Specifically, some high-ranking public officials who got into the cross-hairs of Ty Clevenger's criticism are listed below, and the main target of Ty Clevenger's criticism was Judge Walter Scott Smith Jr., of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas
Walter Smith was outed by attorney Clevenger for sexual misconduct revealed in attorney Clevenger's own disciplinary proceedings in the State of Texas - dismissed proceedings - where the victim of Judge Smith testified under oath that Judge Walter Smith:
- spotted her years before he started sexually harassing her, because the judge actually had in his private chambers monitors where he saw court employees coming and going from the courthouse, and the victim was initially the newly-hired probation officer;
- after the victim was promoted to become a court clerk four year later judge Smith used his power as the judicial officer to order the victim to appear in his private chambers at the time was drunk on the job, groped her when she appeared, and propositioned to her;
- when the victim got away from Judge Smith and notified her superior not to leave her alone with Judge Smith because of her advances, Judge Smith started to pursue her by sending her flower bouquets, pressing her to go to rendezvous with the judge outside of the courthouse, ordering the victim's superior to step away and keep away while judge stayed alone with the victim, and, when the victim was forced to leave her job and filed an employment discrimination complaint,
- the victim was restored in her job, but then the judge created an impossible hostile atmosphere at work where the victim was actually blamed for making a complaint against the judge by co-workers who had to tolerate the judge's misconduct; and,
- the judge caused his law clerk to exert pressure upon the victim to withdraw the complaint,
- and exerted pressure on another employee in the courthouse who tried to reason with the judge and protect the victim, to also resign from the job.
By the way, it was recently reported by a Sun Foundation, a watchdog of government compliance with access-to-records requests, that the U.S. Department was not exactly truthful with the U.S. President as to the rate of disclosure on those FOIA requests - and that it was simply an "inaccurate report", given what Hillary Clinton's legal team did, is an understatement of the century, it looks more like deliberate shielding of high-standing public official from requests that could expose them to criminal charges, see also what is done all over the country to people who seek access to public records, see what happened specifically in the State of Georgia last month.
I was actually personally sanctioned and ordered to pay tens of thousands in sanctions and opponent's legal fees for "harassing" opponents (a former judge) through disclosure of his misconduct in a court proceeding based on information I obtained through an access-to-public-record request. Moreover, my license was suspended by a judge in response to a motion based on information received through such an access-to-records request revealing that the "judge"'s claim that he is a judge is not based on competent evidence required by law and is, thus, false.
See also how the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit, a court that habitually puts civil rights appeals on a "fast-and-sloppy" track of summary non-precedential orders (see also my blog here) made by extremely old judges, is trying to stall my FOIA request about potential widespread corruption between federal and state judges and politically connected attorneys that 2nd Circuit covers up for, and likely has been covering up for - for decades.
All of these people, as explained, with proof, above, are subject to harsh retribution in this country by the politically powerful targets of the criticism and their helpers.
Ty Clevenger's case is no exception.
After all, he not only publicly criticized judicial corruption in his blog, but published the actual transcript of testimony implicating a federal judge Walter Smith in sexual misconduct against at least one and possibly more court employees.
That was, of course, unforgivable, and the former law clerk of a U.S. Supreme Court justice, a former counsel of the U.S. President Bill Clinton, the present counsel of presidential candidate Hillary Clinton and the chair of disciplinary committee (what "coincidences"!) of the D.C. Circuit court
David Kendall, had to file disbarment charges against Ty Clevenger based on trumped up charges, while himself engaging in criminal conduct that is not subject to discipline because David Kendall is a "golden boy" and is above the law, and
That the D.C. District Court for the District of Columbia actually uses attorney disciplinary boards staffed by supermajority of attorneys, competitors to those attorneys the boards investigate and prosecute, in violation of the recent precedent of the U.S. Supreme Court declaring that disciplinary board consisting of super-majorities of market players (licensed attorneys disciplining licensed attorneys) is a violation of federal (civil and criminal) antitrust laws (see also a letter from a former federal antitrust prosecutor on liability of such attorney grievance committees for doing what they are doing to Ty Clevenger), and in violation of the recent ruling of the D.C. District Court's supervising court, the U.S. Court of Appeals for D.C. Circuit that regulation of an industry by a participant and a competitor in the industry is a violation of due process of law of the competitors.
Obviously, while the D.C. Circuit Court rules that it is a violation of the "regulated" businesses and individual's due process rights when they are regulated, or rather, railroaded (pun intended since the D.C. Circuit case refers to regulation of the railroad industry by Amtrak) by their own competitors, the D.C. District Court continues to appoint competitors to railroad attorneys like Ty Clevenger who dare to expose judicial misconduct - bad judicial misconduct, sexual criminal judicial misconduct, as well as bad criminal misconduct of attorneys with political connections to the highest echelons of power in this country.
By the way, the dismissed Texas State disciplinary proceeding against attorney Ty Clevenger where the victim of sexual misconduct of federal judge Walter Smith testified was conveniently brought on complaint of an attorney who represented, without disclosure, Judge Smith's in the judicial investigation of his misconduct. The attorney was rewarded for representing Judge Smith in the investigation by protection from well deserved discipline.
By the way, and, of course, coincidentally, Hillary Clinton is the preferred candidate of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Ginsburg who recently was subject of criticism for her public statement that Hillary Clinton's opponent, presidential candidate Donald Trump, is a "faker" and has "no consistency".
Justice Ginsburg also claimed that if Donald Trump gets elected, Justice Ginsburg will have to flee to New Zealand.
Statements of a judge in anticipation of "Gore v Bush" # 2 with a harsh personal opinion about one of potential parties in front of her in such a case, constituted judicial misconduct, but Justice Ginsburg was not impeached.
Justice Ginsburg did not express regret - initially - for her personal remarks against Donald Trump and, when Donald Trump publicly stated that Justice Ginsburg should resign, stated "gloomily" that she does not know how Donald Trump can become president and that he gets "too much of free publicity."
Yet, when criticism against Justice Ginsburg heated up, Justice Ginsburg did express making remarks about Donald Trump, but did not resign, and very recently, 9 days ago, reportedly held private out-of-court meetings with attorneys "and their guests" at a private resort in New Mexico, discussing who knows what in ex parte meetings with those attorneys "and their guests".
Just in February of this year, another U.S. Supreme Court Justice, Antonin Scalia's misconduct was revealed only after he turned up dead also at a private resort, but in Texas, at the border with Mexico, when his death was clouded with secrecy, local laws were violated in how his death was pronounced without an autopsy, and his body was secretly whisked out of the crime scene and criminal jurisdiction, evidence destroyed by embalming his body, and then his body was removed to Washington and he was hastily and pompously buried.
I wrote a lot about that occurrence, my blogs can be found by a word-search "Antonin Scalia" in the search window on the right of this blog, but one of the most prominent statements made about Antonin Scalia's passing was that we as a nation should not allow ourselves to lament the passing of a racist judge caught dead, literally, during a trip suggesting corruption, simply because of his high status.
Recently, yet another U.S. Supreme Court Justice, Sonya Sotomayor, expressed at yet another private gathering, in Alaska, that criticism against her "get to her stomach", sending out a clear chilling message to attorneys and parties who appear in front of her, or have a possibility of their cases heading towards her court, to shut up and not criticize her no matter what misconduct she is involved in.
I already broke that rule, by criticizing Justice Sotomayor in September of 2015, "coincidentally" 2 months before suspension of my law license, for potential corruption; in May of 2016, see also here, and June of 2016, for advocacy of slavery ; and in August of 2016 for making a thinly veiled threat against those who criticize her.
"Coincidentally", after I criticized ALL the U.S. Supreme Court justices for misconduct in book-writing while tossing meritorious cases without review and for "sponsoring" (in words) the law clerks for all expenses paid trips to England at the expense of secret bodies funded by their secret attorney members and their foreign colleagues, an anonymous criticizer who admitted only to being a male lawyer, but who was likely a judge or a person close to the U.S. Supreme Court justices, published comments on my blog, castigating me for my allegedly "misguided" criticism of judicial misconduct.
When my criticism continued, I was quickly suspended from the practice of law.
Recently, the U.S. Supreme Court was outed for more corruption when a foreign reputable media source, the Reuters agency, published an article about "The Echo Chamber", 66 attorneys with ties to the court, former law clerks of Justices of the court, former colleagues or social contacts (57 men, 9 women, no blacks), who continuously "win" discretionary review in front of the U.S. Supreme Court - at the time when the court cut its intake in half from 1980s by 2009 while the population increased at least 1/3 by the same 2009, and while the Internet, smart phones and social media cause an extraordinary surge of civil rights litigation lately based on documented evidence of governmental misconduct.
With that background, it is not at all surprising that, when attorney Ty Clevenger asked the Chief U.S. Supreme Court Justice John Roberts to speed up investigation of sexual misconduct of federal judge Walter Smith, attorney Ty Clevenger found himself facing a hasty disbarment proceeding.
Attorney Clevenger expects to be railroaded soon - not sorry, disbarred - because the disciplining court made it obvious, by providing Attorney Clevenger with less than 30 days' notice to prepare, less than 30 minutes to present his defense, and denied him the opportunity for discovery - what the court's judgement is going to be.
You do not criticize judges in this country without an expectation of harsh retribution. Especially if you are an attorney.
Attorney Clevenger understands it well:
As law professor Carl Bogus stated in 2004 in a law review article (that was also the target of harsh criticism by the judiciary), attorneys must "scrape and bow" to judges - or be destroyed.
Of course, lack of criticism of judges is not "cruelly unhelpful" to judges - it is actually what keeps them on their benches for decades no matter what misconduct, including criminal conduct, they engage in.
Not only lawyers treat judges as "omniscient", they are paying for seminars where judges tell lawyers about their whims - so that lawyers could serve them better. Please, note that since I ran the blog, the CLE provider conspicously removed the description of the "pet peeves" program - which happens often with links to content exposing judicial misconduct.
I am not proud.
I saved that content, predicting that it will be deleted once the blog exposes it, and just reposted it in the update to the original blog, and here - please, note that the "precious face time with local judges" is sold, for $359 a lawyer, to be exact.
Professor Carl Bogus in his law review article "The Culture of Quiescence" clearly points out at a taboo on criticism of the judiciary - in Rhode Island, but it exists throughout the country, as cases I keep describing on this blog since its beginning in March of 2014 show.
Like the D.C. District is trying to do to attorney Ty Clevenger - who obviously does not scrape or bow.
Good for him!
Yet, professor Bogus calls upon attorneys - and rightfully so - to display leadership and courage, in large numbers, to criticize judicial misconduct:
Yet, it is easy to call people to go to barricades under bullets, but, when it becomes increasingly predictable what happens to those people who actually do go there and display their courage and "leadership" - like it is about to happen to attorney Ty Clevenger - calling for attorneys to fall on the sword is not enough.
What is needed is a grass roots movement to eliminate the source of power and retaliation against attorneys destroying and eliminating from the reach of legal consumers those attorneys who display that "leadership", with courage, honesty, and competence.
And such a grass roots movement is already rising - in the media, on the Internet, step by step, We the People, we citizen journalists do our work, day by day, and the tide is turning.
Just look at the number of judges removed or disciplined after a public outrage in social media, and even criminally prosecuted.
We are not powerless.
And we need to keep going.
Like Ty Clevenger does with his blog.