2022
12.09

They asked for my explanation regarding my ban.I had been told NOTHING. THERE WAS NO EXPLANATION.

Twitter could silence anyone no matter how big or small. And left you with no alternative.

My reply:

Information which I feel is important to know when reviewing my account.

Everything I say is supported by vast amounts of data on my web site where my experience is documented.

I have called it being under a dome.  Unable to effectively communicate.  I have experienced this on gmail, Facebook, Twitter, landline phones, cell phones.  Imagine raising an issue of national importance and not getting a single response.  Communicating with everyone in the hierarchy of government and never getting any reply.  Email, fax, web forms… you really have no idea if it getting thru.  You trust. But nobody replies.  

Every attempt to contact anyone has been greatly hindered, or prevented.  I have confirmed this in person at every Govt official in the Bucks & Montgomery County area and beyond.

There was an idea that Twitter was making my silencers nervous.  I wasn’t sure why.  I think I figured that out though.  And it will simultaneously explain any perception that my account is spamming.  I’m sending the messages to the PA Government, courts and Assembly.  Also federally to the entire Congress.  I cannot just communicate to MY LOCAL REPRESENTATIVE and anticipate any activity.  It’s been done.  When they act on my info, they reply completely terrified at what they have been told.  

My issue is big.  I know what I am up against.  I’m sane. (Lol.) Really.

Twitter uniquely provided me with a receipt.  If I tweeted to anyone, their name (their I’d) was on it.  I could retrieve the stats and see what occurred.  Also, if they ignored, there would be a record of it.  That’s why my account was ended.  Twitter containers trail of potential accountability that foiled the standard excuse – plausible deniability.  Plausible only if I had given up.  But after trying every which way I could, and having included the transmission listings and distribution lists on my web site connected to each letter, Court filing, etc…. Hard to believe none of my attempts made it through to anyone through any method in any location.

My distribution was nationwide.  Yes, I wrote to every governor, every state Senator, every Supreme Court, every bar association (there’s very good reason this was done.  I filed a constitutional challenge and served it upon 56 state attorneys general.  All defaulted.  I won.  The they concealed the win.

I’m going way longer than I wanted.  I hope I haven’t lost you.  The issue is in front of the whole country.  I can explain it better, but I’d prefer to just headline it.  I can write more if you like.

You know when the FBI and DOJ sit in Congress and don’t answer the questions.  THEY ARE FOLLOWING RULE 1.6 Confidentiality.  The mandate of nondisclosure extends to themselves, the office, the prior office holders, their staff and prior staff.  They are permitted to commit any crime they select to maintain nondisclosure.  It’s excused by the sub paragraphs.  All is excused except murder.  

  • ever notice death row is full.  They can’t kill them.  Otherwise the lawyers are permitted to expose the injustice they were not permitted to discuss.

The Confidentislity RULE protects itself.   Lawyers cannot discuss the challenge because if anything they say leads to the exposure which would embarrass the judiciary for enacting it, they get disciplined.  Judiciary disciplines them confidentially.

I found the problem and the solution after being terrorized for years.  I am certain of my correct position.  It has been confirmed at every level of the courts.  

Also, lawyers are not supposed to be in two branches of Govt. As officers of the court, they may not hold executive or legislative seats.  The Confidentislity affects their legislation.  It also conceals corruption like you can’t imagine.  But, truth be told, Obama and Biden know Rule 1.6.  I told them.  They were hand delivered copies.  I pray it wasn’t the inspiration for their corrupt actions.  Lawyers often know they can get away with things, but many don’t understand why, or how.

Having twitter again would give me hope.  I have no rights, no protection under any law, I have had everything taken from me.  Everything.  If I type further I’ll cry.

I assure you I am not a bad actor misbehaving on Twitter.  Perseverance has been my superpower.  And Elon Musk had truly shown my that my hope isn’t for naught.

My web site was work2bdone.com/live
It was hijacked and taken.
But, I had backup,and it’s now on pTerance.com/live
The p is silent.

I’d gladly explain anything you want to know about my situation. Please help.
Sincerely,
I persevere,
Terance

2020
08.20

No Small lies

When someone steals your wallet and accuses you of robbing them. They immediately have YOU arrested while they preach that theft is wrong.

Then, you realize what is wrong in the media.

It’s lies. All lies. You cannot get ahead of the lies because they aren’t tiny lies. They are huge. They double down. Triple down. Relentless.

The truth is losing to tactical rhetoric designed to mislead and indirect.

NOW SCALE IT… SAY… YOU SPIED ON A POLITICAL RIVAL.

Richard Nixon was impeached for trying. Barack Obama used the DOJ and FBI to accomplish his spying and the cover up.

No talk of a ‘Wallet’, but false allegations which have been unending for years and years. Allegations s which blow out any limits to the scope. Allegations attempting to conceal something huge would have to be MASSIVE.

And here we are in the world of lies which exists to conceal the crime of the millennia. Rule 1.6 Confidentiality for Lawyers. It affected a majority of Americans. The lawyers don’t want to admit it. The lawyers were forced to participate – and they did and they profited. They would poison the world to avoid it. They would end the world in an attempt to survive it. But, THE LAWYERS DID IT.

2020
08.20

The Unasked Question

2020
08.20

Proximity is indicative of the affect of corruption to come. You must wonder at the venom of Lanny Davis. So angry. So deceptive. So many questions where he didn’t get answers…. well, until this 1point6 person replied.

Could he be the reason for Mueller’s participation in concealing the whole story. Yet, the clue was on top of every page.

2020
05.27

Back in 2014, we called the conundrum caused by confidentiality to the attention of the President. In the following week, the US CONGRESS was also informed.

The document would have explained how a President might be able to have the DOJ wrapped up in their own confidentiality while spy8ng on the Republican campaign. To think this is an exaggeration, you would have to forget the level of dirty tricks used to prevent Bernie Sanders from the presidency.

July 28, 2014

Barack Obama
President of the United States
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President,

Please permit us to officially bring this national issue to your attention.

Operation Greylord – An undercover federal investigation of judicial corruption of an unprecedented magnitude has lead to a conspiracy of incomprehensible scope and magnitude where the judiciary is undermined and justice is denied to millions of Americans while and entire profession of lawyers and law enforcement is mandated to silence/confidentiality which prevents exposure and resolution of the unconstitutional injustice by the government.

The surviving victims of nationwide state and federal judicial corruption and injustice are relegated to (1) BEING HOMELESS/DESTITUTE, (2) INCARCERATION UNDER FALSE PRETENSES or (3) SUICIDE.

An unaffected majority does nothing. A responsible minority witnesses and reacts to the ‘broken’ condition of the government. We SEE the cause. We CAN fix this. There IS a resolution.

The response to Operation Greylord, perpetrated by the American Bar Association and enacted into law by state Supreme Courts in every state over a 25 year period from 1984 (New Jersey) to 2009 (Maine), was a level of corruption by an unchecked and self-policing judiciary giving rise to injustice of a scope and magnitude that ANY government would be unwilling and hesitant to admit.

The United States, the world leader of democracy, has denied the most basic rights of millions of Americans and controlled the media preventing the exposure of the government’s corruption… while doing nothing to address the corruption. There can be no effective reform while Rule 1.6 remains.

Even after presentment to the Judiciary and Government Representatives at state and federal levels, the Government continues to perpetrate a fraud of unfathomable proportions… and continues to deny the citizens of their most basic rights.

Addressing the injustice of Rule 1.6 is an inevitability. Facing it responsibly will affect the public reaction to this realization. Continuing to ignore this national issue is not an alternative. We ask your involvement, or where your direct action is ‘unlawful’, whatever assistance of support and resources which will permit us to succeed for the betterment of the nation in the best interests of every American.

Sincerely,
Terance Healy
Todd M. Krautheim

2020
05.16

The only way to watch the news without shouting at them for the stupid things they are saying.

2019
11.16

It’s what Washington DC is NOT saying that is the problem.

EVERYONE IS NOW ONLY SPEAKING IN BROAD GENERALIZATIONS. They are avoiding any direct factual statement. The reason they avoid this is because it is much easier to avoid fact checking when you haven’t stated a fact.

But, just because you can say the generalizations does NOT make them accurate.

Consider that many of those who are calling Trump a liar are mandated by an improperly enacted and unconstitutional Rule promulgated by the Judiciary. There is no possible review of this Rule for Constitutionality. The Rule permits those who are abiding the rule to commit fraud (LIE) to prevent disclosure, and to commit fraud in the furtherance (LIE even if it makes the situation worse) to prevent disclosure. Those who work in government are required to abide the Rule with additional requirements of non-disclosure of the previous office holder ‘frauds’.

(ie The new AG cannot expose the corruption of a prior AG.)

When I indicated making things worse, that includes participation in actions and frauds even where those actions cause a complete denial of the protection of the Rule of Law and ignore EVERY AND ALL CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS.

The CONSTITUTIONAL CONUNDRUM is Rule 1.6 Confidentiality of Information

Anyone can lie to the media.
Lawyers are excused when lying to the courts (it’s a judicial rule.).
Lawyers are NOT PERMITTED TO LIE TO CONGRESS (It’s NOT a LAW. It is a judicial rule.) This is why the closed door testimony happens. LAWYERS ALL MUST ABIDE RULE 1.6.

The Confidentiality Rule also requires that its unconstitutional affect and damage be held confidential by the lawyers who must abide the Rule.
Non-Lawyers are not required to maintain Confidentiality. Rule 1.6 applies ONLY TO LAWYERS.

So how do you best conceal a lie you must tell. You accuse the other side of lying. And the lawyers in Congress have accused Trump of being the LIAR.

Each subsequent investigator and director in Justice and FBI (all lawyers) have each told a different story about each issue. The Rule requires them to cover for those before them and maintain the non-disclosure effort. Someone is lying. It’s the one who is required to conceal someone else’s prior actions.

Loretta Lynch covered for Eric Holder (who was involved in the litigation which exposed this conundrum.)

Every state Attorney General participated in the litigation. Every US Attorney was included in the distribution. Every justice on each state Supreme Court participated and was included in the distribution of documents.

Ask yourself why you never heard anything about THE CONSTITUTIONAL CHALLENGE OF RULE 1.6 CONFIDENTIALITY OF INFORMATION? Terance Healy & Todd Krautheim on behalf of the People of the UNITED STATES v. Pennsylvania Attorney General Kathleen Kane and the Attorneys General of the United States. When the AGs defaulted. The Rule was an unconstitutional nullity. Except the Lawyers committed multiple frauds and frauds in the furtherance to conceal the entire case. Those frauds in the furtherance included taking everything Healy & Krautheim owned and leaving them broke and homeless.

So I see things as LAWYERS v NON-LAWYER.

Trump knows the problem. And he knows he cannot fully trust any lawyer to present his case because he knows the lawyer will LIE – otherwise the judiciary will discipline – and THEY DO. Aggressively.

When you know the true problem, the chaos is organized and expected. Until Rule 1.6 is exposed as unconstitutional, expect the lies to spiral.

The American Bar Association created the conundrum INTENTIONALLY. It has earned their membership BILLIONS. Meanwhile Americans lost their homes, lives and any protection of the law. Foreclosure Crisis. Black Lives Matter, False Prosecutions, Shootings…. American Injustice Ignored.

Rule 1.6 began in 1983. Then, spreading to each state by 2007. Federally it began after two congressmen, McDade & Murtha couldn’t get a law passed to include it. They slipped in one sentence in an appropriations Bill while everyone was trying not to shut down the govt. Newt Gingrich walked out of the session to avoid calling the bill for a vote. They did it anyway. Fraud in the furtherance.

All American Injustice is ignored pursuant to Rule 1.6.

2019
10.04

Pursuant to a judicial rule , Lawyers on the Committees are prevented from asking the following Question which exposes a problem that has undermined the US Constitution. The same rule mandates that lawyers answering questions not disclose the reason behind their misinformation.

If a non-Lawyer would ask…

AS A GOVERNMENT LAWYER WHO’S CLIENTS INCLUDE THE GOVT, THE DEPARTMENT, THE AGENCY, THE STAFF AND PRIOR OFFICE HOLDERS, IS THERE INFORMATION WHICH YOU WERE PREVENTED FROM DISCLOSING IN YOUR REPORT AND INFORMATION WHICH YOU WILL NOT INCLUDE IN TESTIMONY PURSUANT TO THE NONDISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS OF RULE 1.6 CONFIDENTIALITY OF INFORMATION?

Follow Up: Are you aware that Rule 1.6, enacted by the Judiciary, is unconstitutional and has been improperly enacted in every state and federally; while capable of ignoring every law and ignoring constitutionally protected rights; while capable of evading any appeal or review.

Adversely affecting the integrity of the judiciary, who improperly enacted the confidentiality rule, any review demonstrating UNCONSTITUTIONALITY would also be held confidential by this unconstitutional law.

How do you escape an unconstitutional law that has a self defense mechanism; which has further been concealed for 30+ years by additional judicial rules to avoid disclosure of a bad law which has undermined the judiciary, undermined the practice of law, undermined justice; and undermines the US Constitution?
__________________________________

It is very clear why the lawyers are failing to speak the truth. It is also very clear that where the judiciary had been overthrown by their unconstitutional rule, the legislature has been taken over by lawyers. And those lawyers are determined to impeach and overthrow the US President.

Does nobody in government respond to correspondence any longer? And the ridiculous few who have, why bother when you completely neglect the issue that I have raised?

Restore the US Constitution. The first step is to suspend that fragment of McDade-Murtha which stealthily became federal law while hidden in an appropriations bill. Then, no one would be prevented from speaking the truth, not even the lawyers.

2019
09.27

Governor Thomas Wolf September 23, 2019
The General Assembly of Pennsylvania
The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Crisis within the Judicial Branch

Actions which affect the Pennsylvania Judiciary are NOT the lawful or constitutional actions of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, they are the actions of the lawyers which have undermined the judiciary at every level. Your attention is a necessity.

The Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania is dedicated to protecting the public, maintaining the integrity of the legal profession, and safeguarding the reputation of the courts.
The statement contradicts a group of people who proposed to violate a litigants constitutional rights, undermine their protection of the Law, usurp the exclusive responsibility of the General Assembly to indicate the jurisdiction of the Courts, and destroy the integrity of the courts. That is one secret which should no longer be kept.

Taking issue with Rule 1.4 and all of the other Rules put into place to prevent the exposure and correction while concealing the conspiracy behind unconstitutional Rule 1.6 Confidentiality of Information.

The constitutionality of the Rules enacted by the Judiciary is a necessity to any Rule being proposed and promulgated by the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. BUT, who reviews the constitutionality of these Rules? The Supreme Court would clearly have a conflict of interest. NO ONE CHECKS.

The jurisdiction of the Courts is the exclusive responsibility of the General Assembly. This is specifically restated in Article V Section 10. Rules are not permitted to usurp that authority.

BUT, there is no review of the jurisdiction of the Courts by the General Assembly. The General Assembly replies to inquiries by indicating they ‘do not get involved in issues which involve the judiciary.’ The General Assembly IGNORES.

When the Courts act without jurisdiction, they do so without authority, the orders are a nullity and there is no necessity to abide their instructions. BUT, there is no review of proper jurisdiction by those who are directed to enforce the Orders. Nobody checks. Enforcement is more aggressive when the court lacks (lacked) jurisdiction. Those who enforce orders which lack jurisdiction become a party to the crime. There is no incentive to check for jurisdiction when you may discover you have been used in the commission of a crime.

“Rules or court orders governing litigation may provide that information supplied to a lawyer may not be disclosed to the client.”

The line added to Rule 1.4 falls based on those simple obvious and immediate procedural issues. Unconstitutional, Improperly enacted, and affecting Jurisdiction. A recent amendment to Rule 1.6 Confidentiality would prevents disclosure to the client by only allowing information to be exchanged with the client “to comply with other law or court order.”

How did it get to the point where it is days from going into effect and not one lawyer has indicated the problems? Broadly, Rule 1.6 requires non-disclosure where information adversely affects the integrity of the Court.
Rule 1.6 failed to stop those who put it forward and presented it to the Supreme Court of PA. It has stopped every attorney since. Further, it silenced any discussion in the subsequent rules which were enacted to prevent exposure of improperly enacted and unconstitutional Rule 1.6. Those subsequent Rules, and amendments, serve to obstruct justice and deny the Rule of Law. Unconstitutional Rules enacted to conceal an unconstitutional Rule. Review of the history of those rules, amendments and additions leads indirectly back to Rule 1.6.

I have already been a victim of the Rules which go into effect in a few weeks. No Law. No Rights. No explanations. Two Counties. Hundreds of lawyers. Injustice, where the court was without jurisdiction. Nobody checked. Judicial overreach. Abuses continued. Obstruction of Justice is barely the beginning of the litany of crimes to which I have been subjected and survived. I have persevered.

I believe the current amendments clearly seek to prevent people from prevailing or escaping. When you have no protection of the law, you can be victimized repeatedly. Without rights, you may survive but you can never prevail. I persevere.

The Rules, and specifically the recent amendments, indicate an awareness and response to the litigation which has involved me and affected my life, liberty and any happiness since 2007. I am well documented on the court record and the internet. Yes, you have likely heard from me before. I have turned to everyone, including foreign leaders. I WAS NOT BEING IGNORED. Events and Actions were CONFIDENTIAL AND SUBJECT TO NON-DISCLOSURE.

One who tried to help discovered the retaliation, corruption and determination to continue the corruption which has undermined the judiciary, the Rule of Law and the US Constitution. Those ‘secret orders from unidentified courts’ preventing the Attorney General from the duties and responsibilities of the Office of Attorney General also lacked jurisdiction and support of any law.

Lawyers were Ordered to not disclose information. The client knew already. Public disclosure was prevented where the presentation of the information was additionally ordered to NOT be presented to the Court.

Injustice and Lies do not protect the integrity of the Judiciary. Injustice and Lies conceal the corruption of the judiciary undermined by their own confidentiality.

These improperly enacted and unconstitutional Rules contradict many, if not all, of the principles which serve to protect the dignity and honor of the judiciary and the legal profession.

“Obstructive conduct impedes the fundamental goal of resolving disputes in a rational, peaceful and efficient manner.” Judicial Code of Civility 99.1 Preamble
§99.2 A Judge’s Duties to Lawyers and Other Judges.

  1. A judge should show respect, courtesy and patience to the lawyers, parties and all participants in the legal process by treating all with civility.
  2. A judge should refrain from acting upon or manifesting racial, gender or other bias or prejudice toward any participant in the legal process.
  3. A judge should not employ hostile or demeaning words in opinions or in written or oral communications with lawyers, parties or witnesses.
  4. A judge should ensure that disputes are resolved in a prompt and efficient manner and give all issues in controversy deliberate, informed and impartial analysis and explain, when appropriate, the reasons for the decision of the court.
  5. A judge should allow the lawyers to present proper arguments and to make a complete and accurate record.
  6. A judge should recognize that the conciliation process is an integral part of litigation and thus should protect all confidences and remain unbiased with respect to conciliation communications.
    §99.3. The Lawyer’s Duties to the Court and to Other Lawyers.
  7. A lawyer should act in a manner consistent with the fair, efficient and humane system of justice and treat all participants in the legal process in a civil, professional and courteous manner at all times. These principles apply to the lawyer’s conduct in the courtroom, in office practice and in the course of litigation.
  8. A lawyer should not engage in any conduct that diminishes the dignity or decorum of the courtroom.
  9. A lawyer should refrain from acting upon or manifesting racial, gender or other bias or prejudice toward any participant in the legal process.
  10. A lawyer should not misrepresent, mischaracterize, misquote or miscite facts or authorities in any oral or written communication to the court.
  11. A lawyer should avoid ex parte communications with the court, including the judge’s staff, on pending matters in person, by telephone or in letters and other forms of written communication unless authorized. Communication with the judge on any matter pending before the judge, without notice to opposing counsel, is strictly prohibited.
  12. A lawyer should strive to protect the dignity and independence of the judiciary, particularly from unjust criticism and attack.
  13. A lawyer should be cognizant of the standing of the legal profession and should bring these principles to the attention of other lawyers when appropriate.
    The principles listed are NOT Rules NOR Laws, NOR Enforced. They exist to be referenced. They are self-serving suggestions about the system used when admonishing a judge or lawyer involved in a real disciplinary matter.
    Trust and esteem in the judiciary is a necessity. Yet, within these rules capable of repetition and damage while evading review, there exists a blatant disregard for the Public Trust which prevents the judiciary from rising to address their problem. Perhaps the judiciary is less concerned with a problem where ennui and acceptance demonstrates there can be no attack against an integrity which only exists in principles.

The authority of the court has been usurped. Those responsible extend their reach to further usurp the authority of the General Assembly.

The reality of retaliatory actions which threaten the members of the General Assembly has been demonstrated when they used these improper and unconstitutional Rules to remove the elected Pennsylvania Attorney General. The General Assembly neglected to address the rules affecting the jurisdiction of the courts.

The farce of a trial where a litigant is prevented from presenting information demonstrating their innocence, and the identifying the fraud of those who are responsible.

At that time, every lawyer was not being silenced by Rule 1.4. However, nondisclosure was Ordered for those in the Office of the Attorney General, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, the Montgomery County District Attorneys Office, the Montgomery County Courts and the teams of lawyers representing the defendant. A common pleas court judge succesfully unrang a bell.

The federal courts had indicated ‘to unring a bell’ was an impossibility in a matter which brought another litigant to Montgomery County. A defendant prevented from information by lawyers. Prevented from many aspects of his defense. Prevented from raising issues relating to the allegations and the charges. Jurisdiction was demonstrated to have been affected. Those changes were also ignored.

My experience was the same. Same Courts. Same judges. Same lack of jurisdiction. Same failure to address issues. Mine has been relentless and unending. It had taken years to realize that those who failed to communicate or address any issues were not negligent or ineffective or absent minded or stupid or involved in a personal conspiracy against me.

It was non-disclosure. It was Confidentiality. Once triggered, it terrified them.

Permit me to start with the Ridiculous notion you present in these recent Rules. Application of Rule 1.6 to Rule 1.4 [Comment 7, last sentence.]
A Court may order a Lawyer to withhold information from his client.

Which Court? Jurisdiction question. Requires the General Assembly.
There is no indication that such an Order from a Magisterial Court is any less applicable than one from the Supreme Court.
What if Orders from two judges silence both sides involved in litigation.
Clearly ex parte ? The client is not aware of the secreted proceedings, if any, which bring about this failure to communicate or provide ‘zealous representation’.
Exculpatory Information? Not excluded from the new rule’s non-disclosure Order.
Information Necessary for Defense? Not excluded from the new rule’s non-disclosure Order.

Many of these factors create a valid reason for appeal of any order in any case where such a farce has occurred, or may have been perpetrated and concealed, by those trusted persons representing them and the ones trusted by the People to maintain the integrity of the courts. “Sneaky” is not a word often associated with integrity.

This determined and obvious unconstitutional rulemaking is a violation of the Public Trust which could potentially throw open the doors of every cell block in Pennsylvania. This would involve considerably further reviewed than the smaller segment of the prison population which, despite the overly loud objections of Prosecuting attorneys at having their efforts reviewed, had been reviewed by the Governor.

The Governor’s review was clearly an evaluation to determine if one provision of Rule 1.6 had deliberately and intentionally not been triggered so as to avoid a disclosure. Death Penalty cases.

Injustice could be concealed pursuant to Rule 1.6 unless it would result in a person’s death. Placing a person on death row to live out there natural days would not trigger the exception. However, an imminent execution would trigger the opportunity for disclosure. There seems no haste to execute prisoners in Pennsylvania. Why had no one been executed?

Assigning lawyers to conduct the Governor’s review provided the necessary ‘discretion’ which avoided any potential revelations. Lawyers obligated by Rule 1.6 could not reveal the problem.

Any suggestion that fear of such an occurrence is a valid reason for creating these new Rules shows a tremendous logical failure to recognize that it was the improperly enacted and unconstitutional Rule 1.6 Confidentiality of Information which created and IGNORED those prior injustices. The removal of the fraud provisions demonstrated the informed intent of those who put that rules forward to each state Supreme Court. Failure to recognize the aggressive enforcement of Rule 1.6 would

CONSTITUTIONAL CHALLENGE

A Constitutional Challenge had been filed in Federal Court in August 2013 and served upon every state Attorney General. Each defaulted and failed to respond, a coordinated effort by each state. The federal court had neglected to put the question of the constitutionality to each state. The federal court had neglected to serve the US Attorney General. After the deadline for responses had passed, Letters were served upon each state Attorney General to confirm that it was their intention to default. None replied.

After the deadlines had passed, without offering explanation nor excuse, and without making any case to justify an extension of the deadline, a response arrived improperly filed electronically. The relevant issues were neglected. This was the monkey wrench through which the Federal Courts subsequently dismissed the matter while failing to address any of the omissions and neglect to adhere to the procedural rules.

On Appeal, the matter was not presented by the court staff to the Third Circuit Justices. The Third Circuit would have carefully addressed the issues involved in the appeal. Yet, the Pennsylvania Rules of Professional Conduct forbade the court from addressing the issue. The unconstitutional Rule mandated non-disclosure. This included non-disclosure that the Rule was indeed unconstitutional. Additional provisions excused the fraud in the furtherance of non-disclosure. However, Rule 1.6 was exposed and had fallen. The non-disclosure mandate had interfered with the matter from the start. The failure to address the primary issue involved in the appeal demonstrated the court was under the mandate. The McDade Murtha Law had not passed. Instead it became a single sentence in a huge appropriations bill. Preventing the federal government from acting, and further causing the current environment in Washington where lawyers lies are excused everywhere except before the US Congress.

These actions which affect the Pennsylvania Judiciary are NOT the actions of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, they are the actions of the lawyers which have undermined the judiciary and controlled the courts since 1987. Their act of sedition held confidential while their control of the judiciary has leveraged a broad overreach into all areas of government and public and private lives.

Without your action there remains only one method to remove these unconstitutional rules. The Kings Bench jurisdiction and the exception regarding present rules would requires Supreme Court approval. The court has thwarted all attempts to save them from themselves.
|
This demands your immediate attention.

Terance Healy

2019
07.29

One question
– to expose and resolve the quagmire of problems encountered by lawyers mandated by non-disclosure and excused for fraud and lies.
– to prevent the overthrow of the first non-lawyer in the Executive Branch since Ronald Reagan.

AS A GOVERNMENT LAWYER WHO’S CLIENTS INCLUDE THE GOVT, THE DEPARTMENT, THE AGENCY, THE STAFF AND PRIOR OFFICE HOLDERS, IS THERE INFORMATION WHICH YOU WERE PREVENTED FROM DISCLOSING IN YOUR REPORT AND INFORMATION WHICH YOU WILL NOT INCLUDE IN TESTIMONY PURSUANT TO THE NONDISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS OF RULE 1.6 CONFIDENTIALITY OF INFORMATION?

Follow Up: Are you aware that Rule 1.6, enacted by the Judiciary, is unconstitutional and has been improperly enacted in every state and federally while capable of ignoring every law and ignoring constitutionally protected rights while capable of evading any appeal or review.

Adversely affecting the integrity of the judiciary, who improperly enacted the confidentiality rule, any review demonstrating UNCONSTITUTIONALITY would also be held confidential by this unconstitutional law. How do you escape an unconstitutional law that has a self defense mechanism; which has further been concealed for 30+ years by additional judicial rules to avoid disclosure of a bad law which has undermined the judiciary, undermined the practice of law, undermined justice; and undermines the US Constitution?

%d bloggers like this: