 4 contrasts greatly with the original complaint filing. The original filing was rejected several times. This is reflected in the “record”:

Figure 6

The final piece of the puzzle completes the picture. The “record” indicates that on April 1, 2025, the court on its “own motion” decided to move the “hearing” from April 21 to 28:

Figure 7

Since the court had just received and accepted that day the amended complaint, which revealed at that time the true names of the criminals whom I was suing—no doubt some of Vicencia’s friends—because it replaced the “Does” with actual names, he had to contrive a way to flush the case. Since I had called the court twice before April 15 and they knew I could not possibly attend the hearing in person, they decided to push the date, but not so much that I would be back in the area, and just ignore me if I happened to appear remotely, which I did. This way, their alleged 30-day service window since the date of amended complaint “filing” would be met—if the amended complaint had been recorded on March 28, 2025, which it was not—and they could dismiss the case thinking that a self-represented litigant wouldn’t catch them violating a multitude of rules (which at most only allowed for sanctions) and the U.S. Constitution. With the date moved, Vicencia could now conveniently dismiss the case as he had planned all along—or at least after I filed the amended complaint and he was aware that I was suing his friends and the entire WLCS, federal division.

Incidentally, there was no apparent hurry to hold a hearing when the complaint was first filed. Party names were essentially all redacted then. The hearing was originally scheduled seventeen days after the perceived final due date for service. However, once the defendant-criminals’ names were known as I provided in the amended complaint, there was an extreme urgency to dispose of the case. Vicencia either didn’t know or had forgotten that a litigant could register for automated email notifications regarding case activity. Without my email evidence, their inability to change the chronological ordering of the filing software (Figure 3), and the fact that they didn’t erase the one entry that showed the amended complaint had been rejected (Figure 5), their plan may have been carried out perfectly. Thankfully for me and the American public, their nefarious plan has been exposed.

By committing all the above crimes—and probably more—Vicencia revealed himself to be a criminal according to 18 U.S. Code § 4 and Branzburg v. Hayes as I proved in the amended complaint. He also unquestionably violated 18 U.S. Code § 1512(c)(2) and Cal. Pen. Code § 96.5 and almost certainly § 182 with other conspirators. Justice must be served—not injustice. There’s not a snowball’s chance any of the other criminals in the WLCS will reprimand or prosecute him as they should.

What he and other criminals like him do is, in one way, worse than Hitler’s atrocities. It is worse because Hitler had a warped, deranged ideology and eventually was stopped from doing purely evil things. On the contrary, all the evil perpetrated by these legalized criminals is far worse because it is done in the name of “justice" and without encumbrance. In fact, their heinous acts are cultivated, and these criminals are protected so they can victimize others. That's the difference.

I am not saying any of this lightly. I have “experienced” well over 100 glorified, unelected lawyers in black gowns. Only about twelve have not behaved criminally—at least not that I can prove in my cases. This means I can say—at the 95 percent confidence level with less than a 5 percent margin of error—that about 92 percent of judges are truly criminals. The margin of error for a sample size of 145 glorified lawyers in black gowns of 31,700 total here in Amerika at a 95 percent confidence level is only about 5 percent. See, for example, qualtrics.com/experience-management/research/margin-of-error.

Vicencia has committed several crimes, which include, but are not limited to, those mentioned in the last paragraph. He blocked my case, (www.stloiyf.net/case.html). One reason may be that Joseph Michaud called him after Michaud was officially served process on April 10, 2025, and was clearly made aware of the lawsuit. Michaud would have had plenty of time to call Vicencia and commit more felonies alongside him as Michaud has done numerous times in prior related matters. Regardless, multiple beings have committed multiple crimes. I can't call them "people" because they are satanic entities. In fact, the data show that—percentagewise—judges and other members of the WLCS commit more premeditated crimes than ordinary citizens and by a minimum of an order of magnitude.

I’ve submitted dozens of complaints against lawyers with and without black gowns nationwide. All have been filed under “G.” This should convince anyone that complaints against lawyers and judges are dismissed about 99 percent of the time because the fox is in charge of the henhouse.

Incidentally, Sara and I would like to announce that our blog has been selected as one of the Top Ten Anti-Corruption Blogs out of more than one thousand. We are honored to have been bestowed this distinction and will continually try to meet the requisite standards by doing our best to fight corruption in the American "justice" system every day.

Do Not Be Fooled by the Mainstream Media

2025-05-25T13:38:09-07:00

Regardless of whether you’re red, blue....purple.....or even gray like me, do not be fooled by the mainstream media (MSM). It is more concerned about ratings, image, and money these days than actual news reporting. The era of unbiased and true journalism a là Jim Lehrer and Robert MacNeil in the MacNeil/Lehrer Report is long gone. In fact, if one wants real news, the smaller media outlets like The Liberty Report with Dr. Ron Paul and blogs like this are the way to go.

To prove my point, I recently by chance met a local news reporter and her colleague. I had begun the conversation based on idle chatter about computer hardware and software issues after noticing that both of them were seated and using laptops at a local café. After I learned who they were, I thought I’d introduce myself with my full credentials.

This is when the average person had to be there to see their reaction I personally experienced. I told them that I’m the world’s leading expert regarding the corrupt U.S. legal system and that people from across the nation and around the globe contact me about their plights with our so-called “justice” system. I told the pair one case I recently filed in California would make any sane person’s head spin.

After stating that the matter was worse than “kids for cash” because it involved far more criminal actors and far more crimes being committed and that more than sixty statutory laws—twenty-two of them being felonies—were violated in order to steal my mother’s condominium, a portion of my retirement, and $2,200 of my monthly income, there was no jaw-dropping reaction from either of them. To the contrary, their facial expressions were ones a person would expect to see on someone approached by an insurance salesman or on someone who had just gotten a free roll of bathroom tissue.

They didn’t even raise an eyebrow or question anything I told them. The reporter asked if I had a card, but I gave her my email address since I didn't have a card. This was weeks ago. I have not heard from the reporter, nor did I ever expect to in the first place.

I’m convinced that reporters are told on their first day of work something along the lines of, “If any everyday people approach you about crime and corruption in the legal system, just ignore them.” The preceding is just one example in a long line of occasions when I’ve reached out to reporters by phone or email to tell them about my unbelievable story only to never hear from them again or at all.

I’m also convinced that MSM personnel have two different approaches to “reporting.” One approach is to jump right on a story that addresses crime or corruption within the world’s largest crime syndicate—the U.S. legal system—whenever the matter pits one branch of the syndicate against another and is disclosed by one of the branches. The latter part of this sentence is key. For instance, the aforementioned “kids for cash” incident was one in which federal members of the syndicate went after state members of the syndicate. In that instance, The MSM got the “green light” to report on the criminals.....well, one of the two sets of them, anyway.

Another example is “operation greylord” wherein the Federal Bureau of Iniquity came down hard on the local state syndicate in Illinois. Yet another example concerns the infamous Tom Girardi who defrauded innumerable clients who then filed complaints against him with the local bar association and other agencies that turned a blind eye to his criminal misbehavior and dropped all the complaints on the floor. However, when he pissed off the wrong person in the right position, then it was a different story entirely. Then he got hammered.

However, another approach to “reporting,” as just implied, is to completely ignore any story regarding crime and corruption in the syndicate if the story concerns a commoner who has been victimized by syndicate members—regardless of how severe, outrageous, or costly the event may have been—and the story is provided to the MSM by the victim or any other commoner.

The reason for the above duality becomes clear after digging a little. Take a look, for example, at one judge-criminal, Jack McConnell, who is the chief judge for the federal district court in Rhode Island. If you look at his followers on X, you’ll see that a good percentage of them are members of the MSM. The same is true for other supposed legal entities, such as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circus, the U.S. Supreme Syndicate blog, and other similar social media accounts. In light of these incestuous relationships, it’s no wonder why the MSM behaves as it does when presented with syndicate wrongdoing by the public—versus another arm of the syndicate.

Sadly, the heavily biased MSM today is not at all what the Framers had in mind when they created the Bill of Rights, and particularly the First Amendment. This is also true about the wildly, off-the-rails corrupt American legal system. It is only we the people who can correct the course of bias and corruption, both in MSM and in the syndicate itself. Until we do, things will only continue to worsen as we swirl down the toilet.

How an Investigation Into Possible Spying Turned Into a Child Pornography Prosecution

2025-04-27T20:05:20-07:00

FBI agents investigating a potential data leak at Boeing obtained a secret warrant to search the home computers of a company manager in California for evidence they hoped would connect him to Chinese economic espionage. Instead, they say, they allegedly found something else entirely: graphic child pornography.

With that discovery more than ten years ago, an investigation that began with sensational but ultimately unproven allegations of espionage veered into an unrelated child pornography prosecution that won Keith Gartenlaub’s conviction. Now, the Los Angeles case is testing a defendant’s ability to access information about himself that had been presented to the nation’s secretive intelligence court, which issued the warrant that let agents scour his computers. At issue is how the government uses evidence derived through the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court and under what circumstances that information should be seen by defendants, particularly when it’s repurposed for a routine criminal prosecution that has nothing to do with national security.

Gartenlaub says he has a right to know the government’s arguments that were used to obtain the warrant, and fight them. “You can’t base a search on lies,” he said in an interview with The Associated Press. He’s seeking a new trial after he was sentenced and served time, saying there’s no evidence he was aware of the child pornography or had ever accessed the images. If that’s denied, he’s likely to appeal on grounds that the warrant to inspect his computers was based on false assumptions and allegations of a crime—espionage—for which he’s never been charged.

It won’t be easy. His request to suppress pornography evidence he said was improperly obtained was denied before the trial. He’s tried to review the sealed FISA court records in hopes of attacking the FBI search, but the government refused and a judge said he wasn’t entitled to it.

The FISA court, created in 1978 to hear government surveillance requests in foreign intelligence matters, remains shrouded in secrecy. Judges can theoretically order prosecutors to share FISA information with defendants if they deem it necessary for challenging a search’s legality, but courts have consistently agreed with the government that disclosing the material could expose sensitive intelligence secrets. In Gartenlaub’s case, then-Attorney General Eric Holder advised against disclosure.

A rare exception came in 2014, when a judge in Chicago ordered the disclosure of FISA materials in a bomb-plot case. A federal appeals court overturned the decision, and the Supreme Court declined to review it.

“For defendants, access to this information is a matter of fundamental fairness, because without it they cannot meaningfully challenge whether the government’s secret searches were lawful in the first place,” American Civil Liberties Union lawyer Patrick Toomey said in an email. “For the public, this information is crucial because it is the only way to know whether the law’s basic protections for Americans have been watered down in practice, behind closed doors.”

The Justice Department noted that the judge, Christina Snyder, already ruled that the FISA warrant was lawfully issued and the evidence properly gathered. “When law enforcement lawfully obtains evidence of a serious crime, in this case a crime against children, we will pursue further investigation of that crime,” the department said in a statement.

The FBI interviewed Gartenlaub multiple times in 2013 after a Wired.com article revealed a resemblance between a new Chinese aircraft, the Xian Y-20, and the Boeing C-17, a military cargo plane, and suggested someone within Boeing may have been responsible.

A separate FBI affidavit seeking access to Gartenlaub’s Yahoo email account lays out the basis for suspicion, describing Gartenlaub as the “one engineer” who had access to C-17 data, intimate knowledge of Boeing’s computer systems and family ties to China. His wife is from China with a family he described as “well connected,” and he traveled regularly to the country and expressed frustration that Boeing sought to limit his excursions there over security concerns, the affidavit says.

A recent court filing suggested a connection to the prosecution of Su Bin, a Chinese businessman who pleaded guilty last month for his role in a Boeing hack that led to the theft of C-17 secrets. But Gartenlaub, for his part, maintains he wasn’t working on the C-17 program when the Su Bin theft is thought to have occurred and didn’t have access to the data in the first place—though, he says, thousands of other Boeing employees did. He says the FBI misstated his position at Boeing, making it sound like he had broader access than he actually had.

The FBI accessed his computers early in 2014 after obtaining the FISA warrant and arrested him months later for pornography charges. In its search the FBI says it found videos of prepubescent girls on multiple hard drives, and evidence that Gartenlaub maintained a “carefully curated and organized collection” that was copied multiple times. But Jeff Fischbach, a forensic examiner who reviewed the evidence for the defense, said there was no evidence the videos were ever opened or accessed in the years since they’d been downloaded and placed onto his computer and that other computer users may well have been responsible for the files.

“Either I’m this spy-slash-child pornographer, or I’m one of them, or I’m none of them,” Gartenlaub said. “I’m telling you, I’m none of them.”

The Justice Department's internal watchdog is reviewing a former Boeing engineer's allegations that he was unfairly investigated by the FBI on suspicion that he was spying for China, according to correspondence and court filings reviewed by The Associated Press. It's the latest challenge related to secretive surveillance powers used in some terrorism and espionage cases.

The inspector general review is unfolding amid broader scrutiny of the FBI's process for applying for court-authorized surveillance in national security investigations. Errors in applications submitted during the Russia investigation of Donald Trump's first presidential campaign, as well as in a larger sample of applications subsequently scrutinized by the watchdog office, have spurred bipartisan concerns about government surveillance powers and yielded rare alignment from pro-security and pro-privacy voices in Congress.

At issue in this case is a warrant the FBI obtained in 2014 from the secretive Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to search the computers of Keith Gartenlaub as agents investigated whether he had leaked to the Chinese design plans for a C-17 military transport plane. Gartenlaub was never charged with any espionage-related crimes, but the Justice Department did bring child pornography charges after finding images on his hard drive. He was convicted in federal court in California and sentenced to more than three years in prison.

He has long maintained his innocence, insisting that the files were not his, were never opened, and date to a period in his life when numerous people had access to his computer while he lived at a beach house. In any event, he argues, the FBI had no basis to search his computers in the first place since there was no evidence he had conspired with China.

Having now completed his sentence, he sued last year to vacate his conviction and his lifetime probation, alleging that he was victimized by an error-tainted investigation and that there was no basis to suspect him of espionage. As part of the lawsuit, Justice Department lawyers have revealed that the inspector general is reviewing Gartenlaub's complaint, acting on his request that it do so.

In a recent court filing, lawyers said the inspector general anticipated that it would take at least six additional months to finish reviewing the issues that Gartenlaub raised. In addition, an August letter from the inspector general's office to Gartenlaub's lawyer said his allegations were being looked at by the oversight and review division. A separate letter last year to Rep. Ted Lieu, D-Calif., also disclosed a review by the office.

"To me, this is a canary in a coal mine case," said Gartenlaub's lawyer Tor Ekeland. A spokeswoman for the inspector general declined to comment.

Gartenlaub has publicly maintained for at least five years that he was unfairly targeted by the FBI and that the allegations in the original application were mistaken. He has said, for instance, that the FBI misstated his position at Boeing and that he didn't have access to the information that was obtained by the Chinese so he could not have disclosed it.

"It's an entirely different thing to take a national security warrant and then use it to prosecute a domestic, criminal crime," Ekeland said. "Without that FISA search warrant, they have no case. It's not some ancillary thing."

Though Gartenlaub was convicted of unrelated crimes, his underlying allegations about flaws in the FISA process have gained traction over the last year following revelations by the inspector general of seventeen significant errors or omissions in four applications submitted to surveil a former Trump campaign aide during a probe into possible coordination between the 2016 campaign and Russia. The FBI in response issued dozens of corrective actions designed to ensure the accuracy and thoroughness of its FISA applications.

Months later, the inspector general's office revealed that a broader audit of twenty-nine FISA applications had turned up problems in each, including apparent errors or inadequately supported facts. The FBI has said that most of the errors were minor and would not have affected a judge's decision that there was probable cause for the surveillance.

"I'm no Trump fan, but I thank him for this one," Ekeland said. "He shined attention onto this bloated national security apparatus that is unaccountable."

Joseph L. Michaud and His Filthy Pack of Rats Finally Served Process

2025-03-30T19:49:24-07:00

It has taken a tremendous amount of patience, tact, and resourcefulness and many years to finally serve one of the worst lawyers—now a judge—who has ever walked the earth with civil process of a lawsuit. He has relentlessly blocked my cases in the past by making phone calls to the court, committing crimes in doing so, and getting the cases dismissed. As anyone might guess, this is highly illegal and is in fact criminal on many levels. I had to get quite creative to shield the case from him until he was finally served by a third party.

One thing I had to do was use “Does” in the original case filing. I did this because Joseph Michaud configured his PACER account to get new case notifications based on party names.....so that he could then call the respective court, conspire with its personnel, get the case dismissed, and commit more crimes in the process. Including multiple counts of the same offense, he has committed dozens and dozens of state and federal felonies.

Not to pick on him in particular, there’s plenty of criminal activity to go around. Another miscreant, Mark Jeremy Bennett, was responsible for illegally flushing one of my cases. Service to him has netted over 100 views in less than eight hours:

Keep in mind that they are not looking at the civil complaint and associated evidence to see how they can settle the case. They’re sifting through everything to see what they can use to prosecute or stop me. Good luck with that. This extraordinary number of views basically means that all the rats are frantically scurrying to try and protect themselves. Incidentally, the right column of data in the above image is from Streak email tracking, which a free browser plug-in I've been using for years. It is a great way to track the criminal misbehavior of lawyers and lawyers who wear black gowns.

They are going to try their damndest to flush the entire case. The only time members of the world’s largest crime syndicate—the U.S. legal system—are held accountable is when one arm of the syndicate decides to attack another arm of it. “Kids for Cash” and “Operation Greylord,” for example, are two instances wherein the state syndicate was steamrolled by the federal syndicate. When everyday people try to take down the syndicate for its criminal wrongdoing, it’s a different story entirely. Instead of prosecuting the offenders, the syndicate protects them with falsification of records, manufactured evidence, sealing of records, and whatnot.

If people only knew just how off-the-rails corrupt the syndicate was, there would be rioting at the courthouses. People just don’t believe something in our nation could be that bad. It isn’t. It’s worse. I always tell people to imagine just how corrupt they think the syndicate is, and, once they have that thought in their heads, to multiply it by three, and then they’d be close. Scariest of all, we’re headed toward the hairpin turn and still accelerating. We haven’t even begun braking yet. Even as corrupt as the syndicate is, corruption continues to get exponentially worse.

If the syndicate manages to flush my case once again, another post will follow. But people should be aware that I am doing my best to create MAJA (make all judges accountable). This will be the best administration in my lifetime for such an endeavor. The reason is that President Trump—love him or hate him—is quite likely the only president who has experienced or will experience our “justice” system in all its splendor. He was all set.....until he decided to run for re-election. Then he had four indictments on his plate. Just a coincidence. Right.

If the syndicate can be weaponized against him, you can bet your bottom dollar it can be weaponized against Jane or John Q. Public. Everyone should be giving me all the support they can because, if I can do what needs to be done, these criminals will be running for the hills. I will essentially establish a brand new legal system with real checks and balances where everyday people can expect—and receive—true justice.

Judges Taking Bribes via Money Laundering: An Epidemic Worse than COVID-19

2025-02-23T10:35:18-08:00

In what is being called the largest single day of clemency, President Biden commuted 1500 sentences, including the lengthy sentence of a Pennsylvania judge. Michael Conahan was convicted of funneling juveniles to for-profit detention facilities in exchange for $2.1 million in kickbacks, in what came to be nationally known as the “Kids for Cash” scandal.

The implications of this need to be further examined. Biden has been quoted as saying “America was built on the promise of possibility and second chances.” He went on to state that “I have the great privilege of extending mercy to people who have demonstrated remorse and rehabilitation, restoring opportunity for Americans to participate in daily life and contribute to their communities.”

It appears, however, that there is more to this story than a scummy judge getting caught and rehabilitated and subsequently set free. Research indicates that somewhere in the range of ⅔ of the judges already checked have financial profiles that are redolent of money laundering and bribe taking.

Let that sink in. A full ⅔ of sitting judges, both state and federal, have been confirmed as on the take. And given that the research involves only those partaking of the mortgage scam (more on this in a moment) and excludes other vehicles for bribing a judge, these numbers need to be seen as deeply conservative.

The mortgage scam works in this way—Judge X takes out a loan and Y pays it back. This has the patina of respectability and it is only by doing a deep dive into the judge’s finances, such as was done here and again here that one begins to see the pervasiveness of this vehicle for enriching pivotal members of the legal system. Also, this method runs a detour around the IRS mandate that any deposit of over $10,000 must of necessity be flagged and reported up the line of command.

Multiple individuals have attempted to turn the results of these investigations over to the FBI, which refuses to take this on. Several years ago, a veterans group contacted the US attorney in the state of Washington with the results of a similar investigation and when the US attorney failed to act, the group turned the research process on the US attorney herself, with dramatic results.

Jim Jordan’s subcommittee on the Weaponization of Government was contacted by this reporter with details as to the weaponization of the courts. While those who answered at that subcommittee were exquisitely polite, there was no follow up on the allegations. The subcommittee was also contacted for input on this article. At the time of going to press, there was no response.

There exist other vehicles for funneling money to a complicit judge. When the judges in Nevada got national attention, due to the prosecution of an officer of the court, guardian April Parks, this reporter began to look at the involved judges.

Once again, two out of three involved judges had problematic mortgage histories. However, one of the worst offenders (in terms of his decisions impacting guardianship) looked to be clean, financially. Input from another reporter that this court heavyweight was using casinos to launder his ill-gotten gains was unverifiable.

When Arizona legislator Liz Harris sponsored a talk by researcher Jaqueline Breger, which extensively revealed the use of mortgages to pay off complicit politicos, the retaliation against Harris was swift and severe. Harris was expelled from the Legislature. While this reporter does not endorse some of Breger’s claims, such as her claim that the Mexican cartels are paying these bribes, much of Breger’s research concerning the mortgage scam appears to be valid.

To be clear, the mortgage scam is only one vehicle for funneling money to complicit politicos, though at 60+% involvement, it may qualify as a preferred vehicle. Retired Illinois attorney Ken Ditkowsky has this to say about other vehicles for funneling dirty money:

1) Direct payment to the Judge or his/her bagman

2) Payment to a family member or nominee – this can be direct or via a no work job. Hiring the Judge’s wife as an employee is a common tactic. (Note by JCP—or hiring the President’s son)

3) Purchase of goods or services from a facility that would benefit the judge. Mrs. Holtzer was an insurance agent. The target to obtain a favorable judgment merely had to purchase a life insurance policy from Mrs. Holtzer.

As the Department of the Treasury became more sophisticated the quid pro quo became more subtle. You are aware to the payments by the person bribing the public official to a creditor of the Judge, and its various variations, but the variations on this theme can become quite sophisticated. One of the most common is granting the Judge or a nominee participation rights in a project or business. Nomination of the Judge or his nominee to the BOARD OF DIRECTORS of a corporation provides a no-work scenario. The variations on this theme include:

1. Purchase of equity interest at a very discounted price

2. Gifts or purchases of “rights” and/or stock options

3. Opportunity to purchase negotiable Bonds or other securities at discounted prices.

4. Grants/purchases/options to purchase et al of interests in limited partnerships etc. (Nursing home interests are a common commodity.)

An almost foolproof scenario is the “stock tip.” The person seeking to bribe the public official is engaged in a transaction to acquire XYZ corporation. XYZ is a closely held company traded on a stock exchange. The judge with prior disclosed knowledge either in his own name or in the name of a nominee either purchases or sells openly and notoriously the stock.

Participation in various transactions such as mortgage foreclosures is yet another avenue. The Sallas case is an illustration of the same. Lot 6 (the Sallas home) is forced into a default. A Bank favorable loan (such as a commercial loan) is forced upon the victim. The Guardian obtains control over the family funds and creates a default. The default results in a mortgage foreclosure before a favorable judge. (This favorable judge’s participation will not appear anywhere until the final transaction)

The judge (or judges involved) for their part makes it possible so that the mortgage slips through without a hitch. In the event of protest or any law enforcement interest, the plaintiff in the foreclosure action creates the façade of the sale of defaulted note and the corrupt judge allows the sham note assignee to proceed as if it was the original note holder. (For instance, in the Sallas case a “judgment” not referred to commercial loan document suddenly appeared in the calculation of the balance due. The fact that this judgment is obviously a sham – is irrelevant. Ditto is the fact that the loan transaction in the Sallas case was a criminal act see 755 ILCS 5/11a – 22 and 720 ILCS 5/17 – 56.

A decree of foreclosure is entered – all defenses are ignored as per the extracurricular agreement, and the property is sold to another nominee. The new nominee now promulgates a series of mesne sales until Chicago Title and Trust will feel comfortable in granting a marketable title. When this occurs a group of investors (now including the judges who are to receive remuneration) is formed and the real estate is sold. Out of the profits, the judges are given their compensation for services rendered. Capital gain taxes are paid.

There are variations on the theme. These, however, are the most common.

Back to the implications of President Biden granting clemency to a dirty judge—the Fish Who Got Caught. If indeed the judiciary, which is the third branch of government, has been compromised through a pay-off scam in order to secure politically preferable results, what does this say about the other two branches? Are they in the dark or are they also on board?

According to its definition, the judiciary is the branch of government charged with the interpretation of laws and the administration of justice. Judges enjoy immunity from prosecution and behave as if they are kings and those appearing in front of them are simply pawns. Generally, judges are not sanctioned for failing to follow the law. If judges are instead tasked with political imperatives, rather than with the administration of justice, do we even have a level playing field at this juncture? Or is it all a big charade?

In an interview last year, Trump’s choice for the new head of the FBI, Kash Patel, referred to judges as “political terrorists.” As the country transitions to a new administration, we will soon see if these perceptions are backed up by action.

-----

Janet Phelan has been on the trail of the biological weapons agenda since the new millennium. Her book on the pandemic, At the Breaking Point of History: How Decades of US Duplicity Enabled the Pandemic, has been published in 2021 by Trine Day and is available on Amazon and elsewhere. Her articles on this issue have appeared in Activist Post, New Eastern Outlook, Infowars and elsewhere. Educated at Grinnell College, UC Berkeley and the University of Missouri Graduate School of Journalism, Janet "jumped ship" and since 2004 has been writing exclusively for independent media. Her articles previously appeared in the Los Angeles Times, Oui Magazine, Orange Coast Magazine, the Long Beach Press Telegram, the Santa Monica Daily Press and other publications. She is the author of the groundbreaking expose, EXILE, and two books of poetry. She resides abroad. You may follow Janet on Parler here @JanetPhelan and Twitter @JanetPhelan14. To support her work, please go to JanetPhelan.

The U.S. Legal System and All Things Related Blog