The Beginning of a Tragedy-Resulting Scheme—
Enabled by Complicity of Federal Judges

 

After federal airline safety inspector Rodney Stich was given  the assignment to halt the corruption at a politically powerful airline that was experiencing a series of airline disasters, he discovered and documented misconduct that was resulting in life-and-death tragedies. In addition, he became the target of attacks to halt his official assignment. Three additional fatal airline disasters occurred while he was under attack.

 

His reaction, over the years, to these deadly forms of corruption enabled him to discover criminal activities that resulted in great harm. Reacting to those serious matters by fighting the corruption resulted in the start of 13 years of attacks by CIA-FBI-front law firms, California judges, and federal judges. The initial attack started in 1982, in California courts at Fairfield, California, involving a  sham lawsuit that was barred by dozens of state and federal laws.

 

These violations constituted  federal causes of actions for which the remedies were in the federal courts, and for  which federal judges had the mandatory responsibilities to provide relief. But instead of providing relief, dozens of federal judges protected the six years of massive violations of state and federal laws, and added additional violations.

 


Federal Judges Enlarged Upon The
Scheme's Massive Civil Rights Violations

Years earlier, federal judges blocked Stich from reporting federal crimes resulting in aviation  disasters that were filed against  the FAA and NTSB, being filed under the federal crime reporting statute.

Now, in the 1980s and under attack to halt his exposure of ongoing corruption in government, that was resulting in ongoing worsening harm to the people and the nation, federal judges aided and abetted the actions starting in the  California courts. When Stich exercised  federal remedies that federal judges were required to provide, every remedy  was  repeatedly denied and violated, making the federal judges complicit in the offenses.

 (1) To recover damages for injury to his person or property, or because of the deprivation of any right or privilege of a citizen of the United States, by any act done in furtherance of any conspiracy mentioned in section 1985 of Title 42:  To recover damages from any person who fails to prevent or to aid in preventing any wrongs mentioned in section 1985 of Title 42 which he had knowledge were about to occur and power to prevent;
 

   (3) To redress the deprivation, under color of any State law, statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any right, privilege or immunity secured by the Constitution of the United States or by any Act of Congress providing for equal rights of citizens or of all persons within the jurisdiction of the United States.
 

   (4) To recover damages or to secure equitable or other relief under any Act of Congress providing for the protection of civil rights, ...

Every person who, having knowledge that any of the wrongs conspired to be done, and mentioned in the preceding section [42 USCS § 1985], are about to be committed, and having power to prevent or aid in preventing the commission of the same, neglects or refuses to do so, if such wrongful act be committed, shall be liable to the party injured, or his legal representatives, for all damages caused by such wrongful act, which such person by reasonable diligence could have prevented; and such damages may be recovered in an action on the case; and any number of persons guilty of such wrongful neglect or refusal may be joined as defendants in the action, and if the death of any party be caused by any such wrongful act and neglect, the legal representatives of the deceased shall have such action therefore, and may recover not exceeding five thousand dollars damages therein, for the benefit of the widow of the deceased, if there be one, and if there be no widow, then for the benefit of the next of kin of the deceased. But no action under the provisions of this section shall be sustained which is not commenced within one year after the cause of action has accrued.”

"With regard to a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, a § 1983 complaint should not be dismissed unless it appears that the plaintiff can provide no set of facts which would entitle him to relief. Doe v. Public Health Trust of Dade County, 696 F.2d 901, 907 (11th Cir. 1983) (Hatchett, J. specially concurring); Richardson v. Fleming, 651 F.2d 366, 368 (5th Cir. 1981). For purposes of testing sufficiency of the complaint, the allegations of the complaint must be taken as true. Richardson, 651 F.2d at 368.

Starting in 1983 and continuing to this date, federal district and appellate judges blocked Stich from exercising the defenses in numerous federal statutes, Supreme Court decisions, and constitutional protections.


Federal Judges Converted Corruption-Fighting Activist
Into a Man Without A Country

 

Federal district and appellate judges repeatedly issued unlawful and unconstitutional orders barring Stich for the remainder of his life from filing any papers in the Federal District or Appellate Courts

 

The effect―and surely the intent of denying Stich access to the federal courts―was to:

  • Prevent him and his group of other former government agents from reporting the criminal activities and related tragedies that they had discovered. (Stich had encountered repeated blocks from members of Congress and Justice Department personnel that prevented him from providing them with the evidence. Stich then circumvented these blocks by exercising the alternate remedy under the federal crime reporting statute.)
     

  • Prevent Stich from exercising the many federal defenses against the massive numbers of violations of state and federal laws and constitutional protections, that constituted violations of federally protected rights, for which federal remedies and defenses were guaranteed to everyone (except to that former federal agent).

FRCivP65 injunctions. Rendered unlawful and unconstitutional injunctive orders barring Stich for the remainder of his life from federal court access and voiding all rights and protections guaranteed by the laws and Constitution of the United States. The injunctive orders reversed the clear legal requirements: the injunctive orders were rendered against the party suffering great and irreparable harm (Stich); were rendered in favor of the parties perpetrating the harm and responsible for the record setting violations of state and federal laws and federally protected rights; were rendered against the public interest rather than in the public’s interest; failed to stated these requirements in the decisions; and in the process misused their judicial positions to aid and abet the violations of federally protected rights that they were paid and entrusted to uphold and enforce.

 

Violated Fifth Amendment protection. The federal judges misused their judicial positions and the courts to destroy for plaintiff, and setting precedence, the rights and protections guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.  

Fifth Amendment, Section 1. No person [shall be] deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;

The federal judges aided and abetted the violations of the Fourteenth Amendment by the CIA-front law firm and the defendant California judges.  

 Fourteenth Amendment, Section 1. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the law.

Federal judges engaged in a continuous pattern of reversing the clear wording and intent of every statute, rules of court, Supreme Court decision, and constitutional right. They, exactly like the California judges, sought to support their unlawful and unconstitutional acts by reversing the legal and common sense definition of frivolous, and placing a frivolous label on Stich’s filings, each of which stated serious and multiple federal causes of action that were backed up with judicial records of such violations.  

The United States Supreme Court defined the legal definition of frivolous in Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738: An appeal [or complaint] is not frivolous if "any of the legal points [are] arguable on their merits ..."

Federal judges, like the California judges, sought to support their unlawful and unconstitutional acts by reversing the legal definition of vexation and called Stich a vexatious litigant.

Applying this definition to the American people, the exercise of constitutional due process for only one of the dozens of legal and constitutional violations inflicted upon Stich would, instead of creating a cause of action, would be frivolous and vexatious, In this manner, the mindset in the federal courts could void and eliminate every legal right and protection guaranteed under the form of government in the United States, and show how dangerous the judicial system is to the people of the United States. Ironically, it was the repeated violations of civil and constitutional rights judicially inflicted upon Stich, and the repeated denial and violation of constitutional due process specifically provided by such laws and the Declaratory Judgment Act and Rule 47, and the Civil rights Act, and related case law and rules of court, that caused Stich to have to repeatedly seek relief, to no avail.  

 

Black's Law dictionary defines "vexatious proceedings" as follows:              

Proceeding instituted maliciously and without probable cause. Paramount Pictures v. Blumenthal, 256 App.Div. 756, 11 N.Y.S.2d 768, 772. When the party bringing proceeding merely wishes to annoy or embarrass his opponent, or when it is not calculated to lead to any practical result. Such a proceeding is often described as "frivolous and vexatious," and the court may dismiss it on that ground.  "An appeal [or complaint] is not frivolous if "any of the legal points [are] arguable on their merits ..." Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738; "The objective standard looks at the merits of the appeal from a reasonable person's perspective. ... whether any reasonable person would agree that the point is totally and completely devoid of merit, and therefore, frivolous. ... an appeal is not frivolous if "any of the legal points [are] arguable on their merits." In re Marriage of Flaherty (1982) 31 Cal.3d 637, 649.

 Interpretation of a frivolous filing in California, under Code of Civil Procedure 907 and Rule of Court 26(a).  

"For the purpose of determining whether a complaint is "frivolous," the court presumes that the plaintiff's allegations are true." Hernandez v. Denton, 88 C.D.O.S. 8132 (9th Cir. Nov. 23, 1988); quoting Franklin, 745 F.2d at 1228.


Obstruction of Justice by Federal Judges—
And Resulting Great Tragedies

Federal judges, by refusing to receive reports of criminal activities being offered under the federal crime reporting statute, Title 18 U.S.C. § 4, obstructed justice:

Title 18 U.S.C. § 4 (misprision of felony). “Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined not more than $500 or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.”

 

To address the corruption in government offices, Stich also sought a court order under 1361, ordering a federal official to perform his duty and halt his unlawful acts, directed to the FAA and NTSB). The earlier obstruction of justice focusing primarily on a pattern of covert corrupt and criminal acts documented by Stich while he was an FAA air safety inspector-investigator made possible the continuation of the federal violations that played key roles in subsequent fatal airline crashes. The obstruction of justice by the present defendant federal judges related to such crimes as the CIA drug smuggling, corruption in bankruptcy courts, and others are described in Stich’s various books, especially: Unfriendly Skies: 20th & 21st Centuries; Blowback, 9/11, and Cover-Ups; and Lawyers and Judges: American Trojan Horses.

Title 28 U.S.C. § 1361. Action to compel an officer of the United States to perform his duty. The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of any action in the nature of mandamus to compel an officer or employee of the United States or any agency thereof to perform a duty owed to the plaintiff.

This obstruction of justice by federal judges commenced in 1976 when Stich filed federal lawsuits under Title 18 U.S.C. § 4 and Title 28 U.S.C. § 1361.

Stich v. United States, et al., 554 F.2d 1070 (9th Cir.) (tab­le), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 920 (1977)(addressed hard-core air safety misconduct, violations of federal air safety laws, threats against government inspectors not to report safety violations and misconduct); Stich v. National Transportation Safety Board, 685 F.2d 446 (9th Cir.) (table), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 861 (1982))(addressed repeated criminal falsification of official airline accident reports, omitting highly sensitive air safety misconduct, making possible repeated crashes from the same sequestered problems); Amicus curiae brief filed on July 17, 1975, in the Paris DC-10 multi-district litigation, Flanagan v. McDonnell Douglas Corporation and United States of America, Civil Action 74-808-PH, MDL 172, Central District California.) (addressing the long standing FAA misconduct, of which the cover-up of the DC-10 cargo door problem was one of repeated instances of tragedy related misconduct); U.S. v. Department of Justice, District of Columbia, Nos. 86-2523, 87-2214, and other actions filed by claimant seeking to expose and correct the powerful and covert air disaster misconduct.


Criminal Offenses Repeatedly Perpetrated
By Federal Judges

 

By blocking Stich and a group of other former federal agents from reporting criminal and even subversive activities, federal judges repeatedly were guilty of criminal acts that had catastrophic consequences for the nation. The involved criminal statutes included:

 

Title 18 U.S.C. §§ 2, 3, and 4, violated by the defendant’s obstruction of justice and harm inflicted upon Stich to prevent his reporting of the criminal activities.  
 

Title 18 U.S.C. § 2. Principals. (a) Whoever commits an offense against the United States or aids, abets, counsels, commands, induces or procures its commission, is punishable as a principal. (b) Whoever willfully causes an act to be done which if directly performed by him or another would be an offense against the United States, is punishable as a principal.

Note: The legislative intent to punish as a principal not only anyone who directly commits an offense and anyone who "aids, abets, counsels, commands, induces or procures" another to commit an offense, but also anyone who causes the doing of an act which if done by him directly would render him guilty of an offense against the United States. Case law decisions: Rothenburg v. United States, 1918, 38 S.Ct. 18, 245 U.S. 480, 62 L.Ed. 414, and United States v. Giles, 1937, 57 S.Ct. 340, 300 U.S. 41, 81 L.Ed. 493.

Title 18 U.S.C. § 3. Accessory after the fact. Whoever, knowing that an offense against the United States had been committed, receives, relieves, comforts or assists the offender in order to hinder or prevent his apprehension, trial or punishment, is an accessory after the fact.

 

Federal judges conspired with other judges and lawyers, among other people, as they perpetrated predicate acts in a racketeering enterprise, to strip Stich of the assets that funded his exposure of criminal acts that continue to undermine the internal security of the United States. Their predicate acts enlarged upon the harm being inflicted upon the American people and the government.  

Title 42 U.S.C. § 1961. Definition. As used in this chapter-(1) "racketeering activity" means (A) any act or threat involving ... relating to 1503 (relating to obstruction of justice), section 1510 (relating to obstruction of criminal investigations), section 1511 (relating to obstruction of State or local law enforcement), section 1951 (relating to interference with commerce, robbery or extortion), section 1952 (relating to racketeering, ...  

Title 42 U.S.C.  § 1962. Prohibited Activities. (a) It shall be unlawful for any person who has received any income derived, directly 9 or indirectly, from a pattern of racketeering activity or through collection of an unlawful debt in which such person has participated as a principal within the meaning of section 2, title 18, United States Code, to use or invest, directly or indirectly, any part of such income, or the proceeds of which affect, interstate or foreign commerce. ...

(b) It shall be unlawful for any person through a pattern or racketeering activity or through collection of an unlawful debt to acquire or maintain, directly or indirectly, any interest in or control of any enterprise which is engaged in, or the activities of which affect, interstate or foreign commerce.
 

(c) It shall be unlawful for any person employed by or associated with any enterprise engaged in, or the activities of which affect, to conduct or participate, directly or indirectly, in the conduct of such enterprise's affairs through a pattern of racketeering activity or collection of unlawful debt.
 

(d) It shall be unlawful for any person to conspire to violate any of the provisions of subsections (a), (b), or (c) of this section. ...  
 

Title 42 USC § 1964. Civil Remedies.

    (a) The district courts of the United States shall have jurisdiction to prevent and restrain violations of section 1962 of this chapter by issuing appropriate orders, including, but not limited to: ordering any person to divert himself of any interest, direct or indirect, in any enterprise; imposing reasonable restrictions of the future activities or investments of any person, including, but not limited to, prohibiting any person  from engaging in the same type of endeavor as the enterprise engaged in, the activities of which affect interstate or foreign commerce; or ordering dissolution or reorganization of any enterprise, making due provision for the rights of innocent persons.

       (b) The Attorney General may institute proceedings under this section. Pending final determination thereof, the court may at any time enter such restraining orders or prohibitions, or take such other actions, including the acceptance of satisfactory performance bonds, as it shall deem proper.

       (c) Any person injured in his business or property by reason of a violation of section 1962 of this chapter may sue therefore in any appropriate United States district court and shall recover threefold the damages he sustains and the cost of the suit, including a reasonable attorney's fee.

        (d) A final judgment or decree rendered in favor of the United States in any criminal proceeding brought by the United States under this chapter shall estop the defendant from denying the essential allegations of the criminal offense in any subsequent civil proceeding brought by the United States.  

Title 42 USC § 1965. Venue and Process. (Any civil action or proceeding under this chapter against any person may be instituted in the district court of the United States for any district in which such person resides, is found, has an agent, or transacts his affairs.

       (b) In any action under section 1964 of this chapter in any district court of the United States in which it is shown that the ends of justice require that other parties residing in any other district be brought before the court, the court may cause such parties to be summoned, and process for that purpose may be served in any judicial district of the United States by the marshal thereof.

           (c) In any civil or criminal action or proceeding instituted by the United States under this chapter in the district court of the United States for any judicial district, subpoenas issued by such court to compel the attendance of witnesses may be served in any other judicial district, except that in any civil action or proceeding no such subpoena shall be issued for service upon any individual who resides in another district at a place more than one hundred miles from the place at which such court is held without approval given by a judge of such court upon a showing of good cause.

    (d) All other process in any action or proceeding under this chapter may be served on any person in any judicial district in which such person resides, is found, has an agent, or transacts his affairs.


Federal Judges Retaliating Against
Former Federal Agent for Reporting
High-Level Criminal Activities

 

Federal judges retaliated against Stich for exercising due process remedies specifically provided by the laws and Constitution of the United States. They retaliated against Stich for attempting to report criminal acts under the federal crime reporting statutes that he and his group of government whistleblowers had discovered.  

 

It is a felony for anyone to retaliate against anyone for having exercised due process remedies guaranteed by the laws and Constitution of the United States.  

Title 18 U.S.C. § 241. Conspiracy against rights of citizens. If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any citizen in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; ... They shall be fined ... or imprisoned ... or both;

Title 18 U.S.C. § 1505. Whoever corruptly ... influences, obstructs, or impedes or endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede the due the proper administration of the law under which any pending proceeding is being had before any department or agency of the United States ... shall be fined not more than $5,000 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

 

Title 18 USC § 1510. Obstruction of criminal investigation.  (a) Whoever willfully endeavors by means of bribery to obstruct, delay, or prevent the communication of information relating to a violation of any criminal statute of the United States by any person to a criminal investigator shall be fined not more than $5,000, or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.  (b) As used in this section, the term "criminal investigator" means any individual duly authorized by a department, agency, or armed force of the United States to conduct or engage in investigations of or prosecutions for violations of the criminal laws of the United States. [Stich was a federal inspector-investigator responsible for air safety at the most senior program at United Airlines, when he discovered an ongoing pattern of criminal activities related to a series of fatal airline crashes.]

 

Title 18 U.S.C. § 1513. Retaliating against a witness, victim, or an informant. (a) Whoever knowingly engages in any conduct and thereby causes bodily injury to another person or damages the tangible property of another person, or threatens to do so, with intent to retaliate against any person for──(1) the attendance of a witness or party at an official proceeding, or any testimony given or any record, document, or other object produced by a witness in an official proceeding; or (2) any information relating to the commission or possible commission of a Federal offense ...

 

Title 18 U.S.C. § 1515. Definitions of terms in criminal statutes (as used in sections 1512 and 1513).

    (a)(2) the term "physical force"  means physical action against another and includes confinement; (a)(3) the term "misleading conduct" means──

(A) knowingly making a false statement;
 

(B) intentionally omitting information from a statement and thereby causing a portion of such statement to be misleading, or intentionally concealing a material fact, and thereby creating a false impression by such statement;
 

(C) with intent to mislead, knowingly submitting or inviting reliance on a writing or recording that is false ... or otherwise lacking in authenticity; 
 

(D) with intent to mislead, knowingly submitting or inviting reliance on a ... object that is misleading in a material respect;
 

(E) knowingly  using a trick, scheme, or device with intent to mislead;
 

(4) the term "law enforcement officer" means an officer or employee of the Federal Government, or a person authorized to act for or on behalf of the Federal Government or serving the Federal Government as an adviser or consultant──
 

    (A) authorized under law to engage in or supervise the prevention, detection, investigation, or prosecution of an offense; (5) the term "bodily injury" means──

    (E) any other injury to the body, no matter how temporary.
 

   (a)(1) the term "official proceeding" means ...
 

    (C) a proceeding before a Federal Government agency which is authorized by law. 18 U.S.C. § 1515 (a)(3)(A). Misleading conduct means knowingly making false statements.

Federal judges repeatedly and willfully deprived Stich of rights, privileges, and immunities secured and protected by the Constitution and laws of the United States.  

Title 18 U.S.C. § 242. Deprivation of rights under color of law. Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, ... shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both;

It is a felony for anyone to inflict harm upon a former federal investigator for seeking to report corrupt and criminal acts that he discovered as a federal air safety investigator.  

Title 18 U.S.C. § 245. Federally protected activities. ((b) Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, by force or threat of force willfully injures, intimidates or interferes with, or attempts to injure, intimidate or interfere with–(1) Any person because he is or has been, or in order to intimidate such person or any other person or any class of persons [whistleblower, witness, informant] from–(B) participating in or enjoying any benefit, service, privilege, program, facility, or activity provided or administered by the United States.

It is a felony to deprive any member of a class, the class being whistleblowers, of benefits provided for or made possible in whole or in part by any Act of Congress.  

Title 18 U.S.C. § 246. Deprivation of relief benefits. Whoever directly or indirectly deprives, attempts to deprive, or threatens to deprive any person of any employment, position, work, compensation, or other benefit provided for or made possible in whole or in part by any Act of Congress appropriating funds for work relief or relief purposes, on account of political affiliation, ... shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.


Seeking Relief from Massive Civil Rights Violations
In Chapter 11: Encountering  More Corruption

 

Suffering enormous personal and financial harm from the unprecedented numbers of judicially perpetrated civil and constitutional violations, corruptly blocked by U.S. district and appellate judges from relief, Stich was forced to seek relief in Chapter 11 courts, seeking to force a federal judge to exercise his duties under the Declaratory Judgment Act and the Civil Rights Act and the case law and rules of court entitling Stich to a federal court forum and relief. The systematic judicial violations spanning the California and federal courts then escalated. Instead of providing relief, which a mere addressing of Stich’s personal and property rights under the declaratory judgment act would have accomplished, federal judges expanded on the civil and constitutional violations:  

 

Federal judges corruptly seized Stich’s life’s assets, combining corrupt judicial acts with major violations of constitutional and legal due process:

  • Violated the legal and constitutional requirement for a noticed hearing.
     

  • Violated the legal and constitutional requirement of a hearing at which Stich could defend against the taking.
     

  • Took Stich’s life assets without cause.
     

  • Signed the orders in chambers taking Stich’s properties, without jurisdiction, the absence of jurisdiction arose from earlier orders that were signed ten days earlier refusing to accept jurisdiction over the cases.
     

  • Under controlling U.S. Supreme Court decisions, orders rendered without jurisdiction, or that violated constitutional due process, are void orders, and remain void, and continue to be void even when affirmed by appellate court decisions.

Jordon v. Gilligan, 500 F.2d 701, 710 (6th Cir. 1974)("a void judgment is no judgment at all and is without legal effect.") Lubben v. Selective Service System Local Bd. No. 27, 453 F.2d 645 (1st Cir. 1972). "a court must vacate any judgment entered in excess of its jurisdiction."); U.S. v. Holtzman, 762 F.2d 720 (9th Cir. 1985)

A void judgment is not entitled to the respect accorded a valid adjudication. All proceedings founded on the void judgment are themselves regarded as invalid. A void judgment is regarded as a nullity, and the situation is the same as it would be if there were no judgment. 30A Am Jur Judgments §§ 43, 44, 45. It is attended by none of the consequences of a valid adjudication. It has no legal or binding force or efficacy for any purpose or at any place. ... It is not entitled to enforcement ... All proceedings founded on the void judgment are themselves regarded as invalid. 30A Am Jur Judgments § 44, 45.

An illegal order is forever void. An order that exceeds the jurisdiction of the court, is void, or voidable, and can be attacked in any proceeding in any court where the validity of the judgment comes into issue. (See Rose v. Himely (1808) 4 Cranch 241, 2 L ed 608; Pennoyer v. Neff (1877) 95 US 714, 24 L ed 565; Thompson v. Whitman (1873) 18 Wall 457, 21 l ED 897; Windsor v. McVeigh (1876) 93 US 274, 23 L ed 914; McDonald v. Mabee (1917) 243 US 90, 37 Sct 343, 61 L ed 608.

 


Brief Introduction Into Judicial Attacks
To Silence Whistleblower

 

Former federal agent Rodney Stich and his coalition of other former government agents and insiders had sought to report the corrupt activities in the government's aviation safety offices related to a series of specific airline disasters, and also criminal activities in other areas of overt and covert government activities. The authority for doing this was the federal crime reporting statute and the statute that permits any citizen to seek a court order requiring a federal official to perform a mandatory duty and halt unlawful conduct.

 

In response to these efforts, large numbers of federal judges, Department of Justice personnel, and over 50 lawyers and law firms embarked on multiple schemes to block the reports of the high-level corruption and silence the former federal agent acting as a whistleblower to expose misconduct resulting in major harm, many deaths, and a series of catastrophic events. Click here for more introductory information. In combination, they inflicted great harm through civil, constitutional, criminal, and human rights violations upon a former federal agent, and made possible the continuation of the prior consequences of corruption, cover-ups, and retaliations, some of which are shown below. The need to coordinate these many parallel efforts to block the reporting of very serious high-level corruption, and protect the participants, from 1982 to 2005 as they engaged in conspiracies involving massive and repeated civil, constitutional, and human rights violations, and criminal obstruction of justice and criminal retaliation against a former federal agent and witness, strongly suggests that a powerful group in the federal government was involved. The consequences of their enabling conduct is shown below.

 

Signs showing credibility of the charges and the powerful secret source orchestrating the multiple attacks.


History of Obstruction of Justice by Federal Judges—
And Resulting National Tragedies

 

Federal judges engaged in a pattern of obstruction of justice tactics to halt former federal agent Rodney Stich and his coalition of other insiders from reporting high level corruption. The first obstruction of justice tactics related to the corruption of key people in the government's aviation safety offices related to a continuing series of aviation disasters. Later, the obstruction of justice tactics sought to block reports of criminal activities of people in overt and covert operations.

 

The attempts to report the federal crimes were made under the federal crime reporting statute, Title 18 U.S.C. § 4, that requires any federal judge or other federal official to receive any information on federal crimes presented to them. Another federal statute also provided for such filing. That was Title 28 U.S.C. § 1361, which is an action to compel an officer of the United States to perform his duty.

 

The judicial blocks made possible the continuation of the corruption, and the continuation of the events arising from the corruption. Some of these events were catastrophic, including a long series of fatal airline disasters, including those of 9/11. (Details in Unfriendly Skies: 20th & 21st Centuries, and Blowback, 9/11, and Cover-Ups.)

 

The first series of federal lawsuits sought to report the ongoing corruption in the government's aviation safety offices, and were filed in the mid-1970s. These were followed by others.


Judicial Blocks to Reporting corruption in Government
Resulted in Series of Catastrophic Events

 

By blocking Stich and a group of other former federal agents from reporting criminal and even subversive activities, federal judges repeatedly were repeatedly guilty of criminal acts under various obstruction of justice states. Once they commenced the cover-up, which was followed by a continuation of major airline disasters made possible by their cover-ups, it became necessary to continue the cover-ups to protect themselves. And it also required them to engage in retaliatory acts  against former federal agent Rodney Stich, seeking to halt his exposure activities. These were additional felonies.

 

These criminal acts involved parallel efforts by a hoard of lawyers, and involvement of Justice Department personnel. These combined legal attacks constituted a criminal conspiracy, and met the legal criteria of a criminal racketeering enterprise (RICO).


Powerful Forces in Government Orchestrating
The Cover-Ups and Retaliatory Actions

A bizarre scheme involving large numbers of lawyers, law firms, California and federal judges, continued from 1982 to 2005. These are described at the following links:

Despite the massive and repeated violations of state and federal laws involved in the legal attacks, state and federal judges combined to protect them from the consequences of the violations, the conspiracy, and the racketeering enterprise−while their acts enabled to occur a continuing series of great tragedies upon the American people and upon the United States.

To understand the following subject, take a look at the introduction to systemic corruption in the United States, the efforts of several courageous former government agents, and the enormous number of people and groups protecting the guilty. That will help understand the existence of a powerful group in government that was orchestrating the retaliatory actions to prevent the information becoming known to the American people.

The evidence indicates that a powerful force in government was orchestrating the multiple parallel actions that blocked the reporting of high-level corruption, and that force was properly key people in the U.S. Department of Justice. Examples of these indicators included the following:

The lawyers, whose actions hindering the exposure of the high-level corruption by activist Rodney Stich, paralleled the block by federal judges and Department of Justice personnel, appeared to be acting for a powerful force somewhere in the federal government. Their actions were similar to the thugs in Egypt hired by the government officials in power, called "Baltagiya," or the hired thugs in Iran called "Basij."


Sampling of Events Made Possible by Corruption And
Attacks Upon Corruption-Fighting Activist

As a result of the widespread corruption in overt and covert government operations, the systemic cover-ups that treat high-level corruption as the "third-rail," and the retaliation against whistleblowers, great American tragedies have repeatedly occurred, and will continue to occur.

Sampling of Early Consequences of Corruption
Involved in Life-and-Death Assignment

   

          

 

   

Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie

World Trade Center bombing

TWA Flight  800

U.S. Embassy Bombings

9/11 Easily-Preventable Multiple Hijackings

   

These few examples of the horrors associated with airline disasters enabled to occur by documented corruption withheld from the American people. The standard culture of cover-ups in the United States enabled the corruption, cover-ups, to mutate into different areas. In the aviation area, although the continuing series of airline disasters eventually came to a halt for other reasons, the culture continued, and enabled to occur a number of easily preventable airline disasters. The inbred culture created the conditions that enabled four groups of terrorists to easily hijack four airliners within a few hours of each other and kill nearly 3,000 people.

One of Over 200 Victims Choosing This Way to Die—
Made Possible by Many Enablers in United States

Consequences of Corruption, Cover-Ups, And
Retaliation Felonies Not Limited to Aviation

These offenses are described in the books written by insiders.

Corruption of the Type Described at this site does not occur in a vacuum. High-level corruption in one area is simply one tentacle of a widespread culture of corruption. And the consequences of that corruption−and the endemic cover-ups−have consequences in other areas. The culture of corruption affects the people and the nation in many other ways, That includes the latest series of financial frauds that has occurred in the housing and financial sectors. Also, the effect of the endemic corruption and endemic cover-ups−major parts of the culture in the United States−that enablers successful terrorist attacks upon U.S. interests.

Harm to People Overseas From Culture Of
High-Level Corruption and Lies in the United States

In addition to the decades of harm resulting from the systemic corruption of key people and groups in the U.S. government, affecting aviation safety, financial, human rights, in the United States, there is the harm from outside sources brought about by the actions of U.S. politicians affecting people in other countries—such as the history of invading and killing foreigners—there are the successful "terrorist" attacks made possible by high-level corruption, and then there are the foreigners who are also victims from the same high-level corruption that adversely affects the American, but in a different form.

Remains of a girl—about the age of the 9-year-old Killed in Tucson in January 2011.

In criminal law, people are accomplices, and guilty, if they know of a criminal act and fail to report it to proper authorities and also to take efforts within their capability to halt their continuation. And there are endless numbers of accomplices that are complicit in these crimes and enablers of the consequences.

Suggestion to people outside the United States. Become familiar with the documented systemic corruption in the United States and show the outrage lacking of people in the United States, and:


     Documentaries by Unique Insiders On 50 Years of
High-Level Corruption and Resulting Tragedies:
Unprecedented in any Modern Industrial Nation

(Print available at www.amazon.com and  www.amazon.co.uk)
EBooks Worldwide

 

   

  

      

        

   


All of the books are available at amazon.com, in print and on digital formats, and at many other Internet sites. They bring together the various pieces of the puzzle to better understand the overall picture, and why the same conditions continue year after year. Information on the books by former government agent Rodney Stich

Sampling of early books reviews

Sampling of complimentary letters/faxes to author/activist Rodney Stich.

Credibility information:

More information about these books by clicking here.

EBook Sources

Print books from Amazon.com in Europe: http://www.amazon.co.uk./s/ref=nb_sb_noss/277-4275297-4922359?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=%22Rodney%20Stich%22


Similarities Between German People Under Adolf Hitler
And American People Under Corrupt Government Leaders

A poem written by Martin Niemoller, relating to how Germans tolerate Adolf Hitler is especially suitable to most Americans today:

 

    First they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out, because I was not a Jew.
    Then they came for the Communists, and I did not speak out, because I was not a Communist.
    Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out, because I was not a trade unionist.
    Then they came for me, and there was no one left to speak out for me.

 

                  Pastor Martin Niemöller

 

Pastor Martin Niemöller (1892–1984) first supported the rise of Adolf Hitler, and then upon learning the truth, and objecting, he was imprisoned. He wrote a poem about the state of denial of Germans about what Hitler was doing. Probably no better example could be shown than what has been done to the American people, in their name, while they ignored the outrages.

 

The first step is to become informed. And with the vast cover-ups, disinformation, and blatant lying by U.S. politicians, media personnel, and political pundits, this requires a little effort. In searching for information, don't be misled by wild conspiracy theories, and go where facts can be found, including courageous (and foolish) insiders who speak out in defense of the country.

 

Sadly, fewer people read such books (preferring trivia reading), rarely read newspapers (which is one small step to becoming informed). Therefore, the future is bleak, made possible by the corruption detailed here and in the books, the cover-ups, and the public's indifference to their responsibilities.


International Consequences from Corrupt Conduct
Of the American Public's Leaders

  • Millions of killed civilians in foreign countries and many more crippled and maimed from the serial lying rampant of U.S. politicians and their shills.
     

  • Over a hundred thousand dead Americans and triple that number of maimed and wounded GIs in wars started and continued, since the end of World War II, on the basis of serial lying by U.S.  politicians and lying by bureaucrats. These wars include the U.S. invasions of Korea; Vietnam; Cambodia, Laos; Grenada; Panama; Afghanistan; Iraq; Libya; Syria; and more to come.
     

  • Decades of undermining foreign governments, assassinating or attempting to assassinate foreign leaders, providing training used against the people of other countries, and much more.
     

  • Self-serving and other conduct by U.S. politicians that generated the greatest number of people in the world's history wanting to kill Americans, and virtually no thought given by the uninformed and sheep-like American public to the deadly consequences.
     

  • The killing, or murders, of people, including infants and children, using drones, in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia, Yemen, and elsewhere.

The consequences will, naturally, be experienced by Americans, our children, for generations to come.