Uncategorized

Do you know the one thing, The one thing you always know?
by

Do you know the one thing, The one thing you always know?

I’ve been working lately assimilating factual information about presumptions, assumptions, and lies. There’s been no shortage of these inspirations for blogging provided by the Federal District Court experience; in my lawsuit against RICO USDA for racketeering. Continuing efforts to sue the USDA for racketeering in Federal District Court has provided far more inspiration from presumptions, assumptions, deceit, deception, and outright lies and obstruction than I would’ve ever imagined in a court of law. Reading through the Court’s latest Opinions inspired me to preempt my many blog additions under draft with this editorial.

Once many years ago my brother asks me a silly question. While I’m not clear on its relevance here it comes to mind. He said: Is it presumable to assume that assume assimilates presume or does presume to assimilate the assumption or is it all just presumptive?

Presumption

How naively I’ve walked through life, brainwashed by television, believing court was about facts, truth, honor, and justice. Then believing court offered an opportunity to address grievances with facts, present your evidence, expose the truth with honor, and have justice prevail with those who broke the law being held accountable. It never dawned on me that a Federal District Court would allow for the scales of justice to be shifted by the injustice of presumption without evidence, assumptions, deceit, deception, and misrepresentation along with outright lies rather than the presentation of factual evidence and the truth. After all, Judges sit on the bench and ask witnesses to swear to tell the truth the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Right? Judges I believe and expect to have, hold and honor the highest in moral and ethical standards, Judges are expected to base their decisions on facts, not fiction, on truth and not lies, and on the presentation of evidence to support reasonable grounds for a presumption rather than purely on assumption.  On sound solid logic, not assumptive and fallacious interpretations.  Judges are expected to demonstrate the utmost diligence in finding of facts to conclude the truth and adherence to the law in enforcing justice. Judges are expected to remain neutral.

Assumption

Perhaps Courts might be far more bastions of truth and justice if we opened the door and exposed them to the public light, exposing judges’ actions to public scrutiny, requiring all court hearings to be recorded and taped. After all, are Judges not civil servants who should be held responsible, and accountable to the people, and the society they serve? Would not the presence of cameras and recorders simply incent them to greater accountability for truth, justice, and equal justice for all? Would it also not protect them from the human condition to succumb to their own egos, biases, and corruption?

Assimilate Truth

Like all of those individuals named in my lawsuit against the USDA for racketeering, the U.S. Attorney, the Virginia State Attorney, the Judge, his court, and the Virginia State University employees involved, are civil servants. All are accountable to the people, all subject to public scrutiny while they rely on public funding to provide them jobs in civil service. I find it a civic duty to expose them one and all, to hold them one and all publicly accountable and responsible for their every misrepresentation, every lie, and every deceitful and deceptive action they take in their public service. I have no tolerance for liars, no tolerance for injustice served on the people by servants who take sustenance from the public trust and use it against the public they are paid to serve. I will relinquish no restraint in publicly naming these individuals now or in the future or in exposing anything I find unethical or any transgression of service. I intend to combine the contents of my blog and the entire story with full disclosure of all relevant facts from every source I have in a future publication. Any individual holding a job through Local, State, or Federal employees should expect to have their name disclosed along with a factual representation of their deeds and my personal opinions and observations of how a preponderance of the factual evidence might be interpreted.

I’ve worked with executives of major financial institutions, and migrant workers who’ve spent their whole lives in the field, I’ve worked with Fishermen, Carpenters, Electricians, Accountants, Programmers, Doctors, Nurses, and migrant workers. I’ve personally known and worked with very wealthy people and very poor individuals and I’ve encountered good and bad people from all walks of life.

The best mentor, I ever had was a veteran serviceman who taught me to take pride in my work, to be the best I could be, to do the best job I could do, and to be honest no matter what others did and I would always be able to have respect and honor for myself. He also taught me a saying I truly believe to be an esoteric truth, all men should learn to heed. He said: “There’s one thing you always know and that is you never know”. People who grew up wealthy can’t know the challenges of truly being poor, poor people can’t know the challenges of being rich. No one can ever know what it’s like to stand in your shoes or ever have more than a glimpse of the history that makes you, who you are. So before making assumptions, before you get to presumptive before you pass judgment you should always ask yourself the question, what is it that I may not know, what is it I might need to know because everyone should remember they can’t ever really know unless they’re blind in which case they never see the light to know what they only thought they knew. I call them Egidiots, egos so large it gets in the way of their intellect making them do idiotic (stupid) things.

The Truth can be told. Lies once written never erased. Facts can allude to the truth or lead to assumptions not grounded in truth, only, by disclosure of all the facts does one learn the truth. We all know the old saying when you assume you make an ASS out of You and ME. But, neither facts nor the truth go away, simply, because they are ignored.

So before you make judgments about people or situations best to have as many facts as you can and ask yourself the question; what is it, I may not know, because you never know too much, you never know everything, and you should know you never know. Don’t be an ASS. Don’t be an Egidiot. You just might not know everything.

You know

by

Everyone is free to believe what

Everyone is free to believe what he or she tells himself or herself to believe. But facts don’t lie. So be sure before you lie to yourself that you know the facts.

Federal Court is not what you would expect. Let’s take a look at a few prime examples provided by the U.S. Attorney General’s Office of Western Virginia represented by Kartic Padmanabhan in the Federal District Court of Virginia Danville Division. Mr. Padmanabhan recently represented the USDA defendants in a Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organization RICO lawsuit. Mr. Padmanabhan made a number of statements, which were very interesting to a Pro-Se victim for the first time ever in a courtroom.

Is a lie, a lie if you don’t know it’s a lie? Is it a lie if you claim you did not know you were lying? Ask a Federal Court Judge but find one that’s not a liar. Don’t ask an attorney they have to be liars they never know which side of a case they’ll be representing.

Mr. Padmanabhan has a job with an interesting parody to it. On the one hand, the DOJ prosecutes civilian criminals and occasionally government employees when they come under the scrutiny of Congress or the Senate. However, on the other side of the coin, the DOJ defends civil servants and Government Agencies who commit crimes against the people.

Interesting parody prosecutes criminal civilians and defends civil servants for the same crimes.

So here are a few questions to consider? Is it a crime for an attorney from the DOJ to lie to a federal court judge in a hearing? Is it a lie if you really don’t know you lying? How about, is it a lie if you sure as hell; should have known the truth about a material fact in a case?

Interesting because I’m not sure whether Mr. Padmanabhan was just outright lying to a Federal Court judge, or he simply had done a criminal job of reviewing the case! Maybe he had a bad memory or perhaps that’s just the way the DOJ operates in protecting bad government actors. Here are a few examples of Mr. Padmanabhan’s performance.

Example 1.

Mr. Padmanabhan made the following statements to the judge you may review the court transcripts here. See the first one is on page 7 top of the last paragraph. The second is on Page 10 center paragraph.

Judicial Review

More Judicial Review

But let’s take a look at what the complaint actually said about judicial review. This is taken directly from the complaint you can view it here see pleading with cover sheer this excerpt is on page 15.  Just how could it be stated any more clearly? But the Government did me a favor by assuming that was the intention.

Complaint Judicial Review

Example 2.

Mr. Padmanabhan tells the Judge plaintiff argues the house is not on the farm property. And the Judge explains that’s a problem with the plaintiff’s argument. Excerpt from the court transcript page 8 last paragraph.  see it here in the Court Trans script Motion Hearing.

House is not on the Farm

House not on farm the court

Court 2 not on the farm

Apparently, more than 7 months after filing the complaint, Mr. Padmanabhan did not read the complaint documents and exhibits or listen to the hearing tapes. The Judge apparently did not read or listen to them either. Why else would they be wrong about a material fact of the case? Yes, this is a material argument falsely represented by the NAD Director Roger Klurfield.

Take a look at this issue in the complaint filing on page 15 item 21. See it Here in Pleading as filed with Coversheet. House is on the FArm

That the house is actually on the farm is documented no less than ten times in the complete filing with exhibits.

Perhaps they got it wrong because the USDA NAD director attempted to justify a major portion of his position with this lie or perhaps this is the lie the NAD director etc. wanted the public to see. After all, only his summary of events goes on the public record.

Example 3. I love this one most of all. “ They acted clearly within the scope of their employment” See it here in the court transcript page 6 center paragraph.

Acted within the scope of their jobs

They’re accused of multiple acts of negligence, fraud, perjury, illegally accessing a credit report, providing inaccurate FOIA responses, discrimination, and violating the plaintiff’s constitutional rights, orchestrating a conspiracy effort to cover it all up. and running a Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organization.  But “they acted clearly within the scope of their employment.”

The complaint details the date time and major events in order of occurrence. FRCP 9(f) States: “TIME AND PLACE An allegation of time or place is material when testing the sufficiency of a pleading” The pleading provided solid evidence of Fraud, Mail Fraud, and Perjury- Obstruction of justice with exhibits supporting the allegations. It detailed a multitude of other despicable acts involved in protecting the enterprise and the chronology is a pattern all in itself. It provided detail on the Predicate acts for a RICO filing and alleges a conspiracy to do so. It meets every requirement of a RICO filing although, it is not described as such because the court’s instructions were not to make legal arguments and cite cases or statutes. As a Pro-Se I don’t know how you meet the filing requirements of a RICO without making legal arguments and citing appropriate statutes? Can you?

Example 4.

The complaint has a one-line throwaway alleging a Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organization and no other allegations. See that here in the court transcripts. Page 10 near the bottom.

No mention of RICO

No allegation is other than Negligence, Fraud, Mail Fraud, Perjury, Obstruction of Justice, discrimination, denial of service, FCRA violation, and FOIA violations. A conspiracy and a scheme to still constitutional rights. Look again at the paragraph that states USDA is operating a RICO and keep in mind a RICO is defined by the prerequisite of certain crimes. Mail Fraud and obstruction of justice. That a sequence of events and recurring criminal acts make a pattern and a conspiracy is conducted. And as a matter of FACT, this suit was filed on the docket as a RICO charge on day one.

Pr 24 RICO no other Allegations

This is what the supreme court said was required to state a claim.

State A claim

Everyone is free to believe what he or she tells himself or herself to believe. But facts don’t lie. So be sure before you fool yourself you know the facts. Because this court and this Attorney do not show any evidence of grasping them.