IsidoroRDL's Comments (27)

“The staring point on accountability for criminal or tortious acts by government attorneys, employees, and judges should be the holding in United States v. Lee, 106 U.S. 196, 220 (1882), which stated that,

[n]o man in this country is so high that he is above the law. No officer of the law may set that law at defiance with impunity. All the officers of the government, from the highest to the lowest, are creatures of the law and are bound to obey it. It is the only supreme power in our system of government, and every man who by accepting office participates in its functions is only the more strongly bound to submit to that supremacy, and to observe the limitations which it imposes upon the exercise of the authority which it gives. (Emphasis added).

But, my past 35 years I have litigated in federal court, citizens have been denied the right to hold government officials accountable, see, http://home.earthlink.net.malfeasance. More than 200 years ago Thomas Jefferson stated, that "[t]he germ of destruction of our nation is in the power of the judiciary, an irresponsible body - working like gravity by night and by day, gaining a little today and a little tomorrow, and advancing its noiseless step like a thief over the field of jurisdiction, until all shall render powerless the checks of one branch over the other and will become as venal and oppressive as the government from which we separated."”

“Virginia Election News–Media Fails to Report on Misprision of a Felony by Bob McDonnell, Government Attorneys, and Judges Obstructing the Rights of Parents. The evidence is that there is on going violations of Va. Code §§ 18.2-22, 25, 26, 481(5), 482, and, 499, by a criminal conspiracy to deprive Virginia parents of the right of access to an impartial court and jury trial to hold government attorneys and judges accountable for malfeasance by obstructing statutory rights (See, criminal complaints filed with the Virginia FBI/AUSA http://home.earthlink.net/~treasonn; and http://home.earthlink.net/~malfeasance). However, to date the media in Virginia refuses repeatedly to conduct an investigation of the record of malfeasance (See, http://www.liamsdad.org/others/isidoro.shtml; and, http://home.earthlink.net/~isidoror).”

“The evidence is that the denial of access to an impartial court and civil jury trial to oppose malfeasance is a part a wider conspiracy to abuse the delegation from Congress to the Judicial Branch under Rules Enabling Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2072(b); the Judicial Conference of the United States Act, 28 U.S.C. § 331; and the Judiciary Act of 1925 (providing for “discretionary appellate jurisdiction,” at 43 Stat. 936). Thus, this is a “legal” issue which Congress must investigate

Query, if I with more than 35 years of federal trail/appellate civil litigation experience can be targeted by the government and courts for exercising my federal statutory rights and deprived of access to an impartial court and civil jury trial to stop malfeasance--what is either an inexperience attorney or a layman father to do to protect their rights against malfeasance by the government and courts? (see, http://www.liamsdad.org/others/isidoro.shtmll; and http://home.earthlink.net/~malfeasance).

Our Republic cannot survive the unbridled tyranny of government attorneys and judges’ use of cronyism to deny access to an impartial court, and then surreally placed themselves above and beyond the law. We need only recall the sorry use of acts by German judges, lawyers, and law schools to permit Hitler and the NAZI’s to power.”

“I applaud Judge Milan D. Smith Jr., and the majority holding, as an independent federal civil litigator, I assert that "[n]o man in this country is so high that he is above the law. No officer of the law may set that law at defiance with impunity." United States v. Lee, 106 U.S. 196, 220 (1882). All citizens must maintain vigilance to preserve our Constitution from undue government encroachment. “There is no crueler tyranny than that which is exercised under cover of law, and with the colors of justice. . . .”U.S. vs. Jannottie, 673 F.2d 578, 614 (3d Cir. 1982). The evidence is that for more than 30 years the Rehnquist/Roberts Court have refused to provide impartial judicial review of government as mandated by Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch 137 (1803), by the surreal grant of absolute immunity for malfeasance of government attorneys and judges, http://home.earthlink.net/~isidoror”

“DOJ and Federal Judges Conspiracy to Violate the Constitution and Rule of Law must make all citizens realize that Democracies such as ours are precarious institutions. Therefore, constant vigilance must be maintained to preserve our Constitution from government encroachment. “There is no crueler tyranny than that which is exercised under cover of law, and with the colors of justice. . . .”U.S. vs. Jannottie, 673 F.2d 578, 614 (3d Cir. 1982).

Thus, when discussing the use of legal sophistry by attorneys in DOJ to circumvent the limitations in the Constitution and the Rule of Law we cannot ignore the evidence of prior discussions with the Judicial Branch. We must recall the sorry behavior of German judges and lawyers which did play a key part in allowing Hitler and the NAZI’s to power. History confirms that “[b]y the time the gas vans came and the human slaughter factories were built in Auschwitz and the other death camps, the murder of the six million Jews and other persecuted minorities was done completely within the framework of German law.” Yad Vshem, The Holocaust Martyrs’ and Heroes Remembrance Authority, 2004.

This collusion is but a sub-part of a much larger issue of the on gong criminal conspiracy of government attorneys and judges violation of the law and then grant themselves immunity. But, “[n]o man in this country is so high that he is above the law,” US v. Lee, 106 U.S. 196, 220 (1882) http://home.earthlink.net/~malfeasancee).”

“At the outset, history has shown that Democracies such as ours are precarious institutions. Therefore, constant vigilance must be maintained to preserve our Constitution from undue government encroachment because, “[t]here is no crueler tyranny than that which is exercised under cover of law, and with the colors of justice. . . .”U.S. vs. Jannottie, 673 F.2d 578, 614 (3d Cir. 1982)(see, http://home.earthlink.net/~isidoror).

As Thomas Jefferson stated more than 200 years ago, "[t]he germ of destruction of our nation is in the power of the judiciary, an irresponsible body - working like gravity by night and by day, gaining a little today and a little tomorrow, and advancing its noiseless step like a thief over the field of jurisdiction, until all shall render powerless the checks of one branch over the other and will become as venal and oppressive as the government from which we separated.””

“"There is no crueler tyranny than that which is exercised under cover of law, and with the colors of justice …"– U.S. vs. Jannottie, 673 F.2d 578, 614 (3d Cir. 1982).

Regarding the surreal expansion of government immunity for malfeasance, tort and torture, the evidence confirms that the Federal Judicial Branch is in collusion with attorneys in DOJ to deny citizens the right to hold government employees accountable. Thus, irrespective of one being either a Republican, Democrat, Liberal, all citizens must take action to stop the violation of the Constitutional mandates of separation of power and checks and balance by the collusion of the Judicial Branch with government attorneys. Because of the evidence of malfeasance of the Federal Judicial Branch conspiring in criminal collusion with Beltway Lobbyist/Attorneys and government attorneys (i.e. Eric Holder) to obstruct my rights as a father I have filed Federal Criminal Complaints under RICO in VA, D.C., CO, NY, and PA:
http://home.earthlink.net/~malfeasance/
http://home.earthlink.net/~treason/
http://home.earthlink.net/~isidoror).”

“"There is no crueler tyranny than that which is exercised under cover of law, and with the colors of justice …"– U.S. vs. Jannottie, 673 F.2d 578, 614 (3d Cir. 1982).

Regarding the surreal expansion of government immunity for malfeasance, tort and torture, by the courts in collusion with DOJ for accountability, I note that in 1995 I argued and won in the U.S. Supreme Court, Martinez v. Lamagno and DEA, 515 U.S. 417 (1995), where DOJ under Eric Holder surreally argued that a DEA agent outside of the US was not negligent for causing a car accident while driving drunk and having sex.

Thus, it is very odd and a bit cynical that Holder will determine if those involved in torture will be prosecuted!!

Because of the evidence of malfeasance of the Federal Judicial Branch conspiring within criminal collusion with Beltway Lobbyist/Attorneys and government attorneys (i.e. Eric Holder) to obstruct my rights as a father I have filed Federal Criminal Complaints under RICO in Virginia, D.C., Colorado, NY, and Pennsylvania (See http://home.earthlink.net/~malfeasance/; and http://home.earthlink.net/~treason/).

I note that I opposed Holder's nomination and confirmation as Attorney General based on the above record of malfeasance. (see http://home.earthlink.net/~isidoror.”

“As a federal trial/appellate private practitioner for more than three decades, I support Sotomayor appointment based on her holding that government employees, including judges, are not above the law.

I as a old Republican do not support the surreal and hypocritical statements of the "conservative Republican" Senators presented today. The evidence confirms based on three decades of litigation before the Rehnquist/Roberts Court, the Supremes do not comply with the Rule of Law or the Constitution. Neither the Bush nor Obama White House, nor Congress, and nor the Virginia General Assembly have acted on my repeated petitions for an investigation of the malfeasance of Federal and Virginia government attorneys and judges obstructing my statutory right as a father and depriving me of my right/duty as a Virginia attorney (see, 2009 presentation to Northern VA Delegates, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VAkEfjcA5sQ, and http://www.liamsdad.org/others/isidoro.shtml)

Thus, I filed just filed a criminal complaint with law enforcement authorities in Virginia to investigate, arrest, indict, and prosecute and obstruction of justice by misprision of felony by http://home.earthlink.net/~treason/treason/).

Query, if I as an experienced federal litigator cannot protect my self from malfeasance by government attorneys and judges what is a young attorney or laymen parent to do to protect his and his children rights?”

“I write as a Nam Vet, a former White House appointee in both the Carter and Reagan Administrations, and as an independent federal civil litigation practitioner for the past three decades against the malfeasance of government to question at what point during the stewardship Chief Justice Rehnquist was our system of limited government allowed to be circumvented? At what point was the right to compel either presenting of evidence or release a person incarcerated?

As explained in Marbury v. Madison, 1 Crunch 137, 140 (1803), by Chief Justice Marshall a legislative act or judicial order which is"repugnant to the constitution is void." In a brilliant display of deductive logic the Chief Justice confirmed that impartial judicial review is a constitutional imperative by pointing out certain fundamental principles of our constitutional system giving limited authority to both Federal and State government: first, that the people had united to establish a limited government; second, that they organized it into three departments and assigned certain powers to each, while at the same time setting limits to the exercise of those powers; and, third, these limits were expressed in a written constitution, which would be a useless document “if these limits may, at any time, be passed by those intended to be restrained.” Id. at 140. Thus, “[w]e the people” must make certain that as a Nation faced with the threat of terrorism, we do not transform ourselves into legal tyrannies, see http://www.liamsdad.org/others/isidoro.shtml.”

“As a Federal civil rights attorney for the past 36 years, I oppose the selected Eric Holder as his Attorney General. The reason is because the Attorney General is the key to changing how the Federal and State Courts comply with their oath to enforce the Rule of Law.

But, the evidence confirms that since Watergate, during the past 36 years the past Attorney General have worked with Chief Justice Berger, Rehnquist, and now Roberts, in violation of the mandates of separation of power and checks and balances to undercut the Rule of Law by the use cronyism to not enforce the laws to make official accountable for malfeasance.

It was for this reason citizens have lost their fundamental rights under the IX Amendment vis-a-vis the Courts holding of unlimited government power

Because Eric Holder, as a Beltway attorney/lobbyist, obstructed my right’s as a father to send my U.S. citizen 13 year-old Son from the US to a zone of war--at the same time the government asserted their ability to torture and conduct rendition, I oppose Eric Holder, see, http://capwiz.com/congressorg/sbx/f/?aid=12313551&r=1; and,
http://capwiz.com/congressorg/sbx/f/?aid=12332481&r=1.”

“As to the confirmation hearing on Eric Holder is Michael Isikoff's cover story in Newsweek, "The Fed Who Blew the Whistle," and the general issue of pardons, amnesties and similar measures for violation of Congressional mandates. The evidence confirms that Eric Holder’s past policies were the base on which former White House Counsel, and then Attorney General Gonzales used to direct DOJ, i.e. the pardon of Marc Rich and other actions to usurp accountability was not an anomaly, but a pattern and practice.

I have experience of litigating against the polices of Eric Holder at DOJ during the ‘90, and later when he was a typical Beltway attorney/lobbyist. Thus I oppose his confirmation, see http://capwiz.com/congressorg/sbx/f/?aid=12313551&r=1.

In summary, the Senate cannot confirm him because evidence confirm that as a Beltway attorney/lobbyist he has been the linchpin in a criminal conspiracy to obstruct the rights of a father and retaliate against an attorney for litigating to enforce federal statutory rights in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 241, 242, 1202, and 1513.

Thus, as a US. citizen and Nam Vet who took the oath 44 years ago to defend and protect the Constitution from, "all enemies, foreign and domestic," irrespective of being a Republican, Democrat, or Independent each Senator must act now to restore the Rule of Law and assure compliance by DOJ with the mandate of separation of power and checks and balances. Isidoro Rodriguez, Esq., isidoror@earthlink.ner”

“As to the confirmation hearing on Eric Holder is Michael Isikoff's cover story in Newsweek, "The Fed Who Blew the Whistle," and the general issue of pardons, amnesties and similar measures for violation of Congressional mandates. The evidence confirms that Eric Holder’s past policies were the base on which former White House Counsel, and then Attorney General Gonzales used to direct DOJ, i.e. the pardon of Marc Rich and other actions to usurp accountability was not an anomaly, but a pattern and practice.

I have experience of litigating against the polices of Eric Holder at DOJ during the ‘90, and later when he was a typical Beltway attorney/lobbyist. Thus I oppose his confirmation, see http://capwiz.com/congressorg/sbx/f/?aid=12313551&r=1.

In summary, the Senate cannot confirm him because evidence confirm that as a Beltway attorney/lobbyist he has been the linchpin in a criminal conspiracy to obstruct the rights of a father and retaliate against an attorney for litigating to enforce federal statutory rights in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 241, 242, 1202, and 1513.

Thus, as a US. citizen and Nam Vet who took the oath 44 years ago to defend and protect the Constitution from, "all enemies, foreign and domestic," irrespective of being a Republican, Democrat, or Independent each Senator must act now to restore the Rule of Law and assure compliance by DOJ with the mandate of separation of power and checks and balances. Isidoro Rodriguez, Esq., isidoror@earthlink.ner”

“As to the confirmation hearing on Eric Holder is Michael Isikoff's cover story in Newsweek, "The Fed Who Blew the Whistle," and the general issue of pardons, amnesties and similar measures for violation of Congressional mandates. The evidence confirms that Eric Holder’s past policies were the base on which former White House Counsel, and then Attorney General Gonzales used to direct DOJ, i.e. the pardon of Marc Rich and other actions to usurp accountability was not an anomaly, but a pattern and practice.

I have experience of litigating against the polices of Eric Holder at DOJ during the ‘90, and later when he was a typical Beltway attorney/lobbyist. Thus I oppose his confirmation, see http://capwiz.com/congressorg/sbx/f/?aid=12313551&r=1.

In summary, the Senate cannot confirm him because evidence confirm that as a Beltway attorney/lobbyist he has been the linchpin in a criminal conspiracy to obstruct the rights of a father and retaliate against an attorney for litigating to enforce federal statutory rights in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 241, 242, 1202, and 1513.

Thus, as a US. citizen and Nam Vet who took the oath 44 years ago to defend and protect the Constitution from, "all enemies, foreign and domestic," irrespective of being a Republican, Democrat, or Independent each Senator must act now to restore the Rule of Law and assure compliance by DOJ with the mandate of separation of power and checks and balances. Isidoro Rodriguez, Esq., isidoror@earthlink.ner”

“As to the confirmation hearing on Eric Holder is Michael Isikoff's cover story in Newsweek, "The Fed Who Blew the Whistle," and the general issue of pardons, amnesties and similar measures for violation of Congressional mandates. The evidence confirms that Eric Holder’s past policies were the base on which former White House Counsel, and then Attorney General Gonzales used to direct DOJ, i.e. the pardon of Marc Rich and other actions to usurp accountability was not an anomaly, but a pattern and practice.

I have experience of litigating against the polices of Eric Holder at DOJ during the ‘90, and later when he was a typical Beltway attorney/lobbyist. Thus I oppose his confirmation, see http://capwiz.com/congressorg/sbx/f/?aid=12313551&r=1.

In summary, the Senate cannot confirm him because evidence confirm that as a Beltway attorney/lobbyist he has been the linchpin in a criminal conspiracy to obstruct the rights of a father and retaliate against an attorney for litigating to enforce federal statutory rights in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 241, 242, 1202, and 1513.

Thus, as a US. citizen and Nam Vet who took the oath 44 years ago to defend and protect the Constitution from, "all enemies, foreign and domestic," irrespective of being a Republican, Democrat, or Independent each Senator must act now to restore the Rule of Law and assure compliance by DOJ with the mandate of separation of power and checks and balances. Isidoro Rodriguez, Esq., isidoror@earthlink.ner”

“As to the confirmation hearing on Eric Holder is Michael Isikoff's cover story in Newsweek, "The Fed Who Blew the Whistle," and the general issue of pardons, amnesties and similar measures for violation of Congressional mandates. The evidence confirms that Eric Holder’s past policies were the base on which former White House Counsel, and then Attorney General Gonzales used to direct DOJ, i.e. the pardon of Marc Rich and other actions to usurp accountability was not an anomaly, but a pattern and practice.

I have experience of litigating against the polices of Eric Holder at DOJ during the ‘90, and later when he was a typical Beltway attorney/lobbyist. Thus I oppose his confirmation, see http://capwiz.com/congressorg/sbx/f/?aid=12313551&r=1.

In summary, the Senate cannot confirm him because evidence confirm that as a Beltway attorney/lobbyist he has been the linchpin in a criminal conspiracy to obstruct the rights of a father and retaliate against an attorney for litigating to enforce federal statutory rights in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 241, 242, 1202, and 1513.

Thus, as a US. citizen and Nam Vet who took the oath 44 years ago to defend and protect the Constitution from, "all enemies, foreign and domestic," irrespective of being a Republican, Democrat, or Independent each Senator must act now to restore the Rule of Law and assure compliance by DOJ with the mandate of separation of power and checks and balances. Isidoro Rodriguez, Esq., isidoror@earthlink.ner”

“As to the confirmation hearing on Eric Holder is Michael Isikoff's cover story in Newsweek, "The Fed Who Blew the Whistle," and the general issue of pardons, amnesties and similar measures for violation of Congressional mandates. The evidence confirms that Eric Holder’s past policies were the base on which former White House Counsel, and then Attorney General Gonzales used to direct DOJ, i.e. the pardon of Marc Rich and other actions to usurp accountability was not an anomaly, but a pattern and practice.

I have experience of litigating against the polices of Eric Holder at DOJ during the ‘90, and later when he was a typical Beltway attorney/lobbyist. Thus I oppose his confirmation, see http://capwiz.com/congressorg/sbx/f/?aid=12313551&r=1.

In summary, the Senate cannot confirm him because evidence confirm that as a Beltway attorney/lobbyist he has been the linchpin in a criminal conspiracy to obstruct the rights of a father and retaliate against an attorney for litigating to enforce federal statutory rights in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 241, 242, 1202, and 1513.

Thus, as a US. citizen and Nam Vet who took the oath 44 years ago to defend and protect the Constitution from, "all enemies, foreign and domestic," irrespective of being a Republican, Democrat, or Independent each Senator must act now to restore the Rule of Law and assure compliance by DOJ with the mandate of separation of power and checks and balances. Isidoro Rodriguez, Esq., isidoror@earthlink.ner”

“As to the confirmation hearing on Eric Holder is Michael Isikoff's cover story in Newsweek, "The Fed Who Blew the Whistle," and the general issue of pardons, amnesties and similar measures for violation of Congressional mandates. The evidence confirms that Eric Holder’s past policies were the base on which former White House Counsel, and then Attorney General Gonzales used to direct DOJ, i.e. the pardon of Marc Rich and other actions to usurp accountability was not an anomaly, but a pattern and practice.

I have experience of litigating against the polices of Eric Holder at DOJ during the ‘90, and later when he was a typical Beltway attorney/lobbyist. Thus I oppose his confirmation, see http://capwiz.com/congressorg/sbx/f/?aid=12313551&r=1.

In summary, the Senate cannot confirm him because evidence confirm that as a Beltway attorney/lobbyist he has been the linchpin in a criminal conspiracy to obstruct the rights of a father and retaliate against an attorney for litigating to enforce federal statutory rights in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 241, 242, 1202, and 1513.

Thus, as a US. citizen and Nam Vet who took the oath 44 years ago to defend and protect the Constitution from, "all enemies, foreign and domestic," irrespective of being a Republican, Democrat, or Independent each Senator must act now to restore the Rule of Law and assure compliance by DOJ with the mandate of separation of power and checks and balances. Isidoro Rodriguez, Esq., isidoror@earthlink.ner”

“As to the confirmation hearing on Eric Holder is Michael Isikoff's cover story in Newsweek, "The Fed Who Blew the Whistle," and the general issue of pardons, amnesties and similar measures for violation of Congressional mandates. The evidence confirms that Eric Holder’s past policies were the base on which former White House Counsel, and then Attorney General Gonzales used to direct DOJ, i.e. the pardon of Marc Rich and other actions to usurp accountability was not an anomaly, but a pattern and practice.

I have experience of litigating against the polices of Eric Holder at DOJ during the ‘90, and later when he was a typical Beltway attorney/lobbyist. Thus I oppose his confirmation, see http://capwiz.com/congressorg/sbx/f/?aid=12313551&r=1.

In summary, the Senate cannot confirm him because evidence confirm that as a Beltway attorney/lobbyist he has been the linchpin in a criminal conspiracy to obstruct the rights of a father and retaliate against an attorney for litigating to enforce federal statutory rights in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 241, 242, 1202, and 1513.

Thus, as a US. citizen and Nam Vet who took the oath 44 years ago to defend and protect the Constitution from, "all enemies, foreign and domestic," irrespective of being a Republican, Democrat, or Independent each Senator must act now to restore the Rule of Law and assure compliance by DOJ with the mandate of separation of power and checks and balances. Isidoro Rodriguez, Esq., isidoror@earthlink.ner”

“As to the confirmation hearing on Eric Holder is Michael Isikoff's cover story in Newsweek, "The Fed Who Blew the Whistle," and the general issue of pardons, amnesties and similar measures for violation of Congressional mandates. The evidence confirms that Eric Holder’s past policies were the base on which former White House Counsel, and then Attorney General Gonzales used to direct DOJ, i.e. the pardon of Marc Rich and other actions to usurp accountability was not an anomaly, but a pattern and practice.

I have experience of litigating against the polices of Eric Holder at DOJ during the ‘90, and later when he was a typical Beltway attorney/lobbyist. Thus I oppose his confirmation, see http://capwiz.com/congressorg/sbx/f/?aid=12313551&r=1.

In summary, the Senate cannot confirm him because evidence confirm that as a Beltway attorney/lobbyist he has been the linchpin in a criminal conspiracy to obstruct the rights of a father and retaliate against an attorney for litigating to enforce federal statutory rights in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 241, 242, 1202, and 1513.

Thus, as a US. citizen and Nam Vet who took the oath 44 years ago to defend and protect the Constitution from, "all enemies, foreign and domestic," irrespective of being a Republican, Democrat, or Independent each Senator must act now to restore the Rule of Law and assure compliance by DOJ with the mandate of separation of power and checks and balances. Isidoro Rodriguez, Esq., isidoror@earthlink.ner”

“Related to this discussion of Alberto Gonzales, is the Senate confirmation hearing on January 15, 2009, for Eric Holder. In considering both I suggest reading Michael Isikoff's cover story in Newsweek, "The Fed Who Blew the Whistle," and the general issue of pardons, amnesties and similar measures for violation of FISA and other Congressional mandates during the tenure of both Holder and Gonzales at DOJ.

Based on my experience of litigating against the polices of Eric Holder at DOJ during the ‘90, and later when he was a typical Beltway attorney/lobbyist, I have sent a letter to all Senator in opposition to the confirmation of Eric Holder as next Attorney General. The evidence confirms that Eric Holder’s past policies were the base on which former White House Counsel/Attorney General Gonzales used to direct DOJ, i.e. the pardon of Marc Rich and other actions to usurp accountability. I submit for your info and investigation the letter I have sent to each members of the Senate by mail and posted at http://capwiz.com/congressorg/sbx/f/?aid=12313551&r=1. See also, http://www.liamsdad.org/others/isidoro.shtml.”

“Greetings,

As explained I request to testify before in opposition to the confirmation of Eric Holder http://capwiz.com/congressorg/sbx/f/?aid=12313551&r=11):

First, the evidence confirms that as a Beltway attorney/lobbyist he violated his oath as an attorney to serve the public. He is the linchpin in a RICO criminal conspiracy in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 241, 242, and 1513, by retaliating, punishing, and stigmatizing me for litigating to enforce my federal statutory rights as a father http://www.home.earthlink.net/~isidoror/id6.htmll; and http://www.liamsdad.org/others/isidoro.shtml). Thus, he will be a defendant in a civil RICO and 18 U.S.C. § 3771 action to be filed in February 2009.

Second, Eric Holder served in policy positions at DOJ in the 90's, at the same time I litigated in the U.S. Tax Court, the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 11th, and DC Circuits, as well as Supreme Court, against the unauthorized polices and practices of DOJ in violation of the right of Hispanics.* Thus, his policy is that the public has no right to expect accountability (i.e., the pardon of Marc Rich).

Isidoro Rodriguez, Esq.

*See Martinez v. Lamagno and DOJ/DEA, 515 U.S. 417 (1995)(DOJ asserted absolute immunity for negligent acts) and Lopez v. First Union, 129 F3.rd. 1186 (11th Cir. 1997)( DOJ wanted to seize every nonresident Hispanic bank accounts in the U.S.)[Web: http://justiciaportodo.webs.com].”

“Letter to U.S. Senate to oppose the confirmation of Eric Holder as Attorney General because he is a defendant in a pending action under 18 U.S.C. § 3771 and RICO, based on the following evidence in the record that establishes that as a Beltway attorney/lobbyist he is the linchpin in a criminal conspiracy since 2003:

First, for five years after my Son was shanghaied to the Republic of Colombia in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1204, he did obstruct my Federal and Virginia statutory rights as a Father to compel DOJ to secure my right to international visitations with my U.S. citizen Son, pursuant to the provisions of the Hague Convention on Missing and Abducted Children (“Treaty”), and Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act VA Code § 20-124.1 et seq. (“UCCJEA”); and,

Second, in retaliation for my litigating to enforce my rights under Treaty and UCCJEA and petitioning Congress (See http://www.liamsdad.org/others/isidoro.shtml), in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 241, 242, and 1513, he conspired to punish, stigmatize, and deprive me of my right to employment as an attorney.

Thus, irrespective of being a Republican, Democrat, or Independent the Senate must immediately act to restore the Rule of Law in the U.S. Department of Justice (See Adam Cohen, “Democratic Pressure on Obama to Restore the Rule of Law,” The New York Times, November 14, 2008).”

“RE: Supplement to Brief Submitted in Opposition to tEric Holder ("Holder)

Greetings:

At this critical time it is imperative to restore integrity and public confidence in DOJ by compelling the next AG comply with the words proclaimed on the RFK Justice Department Building, “No Free Government Can Survive That Is Not Based on The Supremacy of Law. Where Law ends, Tyranny Begins, Law Alone Can Give Us Freedom”

But, the investigation of the evidence of malfeasance of DOJ confirm that Holder does not meet this need for two reasons:

First, Holder’s record in DOJ confirm that he subscribes to the collusion of DOJ with the Judicial Branch in violation of the rights of citizens and the mandate of separation of power. During the past 32 years Holder was in and out of government making it less accountable.

Second, Holder is a defendant in a civil RICO action for violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 241, 242, 1204, and 1513. As a Beltway attorney and lobbyist he is the linchpin in a criminal conspiracy by the government to deprive my Son of his civil rights as a U.S. citizen, obstruct my rights as a parent [See http://home.earthlink.net/~isidoror], and injure, stigmatize, and deprive me of my right as an independent civil litigation attorney in retaliation for 30-year federal civil litigation on behalf of resident and nonresident Hispanics. See The Fraternity: Lawyers and Judges in Collusion, by John Fitzgerald Molloy. St. Paul, Minn.: Paragon House.”

“I believe that for DOJ what is needed is an attorney who is not part of the structure of DOJ formed during the past 32 years after Watergate. From my litigation against DOJ, the abuses under Bush/Gonzales was not an anomaly, but an continuation of the attitude voiced by former AG Thornburg--i.e. governmetn attorneys are not accountable to the public but to their bosses!! A good pick for me would be Gov. of Arizona Nepelatono (sic).

At the very least the public must become aware of the abuses of DOJ and act to stop them in the future.”