In The United States House of Representatives Solicited Data on in re: Impeachment of Judge G. Thomas Porteous, Jr., United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Louisiana COMPARED to activity of Judge Paul L. Friedman, United States District Court for the District of Columbia. Judge Porteous v. Judge Friedman By: David Louis Whitehead Introduction According to the US Constitution, Federal officers can be impeached for “Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.” U.S. Constitution, Article II, Section 4. In US history, there has only been fifteen federal judges impeached by the House of Representatives, and only 7 of the 15 jurists, have been removed from office. On or about 2011, the Congress of the United States impeached and convicted United States Federal Judge G. Thomas Porteous, on four (4) articles for impeachment. The Government of the United States and Congress used past judicial activity as a basis for Judge Porteous removal from office. After eight years of investigations of Judge Porteous, the Department of Justice (“DOJ”) decided not to bring criminal charges against him. Instead, DOJ and the US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit moved for impeachment against Judge Porteous. Judge Porteous was given immunity. Articles of Impeachment for Judge Porteous A. • Article I Article I of impeachment alleges that Judge Porteous: 1. Improperly denied a recusal motion in the Lifemark case; 2. When deciding the recusal motion, failed to disclose his relationship with his long-time friends and former law partners…. 3. Made intentionally misleading statements at the recusal hearing; and Improperly solicited and accepted things of value from__Redacted__ and ____Redacted__ while the Lifemark case was under advisement. See 111 Cong. Rec. S1645 (Mar. 17, 2010). B. • Article II Article II aggregates at least four separate allegations of alleged misconduct. The Article alleges that Judge Porteous: 1. Engaged in a longstanding pattern of corrupt conduct; 2. Engaged in a corrupt relationship with the ________Redacted_______; 3. Solicited and accepted numerous of things of value; 4. Took official actions that benefitted the _______Redacted_________; 5. Used the power and prestige of his office to assist the __________ in forming relationships with State judicial officers and individuals important to the __________business; and, 6. Well knew and understood that _______________also made false statements to the Federal Bureau of Investigation in an effort to assist Judge Porteous in being appointed to the Federal Bench. See id. C • Article III Article III alleges that Judge Porteous engaged in misconduct in connection with his Chapter 13 bankruptcy, accusing him of five specific acts: 1. Using a false name and a post office box address to conceal his identity as the debtor in the case; 2. Concealing assets; 3. Concealing preferential payments to certain creditors; 4. Concealing gambling losses and other gambling debts; and 5. Incurring new debts while the case was pending, in violation of the bankruptcy court’s order. See id. The Impeachment Case for Judge Paul L. Friedman compared to activity of Impeached Judge Thomas Porteous Grounds to Impeach Judge Paul L. Friedman A. • Failed to recuse himself in 11 civil action cases of David Whitehead. • In re: Whitehead v. Columbia Pictures Industries, Paramount Pictures, et al., 98cv2938, failed to disclose business relationships with White & Case LLP Partners, former Partners, spouses and associates in Wallpark LLC, located in White & Case LLP offices in New York. • In re: Whitehead v. Columbia Pictures Industries, Paramount Pictures, et al., 98cv2938, failed to disclose financial interest in Sony, parent company of Columbia Pictures and Columbia Pictures Industries. • In re: Whitehead v. Columbia Pictures Industries, Paramount Pictures, et al., 98cv2938, filed false and misleading statements relating to his stock interest in Columbia Pictures and Sony. • In re: Whitehead v. Columbia Pictures Industries, Paramount Pictures, et al., 98cv2938, failed to disclose his financial interest in Paramount Communication, and filed a false statement regarding those financial stocks, which were listed in 1994, during his Senate confirmation hearings. • Filed false and misleading statements during his 1994 Senate Confirmation to become a Federal Judge. • Instead of recusal, referred the recusal matter to the Calender Committee, as a delaying tactic. • Failed to recuse himself in 11 of David Whitehead’s cases, after Judge Ricardo Urbina issued an order, dated May 5, 2008, pursuant to the (Calendar Committees order August 19, 2005, allowing recusal motions to be filed). Judge Urbina’s order requested Judge Friedman to consider to rule on his recusal in those 11 cases, valuing in billions of dollars. B. Article II • Engaged in longstanding pattern of misconduct as a General Partner with White & Case LLP Partners, former Partners and spouses in Wallpark LLC, connected to clients of White & Case and associates. • Engaged in corrupt relationship with White & Case LLP and Wallpark LLC, ruling in favor of clients of these entities, associated with his General Partnership. • Solicited and accepted things of value from White & Case LLP, Wallpark LLC and Judge Judith Rogers, an interest party in the litigation. • Took official action that benefitted White & Case LLP Partners, former Partners and spouses associated with Wallpark LLC Investors, clients of White & Case LLP and Wallpark, and the law firm of Nixon and Peabody, his wife’s employer. • Use the power and prestige of his office to benefit his General Partnership with White & Case LLP Partners and associates connected to Wallpark and clients of these entities. • Knew that his 1994 Senate Confirmation Testimony was false and misleading, including his statements that Wallpark LLC would be managed by an outside manager, when in fact, Wallpark LLC is housed in White & Case LLP offices in New York, and managed by White & Case LLP Partners. The court lied to the Senate, stating that he would recuse himself from cases involving clients of White & Case LLP, and the court stated nothing about recusing himself relating to his business operations with White & Case LLP Partners, Former Partners, spouses and associates in Wallpark LLC. The court lied when he told the Senate that he would not have a business while presiding as a federal judge. Judge Friedman also lied to the Congress when he stated that he would recuse himself from cases involving former clients. • Knew that his February 7, 2001, affidavit/statement filed in Whitehead v. Columbia Pictures Industries, Paramount Pictures, et al., 98cv2938, was false and misleading. The court omitted his association in White & Case LLP and Wallpark LLC; and the court falsely stated that he sold his Paramount Communication financial stocks in 1993, but listed those same Paramount Communication financial stocks in his sworn Senate Confirmation Testimony for his judgeship in 1994. • The court failed to recuse himself in class action case of the Black Farmers. White & Case LLP represented the Banks involved in the lawsuit: Wachovia, First Union, First American, Wells Fargo, Bank of America. • Knew that Jeff Kilduff’s affidavit was false, but used the affidavit to dismiss David Whitehead’s cases. Mr. Kilduff’s clients in matter of David Whitehead were Sony, MGM, Time Warner, HBO, Columbia Pictures, Warner Brothers, White & Case LLP clients associated with Judge Friedman and White & Case and Wallpark LLC. C. Article III • Engaged in misconduct bringing his office in disrepute. • Allowed other judicial officers to make adverse rulings against party (David Whitehead), knowing of his activities cited in articles I and II, involving his General Partnership associated with White & Case LLP associates and Wallpark LLC. • Engaged in the misconduct involving the impeachment case of Judge Thomas Porteous, knowing of the activities stated in articles I & II involving his association with White & Case LLP and Wallpark LLC. • Allowed the United States Fifth Circuit Court and his own court US District Court for the District of Columbia and Judicial Conference to become in disrepute, engaging in impeachment matters of Judge Porteous, relating to his past judicial history and association with White & Case LLP and Wallpark LLC. D. Article IV • Engaged in conduct prior to his federal judgeship (Senate Confirmation Hearings and testimony), bringing the Senate Judiciary Committee and Congress in disrepute. • Falsely stating the following: he would recuse himself from cases involving White & Case LLP clients. • Brought embrassment to the White House, Three Presidents and Three First Ladies. • Disclosed his association with White & Case LLP Partners and associates, in Wallpark LLC, but lied about the business operations of the entities, which sparked his pecuniary interest and business interest of his spouse. Judge Friedman’s activity goes far beyond the activity of Impeached Judge Thomas Porteous. To start a war, instead of addressing Judge Friedman, White & Case LLP and Wallpark RICO Activity is TREASON and massive Government Impeachments. Date: September 3, 2013 © 2013
Posted on: Wed, 18 Sep 2013 16:33:47 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015