"Will Judith Kaye Use Her Jimmy Choo Shoes to Run to the Nearest OAG Exit?" - Judith Kaye - Andrew Cuomo, Conflict of Interst. Cuomo Family Secrets.

"" Once upon a time, a prince named Andrew who would be king, prevailed upon his fairy godmother named Judith to wave her magic wand and make his problems miraculously disappear. . .

Ms. Kaye,

Since you now have an email address at the OAG, presumably with office space, staff, and expenses paid with tax dollars (courtesy of Andrew Cuomo), I will be resending the three emails I previously sent you at your private law office on 3/12/10 to your OAG email address.

As to your own lack of monetary compensation, the financial arrangement you made with Andrew Cuomo to work pro bono appears to be a generous offer to an uninformed public and a sleeping and non-inquisitive NY press.

I am not in either category. Therefore, I am insisting that you accept $1.00 from NYS funds--not a penny more or less--in payment for your services as independent counsel to the OAG. Informed individuals and lawyers know the legal significance of either offering or accepting state funds--even $1.00--in a situation rife with the possibility of potential criminal charges later being sought.

I would also request that you go on public record that you have accepted $1.00 as salary to serve as independent counsel. Andrew Cuomo's refusal to offer $1.00 from state funds and your refusal to accept $1.00 from state funds could be very telling re: what you knew before agreeing to be independent counsel and what Andrew Cuomo expects from you as independent counsel.

My instincts are hardly ever wrong.

Andrew Cuomo has already gone on public record claiming that his appointment of you as independent counsel was to insure the public of the integrity of the investigation. I believe otherwise--that he had an ulterior and improper motive for appointing you.

Andrew Cuomo is first and foremost a politician and politicians are infamous for granting favors now and collecting payment later. Andrew Cuomo's appointment of you can reasonably and legitimately be viewed as his collecting a delayed payment that was still owed to his father by you..

Governor Paterson has known for some time about the Cuomo family's dirty little secrets. He may be legally blind, but he's not dumb. Rest assured, he knew exactly what he was doing when he asked Andrew Cuomo to investigate any charges against him.

I would venture that he's not laying awake at night worrying whether there will be any criminal charges brought against him.

As to your own predicament and for your own consideration, I acknowledge that claims of appearance of impropriety/conflict of interest do not arise simply out of mere friendship. However, your relationship with the Cuomo family goes well beyond that standard, as even you should be willing to admit. To be blunt, your professional standing and social status is undeniably associated with Mario Cuomo.

Who would Andrew Cuomo be if his father wasn't Mario Cuomo?

Like most attorneys, he would most likely be toiling away in relative obscurity at some non-prestigious law firm or employed by some government agency in an equally obscure position--similar to the career path you possibly would have suffered except for the same Mario Cuomo.

Please don't take this last comment as a personal insult--it's just a recognition of reality, even for myself. There is always someone more intelligent, more capable, more insightful, more principled, more connected, etc. when it comes to filling any position.

Given the Cuomo family dirty little secrets, doesn't it seem strange to you that Andrew Cuomo would ask you to be independent counsel when there are thousands of NY lawyers with prosecutorial experience who have no indebtedness to the Cuomo family or connection to any of NY's hidden political scandals?

Doesn't instinctively knowing that Andrew Cuomo will very possibly expect you to remain silent about crimes and misconduct not connected to David Paterson but linked to the OAG and the NYSP cause you any angst?

Wouldn't any deliberate decision to look the other way be in violation of certain provisions of the Lawyer's Code of Professional Conduct? As a former chief judge for NYS who has written books on ethics, you very likely know this code forward and backward.

Additionally and perhaps irrelevant, you most likely are aware of Christine Anderson's lawsuit claiming that the disciplinary committee for the 1st department of the NY OCA whitewashed and covered up charges made against politically connected attorneys. If you recall, this suit was filed during the last years of your service as chief judge.

Furthermore, any future claim by you that you were only appointed to investigate the Booker matter and World Series tickets matter and, therefore, can ignore any damaging information re: your main benefactor, his son, and others would be subject to justifiable ridicule.

I would hope that you, as a former NYS chief judge, would hold yourself to the highest ethical standards possible and won't resort to "lawyer speak" in defense of your actions if ever questioned.

Andrew Cuomo, and not me, has placed you in a compromising position that should mandate your own withdrawal as independent counsel.

It would be naive to believe that attorneys representing various targets of your investigation who have already been sent the three emails you were sent would not want concessions for their clients or input into any of your findings in return for their own silence.

The fact that each side knows of the Cuomo family's dirty little secrets need not be verbalized, knowledge alone being sufficient enough to cast doubt on the credibility and integrity of any investigation.and its findings.

It would seem to me that there is only one available option if you wish to continue as independent counsel, i,e., to make a full and public disclosure of the compromising position Andrew Cuomo has chosen to put you in--something, I doubt, you would be willing to do.

In the event that you are not a true liberal like myself who can stand on principle, this insignificant nobody and ordinary US citizen would offer this advice: Use your Jimmy Choo high heels and presumed arthritic knees to run as fast as possible to the nearest OAG exit. Prince Andrew, who would be king, is not worthy enough for you to risk the potential damage to your own public reputation. ""

Source
Send in by A Reader

Read more...

"At SEC, the system can be deaf to Whistleblowing" - I say the SEC has Motives to NOT Listen as they Still are NOT Listening To Billion Dollar Tips.

" By Zachary A. Goldfarb
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, January 21, 2010

Eric Kolchinsky was an executive at Moody's, the credit rating company, when he called a top official at the Securities and Exchange Commission in September to warn that his firm might be violating securities law. He reported that Moody's was blessing mortgage-backed investments that it knew were dangerous, according to a person familiar with the conversation.

The SEC official assured Kolchinsky that someone from the agency would call him back shortly. But the call never came, Kolchinsky later told congressional investigators who were examining how the credit rating industry's failures contributed to the financial crisis. He had gone to Congress after losing patience with the SEC.

Kolchinsky is one in a series of whistleblowers who in recent years tried to tip off the SEC to potential wrongdoing, only to be ignored, misunderstood or left to wonder whether they were being listened to. The SEC has no system in place to guide how officials should handle tips and complaints from outsiders, making it difficult for investigators to take advantage of an invaluable source of information.

This failure helped to continue two of the most celebrated frauds of the last decade for several years, potentially costing unwitting investors millions of dollars. Countless others may have been left vulnerable to shysters because of warnings that went unheeded.

Since SEC Chairman Mary L. Schapiro took office last year, she has said that fixing the holes in the process for handling tips and complaints has been a top priority. But improving the way hundreds of thousands of tips are analyzed and pursued has proven difficult.

The SEC's enforcement division got back in touch with Kolchinsky about his allegations only after he told the story publicly to a congressional committee last fall, according to a person familiar with the matter.

The SEC said it responded to Kolchinsky's concerns but declined to provide details or to say how fast it did so. Moody's said it examined his allegations and found nothing improper.
The SEC has a haphazard, decentralized system for analyzing outsider information.

Tips arrive by phone, mail and e-mail to officials throughout the agency -- investor education to enforcement divisions. A study commissioned by the SEC last year and conducted by Mitre, a nonprofit group that does research for the federal government, found that the SEC lacks technology to analyze tips and complaints, as well as cohesive policies for what officials should do when they get information.

Whistleblower complaints are one of the main ways that investigators should be tipped to wrongdoing, SEC officials say, along with inconsistencies in financial filings and alerts from financial exchanges about suspicious trading patterns. But the SEC lags behind some other federal agencies in handling tips.

The Internal Revenue Service, for instance, pays reward money to whistleblowers who provide credible information about tax fraud. The Federal Trade Commission has set up a call center for tips and complaints.

On top of structural problems at the SEC, agency officials individually made mistakes in handling several recent cases, sometimes violating agency rules.

Members of Schapiro's management team said they recognized problems with the system for handling whistleblowers shortly after taking over.

"There was no uniformity to it. Every division and office had its own system of recording, tracking or handling tips and complaints. That system was pretty rudimentary," said Steve Cohen, the official tasked by Schapiro to overhaul the agency's tips, complaints and whistleblower program. "We're already working to acquire and deploy technology that centralizes all of the agency's tips and complaints so they can be sorted, reviewed, analyzed and tracked."

No shortage of witnesses

The SEC's struggles were underlined over the past two years with the revelation of two huge Ponzi schemes.

In the case of Bernard L. Madoff, whistleblowers had provided credible information to various SEC units for years.

The most prominent of these informants, a Boston financial analyst named Harry Markopolos, contacted the enforcement division on numerous occasions, according to the SEC's inspector general.

In one instance, Markopolos provided a detailed explanation of why Madoff's business was probably a fraud. Enforcement officials listened, but they dismissed him in their internal discussions. Two former enforcement officials told the inspector general that they discounted Markopolos's information because he was not an insider in Madoff's company.

Then, a few months after the Madoff scheme exploded into the headlines, the SEC exposed a second large Ponzi scheme, run by R. Allen Stanford. But that happened five years after an insider went to the SEC, warning that Stanford might be conducting a fraudulent business.

Leyla Wydler had been a vice president at Stanford's Houston-based company when she first started asking her supervisors tough questions about what the firm did with clients' money, according to her testimony before Congress last year. Her superiors were evasive, and she ultimately was fired.

After that, she went to the National Association of Securities Dealers, a private industry regulator overseen by the SEC. The NASD dismissed her concerns. Then in September 2004, she contacted the SEC's Fort Worth office, according to her congressional testimony. She followed up with a letter to an official there, questioning whether clients' money had been invested in the way Stanford said.

She never heard from the SEC again -- until January 2009, days before the SEC finally filed a case against Stanford, according to her testimony. The agency wanted to know more about her allegations. An inspector general report from June 2009 said the SEC began looking into Stanford years earlier but struggled to build a case against him.

Turning in the Tipster

In one case, it was the SEC that blew the whistle on Peter Sivere, an informant.

Sivere worked in the compliance office of New York investment bank J.P. Morgan Chase. As part of a team helping the bank furnish documents related to a 2004 SEC probe into suspected illegal trading, he found an e-mail that he thought was incriminating.

According to a subsequent report by the SEC inspector general, the e-mail said J.P. Morgan was knowingly providing hundreds of millions of dollars in credit to a firm "in the business of day trading mutual funds" -- which is illegal.

Sivere asked his superiors if this e-mail had been turned over to the SEC but did not get an answer. Instead, he was taken off the SEC project, according to the inspector general report. Sivere accessed his superiors' e-mail accounts to retrieve relevant e-mails, then contacted the SEC. He told the agency that he had relevant documents and asked whether he could receive a reward. He was told he was not eligible, but he turned over the documents anyway.

Sivere informed J.P. Morgan that he had contacted the SEC.

The company fired him, partly on the grounds that he had "sought payment from the SEC to provide documents and information to them outside of the normal scope of their investigation," according to a letter company lawyers wrote defending his dismissal. J.P. Morgan declined to comment for this article.

Sivere was shocked to learn that J.P. Morgan knew he had inquired about a bounty. He had been promised that his discussions with the SEC were confidential.

An SEC internal probe found that an investigator working on the case disclosed Sivere's information to J.P. Morgan's lawyers, violating the agency's confidentiality rules. The inspector general recommended that the SEC official who made the disclosure be referred for disciplinary action. None was taken, according to agency documents.

Retraining the Watchdog

Cohen, who is overhauling the SEC's whistleblower practices, said a database, jury-rigged from existing technology, will be in place this month to centralize all tips and complaints. Officials said that by the end of 2010, they hope to develop technology that would not only centralize the data but also automatically analyze them for patterns to help officials prioritize cases.

Currently, the SEC is setting procedures for responding to whistleblowers and is creating an office of market intelligence to coordinate how the agency's various units respond to tips.

The agency also wants to be able to reward whistleblowers, which it can only do now for insider-trading cases. The SEC has requested that Congress pass legislation giving it the ability to offer financial rewards to people who provide evidence of violations of securities law. ""

Source of Article
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/20/AR2010012005125_2.html

The SEC Gets Tips that Will inevitable Cost Shareholder Millions and they HAVE No System in place to really handle these tips, yet they act like they are taking in Tips and Handling them. The Iviewit Technologies Case will one day explode into Billions in Loss and the SEC has ignored the Eliot Bernstein SEC Complaint - and has know of the Involvement of Proskauer Rose way before the Standford Billions were lost. More on the Iviewit Stolen Patent and what Companies are affected go to http://www.deniedpatent.com/ and www.Iviewit.TV

Why is there no Accountability for the SEC Insiders that let these Billion Dollar Scams Happen then after the Scam and many innocent investors lose everything, the SEC insider gets a a Really Good Job at a high profile law firm. And no one seems to raise an eyebrow.

All these Billion Dollar Investment schemes seem to have the same thing in common. They have a Mega Law Firm behind them helping them, and the Law firms such as Proskauer Rose seem to have No Accountability for the Damage they due to investors.

In the Stanford investment Scandal SEC Sjoblom went to Proskauer Rose - talk about a conflict of Interest - Proskauer Rose seems to be behind a whole lot of these Billion Dollar Scams and they never seem to be held accountable.

In the Dreier Scandal there was Proskauer Rose LLP Attorney Sheila Gowan.

In the Madoff Scandal and there is said to a woman who fled the SEC to the Law Firm Proskauer Rose and that she is fingered all over the SEC report on Madoff failures.

So the SEC seems to hire these lawyers and let them run these scams and there seems to be no REAL
regulators of any kind for the ones in place seem to be part of the organized RICO Enterprise of Criminal Lawyers and Law Firms and the US court System does not seem to be able to do anything about them.

Is the SEC Liable for Billions to Trillions of Investors money when it is Obviously, Easily proved that the SEC Ignored TIPS for Years upon Years in all these cases. Time to Sue the SEC. This Government Agent should not be above the law, it is as if they let this stuff go on - on Purpose for pay offs and cushy jobs... and year after year the same scheme plays out and no one seems to be able to bring Justice, Accountability, or Real Action from the SEC to do what the Duty of the SEC is....

Links

Sheila M. Gowan - Proskauer Rose - Iviewit
http://www.free-press-release.com/news-iviewit-trillion-fed-suit-defendant-proskauer-rose-sued-in-global-class-action-re-stanford-ponzi-1252249099.html

Standford - Proskauer Rose - Thomas Sjoblom
http://www.proskauersucks.com/2010/01/thomas-v-sjoblom-allen-stanford.html

Madoff - Proskauer Rose
http://www.proskauerrosesucks.com/2010/02/proskauer-rose-madoff-mary-shapiro-sec.html

Read more...

Eliot Bernstein of Iviewit Technologies files SEC and FBI Complaint with Mary Schapiro, against Warner Bros., AOL Inc., Time Warner, Intel, SGI, and

SEC Complaint Filed, is the SEC Listening .. It Does not sound like it. The SEC must be covering up for Favors owed, covering and protecting billionair tech companies and Above the Law Law Firms Like Foley and Lardner and Proskauer Rose.

Eliot Bernstein of Iviewit Technologies files SEC & FBI Complaint with Mary Schapiro & Others against Warner Bros., AOL Inc., Time Warner, Intel, SGI, Lockheed Martin, Proskauer Rose, Foley & Lardner.

"" March 14, 2010 --

FORMAL CRIMINAL COMPLAINT TO SEC & FBI
RE SHAREHOLDER FRAUD BY LEADING BLUE CHIPS

Corp Management of Time Warner (NYSE: TWX), Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc., AOL Inc. (NYSE: AOL), Intel Corporation (NASDAQ: INTC), Silicon Graphics, Inc. (delisted NYSE: SGI) & successor Silicon Graphics International (NASDAQ: SGI), Sony Corporation (NYSE/ADR: SNE) , Lockheed Martin Corporation (NYSE: LMT), Ernst & Young Global Limited have known about the Trillion Dollar Iviewit Liabilities for years & allegedly have concealed the liabilities from Shareholders & in some instances reorganized to the detriment of Shareholders in alleged fraudulent transactions, which may lead to Shareholder Rescissory Rights & catastrophic damage to the companies as complained of to Fed Officials.FEB 12, 2010 CRIMINAL COMPLAINTThe SEC Complaint filed Feb 12, 2010,

“Iviewit & Eliot I. Bernstein Official Formal Complaint…against Warner Bros. Entertainment, Inc., AOL Inc. & Time Warner, regarding Trillion Dollar alleged Fraud on Shareholders; FASB No. 5 & other SEC accounting violations & violations of State, Federal & Int’l Laws; Rescissory Rights of Shareholders; Evidence & Important Info for the SEC regarding ongoing SEC Investigations of Bernard L. Madoff, Marc S. Dreier, Sir Robert Allen Stanford, Proskauer Rose, Galleon, Enron Broadband, Enron, Arthur Andersen & more”

http://www.iviewit.tv/wordpress/?p=274

and

http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20100206%20FINAL%20SEC%20FBI%20and%20more%20COMPLAINT%20Against%20Warner%20Bros%20Time%20Warner%20AOL176238nscolorlow.pdf

SEC COMPLAINT INTEL, LOCKHEED MARTIN & SGIA SEC complaint also was filed by Iviewit against Intel, SGI & Lockheed & similar allegations were levied against these corps for Patent Theft, knowing infringement & Shareholder Fraud.

The March 29th 2009 SEC Complaint to Shapiro titled “Complaint Regarding Intel Corp & Possible Trillion Dollar Fraud on Intel Shareholders & Others”http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/United%20States%20District%20Court%20Southern%20District%20NY/20090325%20FINAL%20Intel%20SEC%20Complaint%20SIGNED2073.pdf

12 COUNT 12 TRILLION DOLLAR FED RICO & ANTITRUST SUIT LEGALLY MARKED “RELATED” TO NY SUPREME COURT WHISTLEBLOWER SUIT

Liabilities for the complained of companies centers on both knowing technology infringements & liabilities from failure to report the Fed RICO & ANTITRUST filed by Iviewit & now legally marked “RELATED” to the Whistleblower suit of Christine C. Anderson, a former staff attorney for the NY Supreme Court Appellate Division. Anderson gave riveting testimony of systemic corruption to the NY State Senate Judiciary & in sworn testimony in before Judge Shira Scheindlin of Whitewashing & Criminal Obstruction by Court Officials for “Favored Lawyers & Law Firms, the US Attorney in New York, the DA and Asst DA” or words to that effect. Anderson further fingered one of the “CLEANERS” of ATTORNEY MISCONDUCT COMPLAINTS at the NY Supreme Court as Naomi Goldstein.A “CLEANER” at the ETHICS department of NY responsible for attorney regulation in Manhattan & the WallStreet financial district, perhaps the reason the country is suffering from a lack of attorney regulation in the heart of the financial district that has led to lax or complicit regulators and prosecutors and a worldwide economic meltdown.

Anderson’s testimony http://www.iviewit.tv/20090608nysjudiciaryhearing/index.htmhttp://www.iviewit.tv/wordpress/?p=205

Bernstein testimony before the NY Senate Judiciary of systemic corruption that has blocked due process & procedure via corrupt infiltration of the NY Courts @http://www.iviewit.tv/wordpress/?p=189http://www.iviewit.tv/wordpress/?p=165

HOUSE OF CARD COLLAPSING ON NY CRIME SYNDICATE INSIDE NY COURTS, ETHICS DEPARTMENTS, PUBLIC OFFICES & REGULATORY AGENCIES BY CRIMINAL LAW FIRMS & LAWYERSThe House of Cards is Crumbling on Key Players in the Iviewit Scandal as the NY Corruption Scandal Elevates to Senior NY Political Figures including Cuomo & members of the NY Supreme Court & US Fed Courts in NY. Proskauer Rose.

Proskauer, mastermind of the bungled attempt to steal the Iviewit patents through Fraud on the US Patent Office & further bungled attempts to cover up the crimes in the NY Courts is under further scrutiny with Proskauer’s direct involvement in the Stanford Financial Ponzi & subsequent resignation of partner Thomas Sjoblom, a former SEC enforcement officer, allegedly found coaching Stanford employees on how to lie to SEC & FBI investigators at a Miami Airport Hanger preceding the arrest of Stanford & his employees.

Proskauer also sued in a Class Action suit for the entire 7 billion dollar Stanford losses & sued by an arrested Stanford employee. Proskauer has further direct ties to both the Madoff & Dreier Ponzis.NY Attorney General CuomoFollowing the illegal representation by the NY AG in the Iviewit RICO & ANTITRUST suit & Anderson’s Whistleblower suit under Spitzer as NY AG, the Cuomo Admin continues to represent illegally State Defendants in both cases left over by Spitzer (a named Defendant in the RICO and Antitrust).

As the Iviewit & Anderson claims are further investigated & litigated these present the largest liability to Cuomo’s run for any office as the largest scandal brewing in NY begins to unravel with his offices dead center.

Anderson’s filing http://www.frankbrady.org/TammanyHall/Documents_files/Anderson%20111609%20Filing.pdf

Iviewit filings of Illegal rep by Cuomo @http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/United%20States%20District%20Court%20Southern%20District%20NY/20080305%20Final%20Plaintiff%20Oposition%20to%20AG%20Cuomo%20letter%20email%20copy.pdfhttp://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/United%20States%20District%20Court%20Southern%20District%20NY/20090129%20Final%20Extension%20of%20Time%202%20SIGNED%20low.pdf

The US District CourtWith Anderson’s revelations in the US District Court & the Jury finding that her 1st Amendment Rights to Free Speech regarding Whistleblower Allegations had been violated, the whole case has been called into question & further questioned due to the ILLEGAL REPRESENTATION of the NY AG Cuomo’s office. Based on Cuomo’s illegal representation of State Officials, Anderson filed for an entirely new hearing based on the Cuomo’s mass conflicts. Iviewit alleges that NY AG Cuomo’s illegal representation of State Defendants, Officially & Personally, violates his office duties & obligations of honest services to NY, public office rules and violates state & federal laws, whereby the Conflicts of Interest act to block investigation of the State Defendants fingered by Whistleblower Anderson & in Iviewit’s suit, causing Obstruction of Justice through Fraud on the Court. Serious allegations for Cuomo who continues to illegally represent State Officials on public funds, while failing to investigate those same public officials, including former NY Chief Judge Judith Kaye.

Also of concern is if these massive liabilities have been reported to State Auditors by Cuomo?The US 2nd CircuitIn the US Second Circuit, Iviewit filed a “Motion to Compel” compelling that court to follow law, as with Anderson’s revelations exposing court members, that court has tried to ILLEGALLY Dismiss all the legally “related” cases to Anderson in attempts to bury them & keep the lids on the scandal that may lead them to exchange their legal robes for prison garb. Motion to Compel

http://www.iviewit.tv/wordpress/?p=78http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/United%20States%20District%20Court%20Southern%20District%20NY/20090908%20FINAL%20Emergency%20Motion%20to%20Compel%20SIGNED44948.pdf ""

"Addressed to:
SEC Chair Mary Shapiro
SEC IG, H. David Kotz
IG OF THE US DOJ, Glenn Fine
FBI
HOUSE & SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
NY SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
US AG, Eric Holder

Treasury IG, David Gouvaia
SBA IG, Peggy Gustafson & Daniel O’Rourke

US DEP OF COMMERCE IG, Todd Zinser
Under Sec of Commerce for Intellectual Property & Dir of the USPTO, David Kappos
Deputy Under Sec of Commerce for Intellectual Property & Deputy Dir of the USPTO, Sharon Barner

USPTO - OFFICE OF ENROLLMENT & DISCIPLINE DIR, Harry I. Moatz
US PRESIDENT, Hon President of the US, Barack H. Obama II
FILED AGAINST
Warner Bros. Entertainment, Inc.
Chair & CEO: Barry Meyer

Pres & COO: Alan Horn
EVP & CFO: Edward Romano
VP & Chief Patent Counsel: Wayne Smith
AOL, Inc.
Chair & CEO: Tim Armstrong
GC & EVP: Ira Parker
Counsel - Patent Lit, Prosecution & Licensing: Christopher Day
Exec Escalation Team: Jerry McKinley

Time Warner, Inc.
Chair & CEO: Jeffrey Bewkes
EVP & GC: Paul Cappuccio
MARCH 29, 2009 SEC COMPLAINT INTEL, LOCKHEED MARTIN & SGI "

Press Release for Immediate Release

Read more...

Jonathan Lippman - Chief Judge Judith Kaye, March 7th 2007 - Appellate Division

" RE: VERIFIED CRIMINAL COMPLAINT /AFFIDAVIT OF TRUTH WITH EVIDENCE, AGAINST JONATHAN LIPPMAN’S TRESPASS AS A NYS CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE AND HIS DOCUMENTED CRIMINAL REPITITIOUS, PATTERN AND PRACTICED LAWLESS USURPATIONS, USURPING POWER HE DOES NOT LEGITIMATELY POSSESS AND THE DISREGARD OF SUCH, EFFECTUATING THE BELOW JONATHAN LIPPMAN GLOBAL ODIOUS CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY AND AGAINST EQUAL PROTECTIONS EMBEDDED IN GOD GIVEN AND CONSTITUTIONAL PUBLIC SAFETY RIGHTS: "

"" Dear Public Officials:

THIS Criminal Complaint Truth Affidavit is written pursuant to Almighty God the Creator God given rights so all people can live free from public record documented Jonathan Lippman, NYS Chief Administrative Judicial Trespasser criminal, seditious, odious scourge, usurpations MANDATING, REQUIRING, AUTHORIZING, his arrest, removal, and impeachment, accordingly.

Jonathan Lippman’s heinous crimes, criminal usurpations, legal fiction administration, persistent and willful insurrection and rebellion against the New York and the United States of America Constitutions effectuated a deadly Public Defraud requiring his arrest as his actions and the attachments attached hereto epitomize his high misdemeanors, felonies, malfeasance in office and are documented public atrocities with genocidal and deadly power and control
ramifications.

Above all, I am filing this Criminal Complaint Truth Affidavit against Jonathan Lippman with particularity to the fact that all persons are born equally free, and have certain natural, inherent and inalienable rights, among which are the rights of enjoying and defending life and liberty, of acquiring, possessing and protecting property, and of seeking and obtaining safety and happiness.

These God given rights have been LAWLESSLY obstructed via lawless disregarded life
threatening usurpations inflicted on humankind near and far. These crimes are
documented in the above and below offices and documented in the public record
of the below mentioned law suit.

This Criminal Complaint Truth Affidavit is written with emphasis on TRUTHFUL DOCUMENTATION OF JONATHAN LIPPMAN’S verifiable crimes that defrauded and OVER THREW the United States system of government, for his power craze personal gain while trespassing as a judge in the law suit against him titled 1 NO. 1: LEONARD J. LEVENSON, ET AL. V. JONATHAN LIPPMAN,&C., ET AL.

This criminal complaint is written on behalf of the people of New York State, Africa, and the sacredness of the protections guaranteed by God, to live free from lawless Jonathan Lippman usurpations and public disturbances, that obstruct justice, terrorize countries and people, as well as kill under varied disguises cited in the multiple documentaries I have written that are filed in the NYC FBI office, Chief Justice Judith Kaye’s office, and The Department of Investigations under NYC Mayor Bloomberg’s office via Rose Hearn, Commissioner.

Additionally, I have attached evidence verifying the above Jonathan Lippman
criminal activities, premised off of lawless disregarded public disturbance
usurpations and his unregulated 2 billion dollar budget that facilitates such.

I have been terrorized, denied all aspects of equal protection of the law, targeted
for a disguised killing/wiped off this earth via lawless Jonathan Lippman
documented patterned and practiced criminal usurpations, consistent with his
patterns of lawless court administration, union interference, public education
usurpations. Usurpations that have wiped out over 13 million people are listed
under his name.

His lawless usurpations including his public record Appellate Division
documented lawless usurpation require arrest and additional charges for the
disregard and seditious/defraud appeal. ""

Full 162 page Document Click Here

Read more...

Peter Z. Sivere v. JP Morgan Chase - Department of Labor - OSHA - SEC - Canary Capital - Davis Polk - JPM Chase

August 2005 Archives

Inside the JP Morgan, Peter Sivere Whistleblower Case

"Civil Action to Protect Against Retaliation in Fraud Cases"

Lisa M. Wells - JPM Chase

Sarbanes - Oxley

Jamie Dimon

Davis Polk Investigations

When Loans were made and What We did about it...

JP Morgan provided a $150 Milloin Line of Credit to a Canary Entity Structured for Canary a series of short equity basket swaps that allowed Canary to hedge its long position in third party mutual funds.

Plaintiffs allege that JPM has liability as financier of some Canary Market timeing and late trading. ... Davis Polk seems to have claimed, in their investigation that JPM had no knowledge of late trading or improper timing...

Heritage Bank One ..

What are the Conflicts of Interest, Attorneys Protecting Each Other.. Isn't Davis Polk connected to Proskauer Rose Somehow??

Canary Capital Litigation

Investment Banking Exposure

TS&S / Investment Management Exposure

Click Here for Full Document

Read more...

J. Huntley Palmer Lead In House Attorney JP Morgan - Whistleblower Peter Sivere

J. Huntley Palmer was the lead in house attorney at JPM, JP Morgan when J. Huntley Palmer removed 8 people from Whistleblower Peter Sivere's team and replaced them with Davis Polk Team. Looks like he is on the short list for US Attorney in Philadelphia. Sources say his name was one of several submitted to the White House for consideration.

"" Posted on Thu, Jan. 7, 2010
Specter blamed for delay in Obama's
naming U.S. att'y

By MICHAEL HINKELMAN
Philadelphia Daily News
hinkelm@phillynews.com
215-854-2656

By this date eight years ago, the then-new U.S. attorney in Philadelphia, Patrick Meehan, had been on the job almost four months, after being confirmed by the U.S. Senate in September 2001.

Now, almost a year into President Obama's term, there is not even a nominee for the post. And the appointment of a new U.S. attorney, which is considered a plum assignment, is not believed to be imminent, sources familiar with the process say.

Some blame the ambling pace on unusual political circumstances.

Traditionally, the state's senior senator of the president's party, in this case Sen. Bob Casey, makes a recommendation to the White House. However, when longtime Republican Sen. Arlen Specter switched parties last April and became a Democrat, that complicated the selection process, sources said.

Sources said that Casey and Specter could not agree on a single candidate to recommend to Obama, who makes the formal nomination.

An initial screening process last summer produced a list of 20 names for U.S. attorney here.
With Casey and Specter unable to settle on one, several names were jointly submitted to the White House last month, sources said.

A source with knowledge of the matter declined to say how many names were submitted or to identify them.

Among those thought to be on a short list, sources said, are Cheryl A. Krause, a partner at Dechert LLP; James J. Eisenhower, a partner at Schnader Harrison Segal and Lewis LLP; and J. Huntley Palmer of JP Morgan Chase & Co. All were once federal prosecutors here.
Krause, Eisenhower and Palmer declined to comment for this story.

Justice Department spokeswoman Melissa Schwartz would neither confirm nor deny whether the Justice Department had received any names from the White House or begun vetting any candidates.

Larry Smar, a spokesman for Casey, said, "As of right now, I don't have a sense of when a nomination will be made."

A spokeswoman for Specter declined to comment.

The U.S. attorney here - one of 93 in the country - brings criminal and civil actions on behalf of the federal government in the nine-county area of southeastern Pennsylvania.

The office has prosecuted a number of high-profile public-corruption cases in recent years, including that of former state Sen. Vince Fumo and former City Councilman Rick Mariano.
Former U.S. Attorney Meehan resigned his post in July 2008. The current U.S. attorney, Michael L. Levy, was named by the Justice Department on an interim basis last May to serve as U.S. attorney until Obama nominated a successor.

When the White House receives a senatorial recommendation, it is sent to the Justice Department for vetting.

Schwartz said the vetting process - which includes background checks and interviews by political and career officials - can typically take up to three months.
Once a finalist is determined, that person is interviewed by Attorney General Eric Holder, who makes a recommendation to Obama.

After Obama makes the formal nomination, it is sent to the Senate for confirmation.
And there's no certainty that a nominee - given the current partisan rancor in the Senate - will win timely confirmation.

Case in point: New Jersey's new U.S. attorney, Paul Fishman, was recommended to Obama last February and was nominated by the White House in May, but not confirmed by the Senate until Oct. 7.

According to the Web site Main Justice, an independent news organization that covers the Justice Department, 31 new U.S. attorneys have been confirmed by the Senate, 12 more have been nominated by Obama and another 23 names have been recommended by senators to Obama for U.S. attorney posts throughout the country.

None of those confirmed or nominated to date are holdovers from the Bush administration, although two Bush holdovers have been recommended to Oba-ma. ""

Source
http://www.philly.com/philly/hp/news_update/80882337.html?cmpid=15585797

Read more...

Is Judith Kaye Independent or being used by Cuomo to hide Cuomo family secrets? David Paterson Probe - Judith Kay .. NO Way Independent.

""what Judith Kaye needs to hide and whom she needs to protect.

Andrew Cuomo's selection of Judith Kaye has been widely praised due to Ms. Kaye's alleged independence and integrity. In fact, Cuomo's selection of Kaye could possibly raise later ethical questions for Cuomo.

I, too, would appoint someone as an independent counsel who has an obvious and understandable indebtedness to Mario Cuomo for her own professional/judicial standing and social status if I needed to keep the Cuomos' long held knowledge of corruption in the OAG and Mario Cuomo's own protection of that corruption secret

One has to wonder if there could ever be any convictions in the Paterson matter when all any defense attorney would have to do is call either Mario or Andrew Cuomo as a witness and then easily destroy Mario and/or Andrew's own credibility? Is the OAG alleged investigation really being done in good faith?.

.... emails sent Ms. Kaye. As you read this first one, keep in mind recent polls showing Cuomo's own drop of 22% in favorability among blacks due to his involvement in the Paterson matter and then ponder what that drop would have been had Paterson remained a candidate for Governor and had the independence necessary to expose the scandals described below.""

Sent: Fri, March 12, 2010 2:07:37 AM
Subject: Cuomo's own secrets--Corruption in the OAG involving the NYSP

Ms. Kaye,

Andrew Cuomo's appointment of you as independent counsel to the OAG in the probe of David Paterson, the NYSP, and others does not entirely eliminate any conflict of interest/ appearance of impropriety on the part of Andrew Cuomo and the OAG. In fact, legitimate questions remain whether anyone connected with the OAG should even participate in your own alleged "independent" investigation.

Additionally, your own close relationship with the Cuomo family could give rise to appearances of impropriety on your part. The indebtedness you owe Mario Cuomo for your current professional standing/social status is both considerable and understandable.

Certainly, Andrew Cuomo had every reason to believe that I would contact you about NY's hidden political scandals once I learned about your appointment as independent counsel. These scandals involve the NYSP, corruption in the OAG under Robert Abrams, Mario Cuomo's protection of that corruption while Governor, and Andrew Cuomo's own refusal to follow the mandates of his current office. Other than Andrew Cuomo's appointment of Robert Abrams as special prosecutor, I doubt that he could have appointed anyone who could be perceived as more indebted to the Cuomo family than you. Perhaps that's why he chose you.

Enclosed in this email is the first of three emails I am sending you. This email and the two
emails that follow are lengthy so you may wish to print them out first. They were being circulated among select NY State Democrat Party officials and political operatives prior to Governor Paterson's recent decision not to seek a four-year term for governor. This circulation was designed to prevent Andrew Cuomo from entering the gubernatorial primary. Andrew Cuomo and his top deputies have already been sent the emails.

The three emails basically cover three separate areas --(1) NY's secret political scandals arising from the corruption in the OAG, (2) how the political arena was used to expose corruption in the OAG, and (3) how Andrew Cuomo's entry into the 2010 gubernatorial Democratic primary could have reopened old racial wounds because of his father's protection of former NYAG Robert Abrams during the Tawana Brawley matter. This third area/email also summarizes Andrew Cuomo's self-inflicted liabilities as a candidate for Governor and also quotes portions of certain relevant letters.

Since this third area/email was the most currently politically relevant, I am including it with this email. However, you may find the first email re: NY's hidden political scandals much more interesting since it details the political circumstances occurring at the the time Angel Diaz was found hanging in his jail cell and afterward. You, yourself, wrote the majority opinion affirming the right of a governor to supersede a district attorney in order to seek the death penalty. Perhaps you would have ruled differently if you had known of the enclosed.

Re: Andrew Cuomo:

Any attorney general in any state can hold his finger to the wind and determine what issues are important to voters and what issues will get him positive press coverage and high approval ratings. It would be hard to name one politically ambitious state attorney general who wouldn't go after child predators on the Internet, excessive bonuses paid to executives of bailed-out companies, and that old and dependable standby, Medicaid fraud.

An attorney general may even make a reputation as a reformer by prosecuting public corruption, concentrating efforts on abuses of pension funds while ignoring abuses of tort funds and operational funds.

Attorney generals also defend state employees and agencies when they are sued. It was the abuse of this constitutionally-mandated responsibility that first gave rise to NY's secret political scandals. Andrew Cuomo should not have spent a minute's time contemplating whether or not to recuse himself from investigating Governor Paterson and the NYSP. His recusal should have been immediate given his reasonable expectation that Paterson already knew about NY's hidden political scandals. Andrew Cuomo's defense that Paterson asked for the investigation is no legitimate excuse for going ahead with an investigation rife with all kinds of conflicts of interest on his part.


PS: As you read the enclosed, please keep in mind that the trial that exposed the corruption in the OAG involved an out-of-jurisdiction arrest by the NYSP who came to a private residence in the Town of Hamburg, NY to effect an illegal arrest meant for the personal benefit of the father of a NYSP trooper.

The Town of Hamburg police (who had jurisdiction) were never involved in the arrest and the NYSP never sought/received permission from the Hamburg Town Police to be involved. After being arrested in Hamburg by a NYSP trooper who was assigned to the Clarence NYSP barracks and who came from Clarence, NY to Hamburg at the behest of his father, the defendant was taken out of district to the NYSP barracks in Orchard Park, NY and was also arraigned out of district in Orchard Park.

The alleged arraignment took place in the back room of an Orchard Park magistrate with only the magistrate and a NYSP investigator present. The magistrate, knowing how much money the defendant had on her, set bail high enough so it couldn't be reached and signed commitment papers in that backroom before the defendant, having been denied a lawyer, appeared before him.

The defendant's first lawful arraignment was held in Hamburg, NY after being incarcerated at the Erie County Holding Center for two days. All criminal charges were later dismissed with a judicial apology from the Hamburg Court magistate.

The OAG had no qualms about defending the NYSP members, even committing felonies in its defense and the NYSP have a history of ignoring jurisdictional boundaries and doing favors for others--all with the blessing of Andrew Cuomo and his predecessors in the OAG..

Below is the email re: Andrew Cuomo's entry into the 2010 gubernatorial Democratic primary:.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
One line in the Spin v Truth --Andrew Cuomo and the Myth of a Cuomo Dynasty section, page 5 of the 2nd email, requires further explanation:
"At the time of the (1992) Illinois primary, I had written to your father only once".

That one time couldn't be worse for establishing any future Cuomo Dynasty since this initial contact was during the racially charged and divisive Tawana Brawley matter.

Andrew Cuomo's entry into the primary for Governor could reopen old racial wounds and provide further racial polarization. Andrew Cuomo already has residual problems with some black voters due to his challenging Carl McCall in the 2002 NY State Democratic primary for governor. Now it's rumored he wants to challenge another prominent black for governor in the 2010 primary.

His racially insensitive and unapologetic "shuck and jive" comment during the last presidential primary campaign doesn't help either. His attempts to explain away his usage of this term was just more "jive talking" on his part.

What could prove to be especially damaging or even fatal to Andrew Cuomo's political ambitions is his father's own conduct during the Tawana Brawley matter since Governor Cuomo's conduct raises questions as to how far the apple falls from the tree--a legitimate concern for both black and white voters.

My first communication with Andrew's father occurred in late August 1988. At that time, Mario Cuomo received an extensive mailing sent certified mail from me criticizing his appointment of NYAG Robert Abrams as special prosecutor in the Tawana Brawley matter and the problems he faced with that appointment (due to what occurred during Rojicek v Cooley, Bell, and Buczkowski). At the time of Cuomo's receipt of the information, Brawley's black attorneys (Alton Maddox and C. Vernon Mason) were refusing to cooperate with Abrams and his Grand Jury and would not allow Tawana Brawley or her mother to testify before it. Among the myriad charges hurled at Abrams by Al Sharpton and the Brawley attorneys was the charge that white officials like Abrams automatically covered up crimes of white officials. They were demanding that Cuomo replace Abrams and appoint another special prosecutor instead.

What Mario Cuomo did not expect or need during the Tawana Brawley matter was to be informed of a federal civil rights trial involving truthful charges of sexual assault by a white NY State Police investigator. The trial of Rojicek V Cooley et. al., proved unequivocally that Abrams and his office not only covered up crimes by white officials but also committed crimes (felonies) in order to cover up.

In my August 27, 1988 letter to Mario Cuomo, I warned him "not to be lulled into a false sense of security by Abrams' disclaimer . . . that my case was not the only case lurching luridly in Abrams' background . . . and that he had a potential scandal in Abrams' administration".

On September 8, 1988 Cuomo's Director of Criminal Justice, John Poklemba would respond via letter to me:

"Governor Cuomo has asked that I acknowledge receipt of your letter of August 27, 1988, regarding your case. As you correctly noted in your letter, the Attorney General is a constitutionally elected officer and not subject to the direct control or supervision of the Governor. . . .Thank you for writing the Governor and sharing this matter with us."

John Poklemba was handling the Tawana Brawley matter for Governor Cuomo and had previously met with the Brawley forces who were demanding the removal of Abrams.

Mario Cuomo had a decision to make at that time--whether to act as a Governor or act as a politician. Instead of protecting his constituency of white, black and other racial origins, Cuomo protected his white Attorney General and the white lawyers involved in my trial.

He could have used Rojicek v Cooley, et al. to heal the racial divisions caused by the Brawley matter since my case came to his attention before the Brawley grand jury was disbanded (one month later) but he chose not to do so. He could have granted the Brawley request for another special prosecutor but he chose not to do so.

He could have gone public with Rojicek v Cooley, et al to reassure his constituents that he would not tolerate obstruction of justice by any attorney, black or white, but he chose not to do so. He could have appointed a special prosecutor to investigate corruption in Robert Abrams' office but he chose not to do so.

Instead, Governor Cuomo, too "tawana'd out" by the Brawley matter, entered into a conspiracy of silence with his white Attorney General not caring whether his constituents and others who use the courts in NY had fair trials when they were adversaries of Robert Abrams and his office. Both Cuomo and Abrams turned a deaf ear and a blind eye to already proved accusations against white attorneys.

Abrams, with Cuomo's apparent blessing, then proceeded to go after Brawley's black attorneys with a vengeance for violations of the professional conduct code for lawyers--violations that were far less egregious than the violations (both civil rights violations and violations of criminal statutes) committed by the white attorneys involved in Rojicek v Cooley, et al. Alton Maddox has had his law license suspended for over twenty years (a record) for refusing to appear before the Grievance Committee to answer questions related to his representation of Tawana Brawley. Mason was disbarred for refusing to answer questions regarding the Brawley matter and other alleged unrelated acts of professional misconduct.

Because of the disparate treatment given black and white attorneys by Cuomo and Abrams, voters can reasonably view both Cuomo and Abrams as racists. The ability to paint Cuomo and Abrams as racists is not only possible but even justified given today's racially sensitive political environment when even words such as "Negro dialect" leads to charges of racism when used innocently by an older white politician who grew up in an era where the word Negro was acceptable (and still is).

NY voters, whether logical or not, could legitimately view Andrew Cuomo's desire to defeat prominent black candidates and his prior usage of a racially insensitive term as proof of racial animus learned from his father, answering for themselves just how far the apple falls from the tree.

Parenthetically, NY voters could simply vote Andrew Cuomo out of any office if they learn what hypocrites and frauds the two Cuomos really are.

Relative to Paterson v Cuomo, it remains to be seen whether or not a black man, in a reversal of history, finally keeps a white boy in his place.

While I would love to see such a public reversal of history, I doubt Paterson will risk political suicide by going public re: Andrew Cuomo and the Cuomo legacy--not when he or his operatives can work quietly behind the scenes to keep Cuomo out. A quid pro quo arrangement such as a later lucrative appointment by a then Governor Andrew Cuomo could also be promised to both entice Paterson to drop out of the primary or as a reward for remaining silent about NY's hidden political scandals.

Paterson, as do others, also has the option of using black activists or others to destroy any Cuomo dynasty.

In the event Andrew Cuomo doesn't enter the primary, I would expect a statement from him similar to the one given by his father when he was forced to remove his name from consideration as a US Supreme Court Justice nominee, i.e. he loves being the peoples' lawyer, he's not finished with important NYAG business, ad nauseum.

Reporters attending any press conference where Cuomo announces his decision not to enter the primary race for governor could then take out their pens and stenographer pads and record Andrew Cuomo's spin for not entering the primary as fact. A few polite, perfunctory, and irrelevant questions may even be asked.

The only question reporters should ask is "Is there anything in your background or father's background that prevents you from entering a gubernatorial primary when a majority of state and national Democrats want you and polling numbers show you easily beating both Paterson and Lazio?"

With that question, reporters would actually witness a white boy "shucking and jiving" his way through a press conference--even if that press conference were being held in an Iowa or New Hampshire living room.

Cuomo's not entering or dropping out of the gubernatorial primary does present a problem for him with the state and national Democrat Party and President Obama since he, rather than Paterson, is viewed as the party's savior and not the liability he really is.

Politician and savior are incongruent occupations.

According to a newspaper article, Tawawa Brawley's mother and stepfather allegedly wrote letters to then Governor Spitzer and NYAG Andrew Cuomo asking that the Brawley matter be reopened. Irrespective of whether the Brawley matter was a hoax or not, Andrew Cuomo will never reopen up the matter since doing so could possibly result in damage to both his political career/ambitions as well as damage to his father's reputation/legacy.

Personally, I think Andrew Cuomo should view me as more of a threat than anyone connected to the Brawley matter. In a letter dated August 26, 1988 sent certified mail to Abrams (included in Cuomo's mailing), I wrote: "You may or may not be successful in denying me my lawful right to justice by riding on the coattails of the Brawley case. We both know, however, there will be other coattails to ride".

Never did I expect that same coattail would be available to ride years and years later.

Andrew Cuomo's rumored entry into the gubernatorial primary is one more coattail to ride.

I have no dog in the Democratic primary fight for governor unless Andrew Cuomo enters the ring. My dog remains in the NY Attorney General's office and is only let out on occasion to ride on coattails.

If I had been able to find one NYAG among the last five (Abrams, Koppel, Vacco, Spitzer, and Cuomo) who believes that fair courtroom trials are the cornerstone of a democracy, my dog could be laying contentedly in Illinois at my feet while my sister and I leisurely search the Internet for names of the last five Illinois Attorneys General. We can only recall the names of the last two.

Andrew Cuomo, despite numerous opportunities, has refused to send my dog home and I miss her.

Hopefully, NY voters won't miss the the character flaws (in addition to racial animus) demonstrated by Andrew Cuomo that prove that Andrew Cuomo is not fit to be NYAG let alone Governor of New York. To wit:

When Mario Cuomo delivered his 1984 keynote address at the National Democratic Convention, he spoke eloquently of a nation divided into two cities, one for the rich, powerful, and politically protected and one for the poor, powerless, and politically unprotected. When it came to a true test of his rhetoric, though, Governor Cuomo chose to live in the city of the rich, powerful, and politically protected.and left a powerless. but more principled victim who occupies the other city, to fight alone.

Andrew Cuomo has always resided in the same city as his father. Despite his rhetoric and public relations makeover, he is still the same Andrew Cuomo. Like his father, he also left a powerless, but more principled victim who occupies the other city, to fight alone.

While I don't know either Cuomo personally, both have been described by others who know them as petty, vindictive, mean-spirited, egotistical individuals who never let go of grudges. Such negative personality traits, combined with arrogance, leads to bad executive decisions, including ignoring the number one rule of politics: When a problem first comes to your attention, deal with it.

Andrew Cuomo received the same two lengthy emails you have received certified mail. Additionally, similar emails have been emailed to his executive secretary (Holly Levy) numerous times as well as to Mario Cuomo and Robert Abrams at their respective private law firms and top deputies of Andrew Cuomo in the OAG.

I have never been able to determine Andrew Cuomo's own OAG email address. According to Holly, Andrew Cuomo can't figure out how to print emails so all emails have to go to her for printing and delivery (although Cuomo brags about his hobby of tinkering with and fixing engines of classic automobiles).

Andrew Cuomo's liabilities are self-inflicted.

As NYAG, he allowed his arrogance to interfere with whatever intellect he has. As NYAG, Andrew Cuomo has refused to follow the law and the mandates of his office. As a government attorney paid with tax dollars, his first duty is to seek and insure justice regardless of whether an injustice occurred in either a civil case or criminal case and regardless of when that injustice occurred. This heightened obligation is due to the recognition that government can and often does abuse its power.

A victim who for years has stood on principle and who has refused to be the first one to motion a Court for redress does not negate any NYAG's responsibilities.

Evidently, game playing is another hobby of Andrew Cuomo's. He's not paid by taxpayers to play a waiting game. Any motion by Cuomo would have only required a simple, short statement requesting the District Court in Buffalo to set aside the judgment in Rojicek v Cooley, et al due to Fraud Upon the Court and in the interest of justice--a motion that would have automatically been granted. Rather than admitting to fraud and criminal acts that included bribery, he could have taken an even more ambiguous route, simply claiming that lawyer over-zealousness has resulted in an unreliable judgment.

I am persona non grata in Buffalo where federal magistrates laugh with lawyers over kitchen sinks and US attorneys slander and maliciously prosecute US citizens engaged in lawful protest--protest designed to protect the public, to expose corruption in the District Court and the NY Attorney General's Office, and to send a message to other victims that going to the US Attorney's office is a complete waste of time.

Furthermore, as Andrew Cuomo is well aware, I have been adamant about the OAG motioning for a new trial and not me and I have no intention of ever changing my position about this since it was the OAG that colluded with my attorney, committed the criminal acts, and paid the bribes. How much more clear could I be?

Both Mario Cuomo and I knew that in public corruption cases one always follows the money. Following the money in NY would lead to the comptroller's office--a fact acknowledged by Andrew Cuomo, himself, when he obtained a guilty plea from Ray Harding, former head of the NY Liberal Party, in October 2009.

Furthermore, Andrew Cuomo has not demonstrated loyalty to the NYS Democrat Party and his lack of loyalty should not be rewarded by the party. The true story of NY State's secret political scandals would have disappeared with settlement that included the mandatory disclaimer of any wrong doing and the obligatory agreement of confidentiality.

The NYS Democrat Party can thank Andrew Cuomo for keeping the story of NY's secret political scandals alive and in the political arena.

Politicians must laugh at the white NY establishment press. New York's version of Watergate was written by two sisters from Illinois, neither of whom have press credentials. We are capable of writing additional chapters with or without the help of NY's black press.

Perhaps Andrew Cuomo should consider breaking the sad news to his paramour, Sandra Lee, that she won't be bringing any of her great garnishes to the Governor's Mansion next year and for the three years following (unless,of course, she's visiting Governor Paterson).

On a more somber note, it should be noted that one of Mario Cuomo's daughters (Andrew Cuomo's sister) was allegedly sexually assaulted by a rapist who has never been caught. Both have dishonored her and other victims of sexual assault by their willingness to add years and years of continued victimization directed towards another sexual assault victim.

How proud she must be of her father and her brother. ""

Sent in by Reader..

Posted here by
Crystal@CrystalCox.com

Read more...

Howard L. Shapiro - Counsel to the Inspector General. Dan Petrole - Peter Sivere Whistleblower Smackdown. Blatant Disregard.

SEC Investigators - OSHA Investigators - SEC OIG Report of Investigation - Industry Whistleblower - SEC Fraud and Failing the Public.

Howard L. Shapiro - Counsel to the Inspector General
Deputy Inspector General, Dan Petrole

Below is What Seems to Me Like a Whistleblower Smackdown, as the SEC Fails Over and Over to Protect Whistleblower, Consumers, Shareholders and Faild to Investigate Fraud. Is there No Accountability, Transparency or Rights on any Level?

***********

In a message dated 2/17/2010 7:55:05 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, shapiro.howard@oig.dol.gov writes:

Mr. Sivere:

The Deputy Inspector General, Dan Petrole, has asked me to respond to your recent e-mail to him, in which you state:

In light of the new public interest in this matter I would like for you to re-open this investigation. Please see the attached documentation from Mr. Heddell (signed by you on his behalf) and his reasoning for not re-opening this investigation.

Specifically, Mr. Heddell stated "our review of the SEC OIG Report of Investigation does not provide sufficient basis to revisit this determination."

Why didn't OSHA ever produce a final determination in this investigation? Did OSHA ever interview George Demos or speak directly with the SEC in regard to his allegations of me?

Upon review of the linked web pages (in your e-mail), it appears that the new public interest in this matter primarily relates to actions taken (or not taken) within the SEC, and does not provide a sufficient basis or justification for the DOL OIG to re-visit its previous determination regarding the opening of an investigation with respect to actions taken by OSHA employees.

Howard L. Shapiro
Counsel to the Inspector General "

************

From: PSivere@aol.com [mailto:PSivere@aol.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2010 6:10 AM
To: Shapiro, Howard - OIG
Cc: Petrole, Daniel - OIG
Subject: Re: Request to OIG

Dear Mr. Shapiro,

Nothing in the attached Memorandum of Understating between the SEC and DOL, entered into July 29, 2008 contain any restrictions on the DOL.

Has Mr. Petrole made any attempt to discuss this matter with the SEC OIG as outlined in the MOU? The fact that my confidential information was leaked during an OSHA investigation and the DOL OIG has no interest in investigating why OSHA investigators did not or will not investigate the leak is troubling.

At a minimum the OSHA investigators should have contacted the SEC investigators to compare "facts." The SEC OIG was concerned enough to investigate their own, why won't the DOL OIG do the same? What is the downside for DOL to produce a similar report as the SEC OIG did?

Thank You,
Peter ""

************

Message from Dan Petrole to Howard L. Shapiro

"In a message dated 3/4/2010 3:16:53 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
Petrole.Daniel@oig.dol.gov writes:

Howard,

I assume that you are monitoring these e-mails. I also realize that Mr. Sivere agreed to a settlement regarding his issue. Just want to make sure you are comfortable that nothing comes back to bite us.

Dan"

************

"From: PSivere@aol.comTo: Petrole.Daniel@oig.dol.govCC: shapiro.howard@oig.dol.govSent: 3/11/2010 5:41:03 A.M. Eastern Standard TimeSubj: Re: Request to OIG

Mr. Petrole,

Leaving the settlement aside for a moment. Congress charges your agency with protecting the workers of this country. Specifically, it charges you to ensure that certain programs are administered and carried out without interference or political agendas.

Sadly, your comment below illustrates why the American people are fed up. You are in Washington to serve the people of this country. It's a sad state of affairs when the agency charged with protecting the workers of this country believe we are better protected when civil servants, like yourself, put politics before your actual mandate.

This is not a legal issue. This is a systematic breakdown of your agency and all you focus on is CYA. I purposely let your e-mail sit in my in box for the past week with the hopes of establishing some dialogue with you and your agency. Sadly, it did not happen.

Thank You,
Peter Sivere "
Posted here by
Investigative Blogger

Read more...

Department of Justice, False Claims Act, Fraud Whistleblower, Whistleblower Blogs

Great Whistleblower Blog on Department of Justice Fraud, Oversight, Lack of Staff to Look into Fraud Alerts, Corrupt Judges, Above the Law Judicial Cronies and Lots More...

"" ..site was created because in my opinion the False Claims Act and other remedies available to ordinary citizens to combat waste, fraud, special interests and abuse that is taking place in this country are a joke.

The Department of Justice takes less than 1% of the fraud cases presented to them due to lack of staff. If the case succeeds, the Department of Justice gets over 75% of the reward. It should be the other way around.

If the Department of Justice passes on the case i.e. it is so unconcerned with the defrauding of the American citizen, then the person who brought the fraud to the attention of society and risked his or her job, family, time and money to right the wrongs that the government created but refuses to fix should get 75% of the reward for their trouble.

I believe that the doctrine of sovereign immunity and qualified sovereign immunity is illegal, and that every judge who upholds the illegal doctrine of sovereign immunity be placed in jail for treason.

I also believe that any judge who interprets the 11th amendment as barring a person from suing the state in which he or she resides, be put in jail for treason and given remedial reading lessons because obviously the judge had trouble understanding the words the founders put in front of him or her.

Yes it is treason. Sovereign immunity is a doctrine based on English law that tried to make it into the Constitution 2x but was rejected by our founders both times. So the Judiciary did — illegally — what the founders refused to do which is to create a 2 tiered legal system where some people and entities are more equal than others.

In fact I don’t know why the Judiciary didn’t just rename America — Animal Farm. If you want a system that is just, then everyone must be subject to the same consequences for bad behavior.

The people who create the law in America have absolutely no right or authority to insulate themselves or other “special people” from the laws everyone is supposed to be subject to. America is a country by the people and for the people. I think our government and our judiciary would best remember that. ""

Folks Sites like this One are Part of the Solution... Check out the Link Below and Lend your support to this Amazing Whistleblower Exposing Corruption, Providing Solutions, Exposing Fraud, Exposing Corrupt Judges, Calling Out the Department of Justice for Not Doing their Job.. Investigative Blogger Crystal L. Cox says WOW.. I am Impressed... this Woman is Amazing and I Encourage you to read the site below and to FIND your Voice - Speak Up - Now is Time. NO law enforcement, Law Maker, Judge, Or Attorney Should Be Above the Law...

Click Here to Read this Amazing Whistleblower Report ....

Read more...

Long Island Congressional Candidate Cited for Giving Up JPMorgan Whistleblower, Peter Sivere.

""George Demos is a Republican Congressional Candidate from Eastern Long Island whose Web site bears the slogan "Fighting for Freedom," and touts his service as an enforcement lawyer in the New York office of the Securities and Exchange Commission. A bio says that he "handled some of the SEC's most significant investigations," including that of Ponzi scheme artist Bernard Madoff, and "worked tirelessly on the cases that never made the headlines."

But one case that never made headlines was his own: Demos' campaign Web site and public statements omit any reference to a report last March of the SEC's Inspector General (IG), which found he had improperly disclosed protected, nonpublic information about a whistleblower to the counsel for that whistleblower's employer, a major Wall Street bank, JP Morgan Chase.

The IG's charges of misconduct grew out of an SEC probe that began in 2003 of JPMorgan and other big financial institutions suspected of illegal market practices.

Demos has denied he did anything improper, and his campaign declined to comment on the matter. But documents obtained by the Project On Government Oversight (POGO) -- a non-partisan non-profit based in Washington -- confirm that Demos was the staff attorney who was cited in the IG report for violating SEC rules.

The IG referred the case to the agency's management for possible disciplinary action, but the SEC took no action. Soon after that, Demos quietly resigned from his job and launched his bid for a seat in the House of Representatives.

But the confidential information that Demos disclosed was used by a JPMorgan lawyer against one of the bank's own employees, a whistleblower who had alerted the SEC to possible wrongdoing by his employer, according to the report and other documents, some released under the Freedom of Information Act.

The significance of the case goes beyond politics.

In response to widespread public anger over Wall Street abuses and a weak economy, the SEC and its latest chairman, Mary Schapiro, have pledged repeatedly to protect whistleblowers and pay more attention to their reports of illegality and market abuse.

The Madoff case itself involved a whistleblower whose information the SEC had largely ignored, and a financial analyst at a prominent Wall Street company said last year that he, too, had trouble getting phone calls returned by the SEC after informing the agency his employer might be breaking the law. In response, the SEC has launched a program to cope with the hundreds of thousands of tips it receives every year, but progress has been painfully slow.

Meanwhile, the SEC also appears to be brushing aside or delaying action on the recommendations of its own IG, and not just in the Demos matter. In response to a recent Freedom of Information Act request submitted by POGO, the SEC has said that since 2007 there have been more than 200 recommendations from its IG on which the agency has either taken no action, or on which action was still pending.

Demos is a 33-year-old politically wired attorney who attended Fordham Law School. According to his campaign Web site, his donor list includes wealthy Wall Streeters and others, who have given him more than $300,000 since October.

His bio includes stints in the District Attorney's office in Suffolk County, Long Island, and service as enforcement lawyer at the SEC from 2002 to 2009.

He was involved in the campaigns of former New York Gov. George Pataki and former Sen. Alfonse D'Amato, and is now in a field of candidates, including Chris Cox, an attorney and the grandson of former President Richard Nixon, who are seeking the GOP nomination in New York's 1st Congressional District, a swing district. The seat is currently held by Tim Bishop, a Democrat, who is considered vulnerable in November.

The SEC IG's findings did not identify Demos by name when they were included in the watchdog's semi-annual report to Congress last year. But documents obtained by POGO, including internal SEC materials and related correspondence, make clear that Demos' conduct lay behind the section of the report on the JPMorgan whistleblower, who worked as a mid-level compliance officer in New York.

According to a redacted version of the report, the whistleblower, whose name is Peter Sivere, first came to the SEC with what he described as "confidential" evidence of the bank's alleged failure to disclose material sought in the SEC probe.

The SEC was investigating a practice known as market timing, which can be illegal. It typically involves trading that favors short-term buyers and sellers to the detriment of long-term shareholders like retirees.

After the whistleblower's initial e-mail contact with the SEC in June 2004, Demos replied to him, confirming, among other things, that the agency's probe was "confidential."

Several major institutions, such as Bank of America and Alliance Capital Management, later reached settlements in similar SEC inquiries, but JPMorgan was never charged with a violation, and this week had no comment.

In July 2004, Sivere brought an employment claim against JPMorgan before the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. He contended that the bank began threatening his job after he had gone to the SEC. JPMorgan strongly disputed Sivere's allegations.

OSHA issued a preliminary finding in favor of the whistleblower, saying there was "reasonable cause to believe" that he had faced retaliation, and that his "preliminary reinstatement" was warranted. Not long after, Demos informed JPMorgan's counsel that Sivere had initially sought a cash payment from the SEC for information he was offering the agency, apparently in hopes of benefiting from a well-publicized SEC program to elicit information from tipsters.

The lawyer for JPMorgan then used Sivere's confidential request for a bounty to question his whistleblower credentials, and informed OHSA that he had asked for money. Apparently concerned that this had damaged his case, despite the initial finding in his favor, Sivere then dropped his complaint against JPMorgan and settled the case.

A well-known Washington securities lawyer who did not want his name used in a discussion of the sensitive case explained that "whistleblowers are often unfairly disparaged for requesting payments, even though U.S. law specifically authorizes rewards to certain informants." JPMorgan has denied any impropriety. It ultimately fired Sivere in October 2004.

In October 2008, the SEC's IG launched its own investigation in response to information from Sivere. Its final report provided a description of what it said was Demos' improper disclosure, as well as an earlier, internal SEC examination of the matter.

Demos, when first questioned by an SEC supervisor, "did not admit" to the improper disclosure, the IG report says, though he did concede he might have been responsible, saying he "did not remember."

Based on that inconclusive evidence, Demos' SEC superior drew no definite conclusion about whether Demos had made the disclosure. Even so, he formally "counseled" Demos in late 2005 about the importance of keeping protected information within the agency, the IG said.

The IG later interviewed Demos' SEC superior and others at the agency. The IG also contacted lawyers for JPMorgan, including one to whom the disclosure had been made. That lawyer readily identified Demos as the source of his information, according to documents.

As the IG report concludes, Demos "not only gave . . . JPMorgan permission to use the non-public information about an informant against him [in the OHSA proceeding], but actually encouraged such use."

The IG found that Demos' disclosure was a violation of SEC rules, which severely restrict the release of confidential information obtained in the course of an investigation.

The failure of Demos' campaign to let prospective voters know about any of these events may not be surprising, but only days after he launched his run for Congress on Oct. 13, 2009, candidate Demos sent a two-page letter rebutting charges of ethical misconduct in the SEC matter that had surfaced in another forum: the Departmental Disciplinary Committee of the New York State Supreme Court Appellate Division, which reviews and investigates ethical complaints against lawyers.

Upset that the SEC was doing nothing in response to its own IG's disciplinary referral, the New York ethics complaint naming Demos was filed by Sivere, the fired whistleblower. Demos' letter in response to that complaint argued that it was "entirely without merit."

The complaint has yet to be resolved, but could result in a finding of no wrongdoing or penalties ranging from censure to disbarment.

In his letter to the Supreme Court's Disciplinary Committee, Demos concedes that information about the whistleblower may have been released, but only in line with SEC "regulations and policies." Demos' statement appears to be at odds with the IG's finding.

His letter also attacks the protected status of the whistleblower's information, arguing that the one time JPMorgan employee "was owed no duty of confidentiality or loyalty by the Commission [SEC] or me" -- another statement that contradicts the IG's conclusions.

Michael Smallberg is an investigator at the Project On Government Oversight (POGO). Adam Zagorin is Journalist in Residence at POGO. POGO is a non-partisan, non-profit government watchdog group based in Washington, D.C.""

Source
http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/01/28/long-island-congressional-candidate-cited-for-giving-up-jpmorgan/

I do not believe that the SEC even Tries to Check on Reports or Tips... I believe that the SEC, Mary Schapiro looks at who the "Names" and "Players" are and decides from there whether to look into it or not.. the Iviewit Trillion Dollar Stolen Patent Case Shows this VERY Well... as the SEC, Mary Schapiro knows full well of a Massive Shareholder Fraud and they DO NOTHING.. they don't even seem to acknowledge it has been reported...

more on the iViewit Stolen Patent at
www.Iviewit.TV and www.DeniedPatent.com

and More on Mary Schapiro Click Here

the Obama Administration Brags about new laws to protect Whistleblowers... Laws seem to be in place but in the Real World Whistleblowers are Treated as Criminals and their Lives are turned upside down...

Read more...

Real Estate Broker Owner Exposing the Real in Real Estate.

I am a Real Estate Broker Owner Dedicated to Consumer Protection in Real Estate. The Real Estate Industry is A House of Cards in a Hurricane and is built on lies, corrupt data, secrets, boycotts, and misinformation. the Association of Realtors is a Consumer STOMPING - Money Making Machine - You Lose.



Crystal L. Cox Real Estate Blog

Realtors have so much money BEHIND them that they can legally Lie – Cheat and Steal. They have, and can afford Bigger and Better Lawyers… You Lose.

You can Not wait them out in court so Big Deal if your Realtor lies about a Latent Defect or Committs Silent Fraud by Saying Nothing - Even though they Know something about your home that could potentially Hurt You. STOP taking it on the Chin.. find out what Really GOES on behind Closed Doors in the Real Estate Industry.

You Deserve to Know More. Knowledge - Information is the ONLY Real Estate Insurance that the Real Estate Consumer REALLY has.

Crystal L. Cox Broker

I am a Real Estate Broker Owner Dedicated to Consumer Protection in Real Estate. The Real Estate Industry is A House of Cards in a Hurricane and is built on lies, corrupt data, secrets, boycotts, and misinformation.

the Association of Realtors is a Consumer STOMPING - Money Making Machine - You Lose.

I am a Former NAR member, former Realtor, Revealing the Secrets of the Real Estate Industry to You for the First Time. Find out how to Protect yourself in Your Real Estate Transaction.

  © Blogger template On The Road by Ourblogtemplates.com 2009

Back to TOP