A Terroristic Divorce

The media has directed a considerable amount of effort at ignoring the Constitutional Crisis which the US is facing. The injustices witnessed by the entire population and repeatedly ignored by law enforcement find NO Acceptable explanation or support in the US Constitution. Yet, Prosecutors/Lawyers are making statements blaming race, sex, nationality, hate, anger, corruption, police, etc…

THE AMERICAN MEDIA DELIVERS THIS UNACCEPTABLE MESSAGE TO A POPULATION IN DISBELIEF. Even more shocking are their statements suggesting that JUSTICE is being served. Due process is being followed. But, how can THAT be true. Clearly, American Injustice is being ignored. The neglect is NOT Constitutional. BUT, A CONFIDENTIALITY LAW IS BEING FOLLOWED BY LAWYERS. The law is being followed, BUT, no one is addressing that the law is not only BAD, but a confidentiality law which is only required of lawyers has a collateral affect on the constitutional rights of individual Americans.

The government is ignoring the Constitution.

So why would our elected representatives in every state and federally neglect their responsibilities to govern in accordance with the supreme law of the land. What happened? How? Why has no one addressed the crisis.

WHAT HAPPENED?
RULE 1.6 Confidentiality of Information was enacted by each state supreme Court from 1984 thru 2009.

Rule 1.6 Confidentiality was no longer discretionary. Lawyers are OBLIGATED to maintain the confidentiality of privileged information. The ethical choice of Lawyers to decide when to disclose and or reveal information became a MANDATE OF NON-DISCLOSURE with permission to commit fraud in the furtherance to prevent disclosure

Where the withheld information can cause the denial of a person’s Constitutional rights, Rule 1.6 is unconstitutional. The Collaterally unconstitutional law which requires lawyers to be silent further defies and prevents its own resolution.

THE PROBLEM:. Each state judiciary has improperly enacted an unconstitutional law. The courts lack any jurisdiction to review the constitutionality of a law which they themselves have enacted.
– a clear conflict of interest for the judiciary to address their unconstitutional law.
– exposing and addressing the improperly enacted law will adversely affect the integrity of the judiciary.
– the state supreme courts DO NOT HAVE authority to enact an unconstitutional law.
BUT… WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THEY DO? BECAUSE, THEY DID.

ANY LAW IS LAW UNTIL SUCH TIME AS IT IS FOUND TO BE UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
Only at that time, the law is a nullity. NO LAW. Repugnant to the Constitution.

As if it had never existed, the bad law, a nullity can provide no defense or support for anyone who has acted to deny a person’s Constitutional rights.

Where the state supreme courts are not able to address or resolve their improper law, THE LEGISLATURE MUST ACT TO SUSPEND THE LAW. Suspension would permit the court to work with the Legislature to address the problem.

BUT, Lawyers in the Legislature are mandated to protect the integrity of the courts. The improperly enacted and UNCONSTITUTIONAL law prevents the Legislature from exposing the issue and acting to resolve the matter.

While 30 plus years of injustice ignored by confidentiality will surely affect the integrity of the court.
Continuing to ignore the issue also has an adverse affect on the integrity of the courts.
Continuing to Ignore does nothing to improve the integrity of the courts.
Continuing to ignore does not restore the independence of the judiciary – an essential element of jurisdiction.

Non-lawyers in the legislature are permitted to address the issue, BUT Lawyers in the Legislature are preventing their action.

The improperly enacted unconstitutional confidentiality law is preventing its own removal.

The Governor could call the legislature to assemble to address the issue. (UNLESS THE GOVERNOR IS A LAWYER ALSO MANDATED UNDER THE LAW.)

The non-lawyer Governor’s staff includes lawyers who prevent the governor from being properly informed of the issue. You cannot meet with PA Governor Tom Wolf without being cleared through the Office of General Counsel. Access has been prevented. The Governor is being misinformed by his lawyers who are permitted to take any actions which prevent exposure and resolution. When committing fraud in the furtherance lawyers are protected by confidentiality and non-disclosure.

HOW DID THIS HAPPEN?
The American Bar Association promoted their Rules of Professional Conduct to each state supreme Court as a Code of Ethics to be enacted into law. The ABA effort was deliberately flawed and executed with knowledge of the unethical immoral and unconstitutional affect on Americans. Against the strong efforts of the Robert Kutek, the removal of the fraud provisions from Rule 1.6 Confidentiality was adopted by the ABA after Kutek’s sudden death by heart attack in January 1983.

Once enacted into law by the state supreme courts, the lawyers at the ABA were also mandated to conceal the unconstitutional confidentiality. They caused the crisis. Their membership profited from their treason. All lawyers were required to conceal the treason by the ABA as it undermined the judiciary and affected their independence. A violation of THE PUBLIC TRUST.

NO FEDERAL ATTENTION
The McDade-Murtha Act mandates federal lawyers and investigators to follow the Rules in affect in the jurisdiction where they are working/investigating. This prevents the federal government from actions.

A RESOLUTION?
The ONLY available lawful alternative for resolution requires ALL LAWYERS to stand back and permit the non-lawyers in government to address the improperly enacted and unconstitutional law. Not participating in the effort to suspend the law, by their lawful inaction and silence, the ethical lawyers will have adhered to the law.

Once the law is suspended, the lawyers may join and participate in the discussion and resolution effort. The state supreme courts can also participate. The Legislatures can enact the laws necessary to prevent any recurrence and address their inability to taken action.

ONE OTHER POSSIBILITY…
The Montgomery County Pennsylvania District Attorney can falsely accuse Pennsylvania Attorney General of a crime. The crime could be shrouded in confidentiality and nondisclosure which may not be presented or explained to the public. The matter can be drawn out by the courts while the career and integrity of the Attorney General is attacked. Fraud in the furtherance by lawyers is protected by confidentiality and permits False information to be presented to the media by the Prosecutors who seek
-to mislead and misinform the public in an effort to continue and conceal the treason of the ABA,
-to continue the denial of the constitutional rights of Americans,
-to actively conspire to deny and ignore the law, the state Constitution and the Constitution of the United States
-to proceed with prosecution of false charges in a court without proper jurisdiction
-to demonstrate the judiciary has been undermined and usurped where motions in the matter are DENIED in unsigned, single-sentence orders left unsubstantiated and unsupported by law.

Improperly enacted and unconstitutional Rule 1.6 Confidentiality prevents the court from any explanation which exposes the bad law AND prevents the court from indicating their lack of jurisdiction AND prevents the judiciary from recusing from the matter because it would require an explanation which would expose the unconstitutional Confidentiality.

The Superior Court is similarly hindered. Their responses to Appeals have also been DENIED in unsigned, single-sentence orders left unsubstantiated and unsupported by law.

Any court which lacks jurisdiction is not authorized to conduct hearings or decide any question brought before the court. Jurisdiction is a necessary
element to any matter before the court. The unconstitutional confidentiality is requiring the Court of Common Pleas to perpetrate a farce.

The lawyers are PREVENTED from exposing the farce where MANDATED to Non-disclosure.

CONFIDENTIALITY AND NONDISCLOSURE ARE AGGRESSIVELY MANDATED AND ENFORCED BY THE SUPREME COURT DISCIPLINARY BOARD.
…UNTIL SUCH TIME AS ANY LAWYER IS PRESENTING A DEFENSE BEFORE A COURT AND IS LAWFULLY PERMITTED TO DISCLOSE PRIVILEGED INFORMATION NECESSARY FOR THEIR DEFENSE.

When the Montgomery County hearing begins, Attorney General Kathleen Kane will finally be permitted to break her silence and expose the cause of the constitutional crisis in American which permits injustice to be ignored.

In December 2015, at the Constitution Center in Philadelphia, Attorney General Kathleen Kane contracted Doug Gansler (former Maryland Attorney General) to conduct an investigation of all OAG email. Gansler, acting as investigator, has no obligations under Rule 1.6.

Where Kane is prevented from disclosure of privileged information concerning OAG staff, Special Attorney General Gansler is not prevented from revealing information which could be otherwise considered privileged.

For example,… Any emails between OAG staffers could indicate a conspiracy to undermine and impeach Kathleen Kane. Where an improperly enacted and unconstitutional Rule 1.6 prevents Kane from publicly prosecuting OAG staff for corruption and abuses, it would not prevent termination and removal from the OAG.

The federal litigation regarding their terminations and purported retaliatory allegations could similarly ONLY be addressed by Kane when presenting a defense in a courtroom.

In July 2016, ending the law suits at an early stage, Federal District Judge Harvey Bartle III dismissed suits filed against AG Kathleen Kane by Frank Fina, Marc Costanza, Frank Noonan, Richard Sheetz and Randy Feathers.

This week, charges could be dropped by the Montgomery County District Attorney to prevents disclosure of the Constitutional Challenge of Rule 1.6 by Kane. HOWEVER, A very likely element of Kane’s defense, the report prepared by Special Attorney General Doug Gansler could be released to State Police for investigation, review and prosecution.

The State Police are not hindered by any Rule 1.6 non-disclosure and are not prevented from prosecuting corruption or abuse of power which could be indicated in the report. In the past, PA State Police refused to participate in the InterBranch Report regarding The Kids for Cash scandal and likewise did not contribute to the Sandusky Report. Both reports were prepared by lawyers with mandates to conceal privileged information. Relevant Data from the State Police would not be included in the report where the lawyers involved had obligations of confidentiality.

PA State Police exposure and prosecution would provide the lawful opportunity for the law enforcement to address the Confidentiality problem responsible for American Injustice Ignored and the Constitutional Crisis in the US.

The US Constitution will be rebooted.

JUSTICE IS COMING.