A groundbreaking verified complaint has been filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia naming Federal Judge Sunshine Suzanne Sykes, State Judge Raquel A. Marquez, and attorneys John and Therese Bailey in a RICO and Bivens action for fraud, collusion, and ultra vires acts. The suit exposes coordinated judicial misconduct, void orders, and abuse of power carried out without jurisdiction or immunity. This case marks a historic challenge to the illusion of judicial untouchability and a direct demand for accountability before a jury of the People.
This article exposes how every loan, mortgage, and public utility billing contract operates as a federally recognized government obligation — not a private contract. Backed by statutes like 18 U.S.C. § 8, 12 U.S.C. § 411, and 31 U.S.C. § 3123, the credit you generate is monetized and guaranteed by the United States Treasury. Banks and utility companies merely act as intermediaries, while your signature creates the actual value. This legal breakdown reveals the true debtor-creditor dynamic hidden behind everyday commerce. The truth isn’t theory — it’s codified in law.
Learn how to lawfully recuse a biased federal judge using 28 U.S.C. §§ 144 and 455. Once a verified motion and affidavit are filed, disqualification is immediate, mandatory, and strips the judge of all jurisdiction. Any continued action by that judge is ultra vires and void ab initio. This article exposes the legal authority behind automatic recusal and outlines your remedies if the judge refuses to step down.Ask ChatGPT
A federal judge’s July 2025 order is now under fire for unlawfully striking a removal, misapplying criminal statutes, ignoring unrebutted affidavits, and participating in a fraudulent party substitution. The case, originally removed under 28 U.S.C. § 1443(1), involves severe allegations of constitutional violations, jurisdictional fraud, and due process abuse. Despite clear legal precedent barring time limits on § 1443 removals, the court falsely claimed the removal was untimely and smeared the petitioner with defamatory labels. This article exposes the judicial misconduct, factual distortions, and illegality underlying the void order now being challenged.
A federal RICO action filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California unveils a calculated scheme orchestrated by attorneys Barry Lee O’Connor and John Bailey, in concert with MARINAJ PROPERTIES and the Doumit family. The Verified Complaint lays out a detailed pattern of racketeering involving simulated legal proceedings, fraudulent conveyance, and theft of trust assets through a void and defective Trustee’s Deed. Despite perfected title claims and unrebutted affidavits establishing lawful ownership, Judge Rachel A. Marquez has enabled the misconduct by shielding culpable parties and targeting the rightful beneficiaries asserting their rights. The suit cites violations of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1962 (RICO), 241 (conspiracy against rights), and 1341 (mail fraud), along with California Civil Code §§ 1709 (fraud) and 3346 (treble damages for wrongful injury to property). This case exemplifies judicial corruption—where bar-protected insiders act with impunity while private Americans are silenced. The court’s response will reveal whether justice, equity, and due process remain alive in California.
In an unthinkable display of judicial defiance, the United States District Court for the Central District of California—specifically Judge Kenly […]
When a court acts without lawful jurisdiction—whether through improper removal, lack of subject matter or personal authority, or constitutional violations—its orders are void ab initio and carry no legal force. This article explains how judges who continue to issue rulings after losing jurisdiction are not merely mistaken—they are acting under color of law and are subject to direct civil liability under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Backed by black-letter case law and statutory authority, this piece dismantles the myth of absolute judicial immunity and affirms a fundamental truth in law: jurisdiction is everything. When it’s gone, so is the court’s power to act.
In a federal civil rights lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, Plaintiffs Kevin: Realworldfare and Corey: Walker expose Riverside Court Commissioner Tamara L. Wagner’s unlawful railroading under color of law and total absence of jurisdiction. Despite a pending Quiet Title Action and perfected federal removal, Wagner issued void orders to dispossess the Walker Estate—yet the Estate remains lawfully and firmly in possession. Now under Article III jurisdiction, Judge Kenly Kiya Kato presides over the live case, which alleges constitutional violations, commercial fraud, and abuse of process. This is a high-stakes confrontation between equity and overreach—where immunity fails and facts prevail.
Judges are not immune when they operate outside lawful jurisdiction, conspire under color of law, or engage in commercial enforcement without consent. Under the Clearfield Doctrine, they become corporate actors subject to liability like any private party. 42 U.S.C. § 1983 enables civil rights lawsuits against them individually, while 18 U.S.C. §§ 241–242 provides for criminal penalties for conspiracy and deprivation of rights. Through tort law, UCC, and case law like Rankin v. Howard, 633 F.2d 844 (9th Cir. 1980), and Pulliam v. Allen, 466 U.S. 522 (1984), judges can face personal and injunctive accountability.
A devastating legal and commercial collapse is underway for Naji Doumit, Marinaj Properties LLC, and their counsel following a Verified Response that dismantles their fraudulent Cross-Complaint. With unrebutted affidavits, perfected UCC filings, and binding conditional acceptance, the Plaintiffs have closed the commercial record and exposed the Defendants to over $100 million in liability. Unauthorized use of protected trademarks like KEVIN WALKER™ and DONNABELLE MORTEL™ now carries $1 million per-use penalties. The Cross-Complaint stands in dishonor, their legal position is void, and federal enforcement is imminent. There is no path to relief—only escalating consequences.
Riverside County officials, deputies, and unlicensed “commissioners” are now in verified default, dishonor, and commercial liability for unrebutted RICO, fraud, and color-of-law crimes. Kevin: Realworldfare has removed case MISW2501134 to federal court, triggering lien enforcement and formal demand for disclosure of liability bonds. Evidence includes unrebutted affidavits, a $1 trillion commercial lien, and documented bond fraud by inactive attorneys Jeremiah Raxter and Charles Rogers. Federal claims include kidnapping, extortion, impersonation, and deprivation of rights under 18 U.S.C. §§ 241–242, 1961–1964. Brady-listed deputies remain under active investigation. If justice is not delivered, top national officials will be named in new federal actions for willful neglect and complicity.
This exposé reveals a coordinated RICO enterprise operating within Riverside County’s justice system, naming Sheriff Chad Bianco, DA Michael Hestrin, Commissioner Tamara L. Wagner, and others for systemic fraud, extortion, and deprivation of rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. It further exposes U.S. District Judge Jesus G. Bernal for judicial obstruction and record concealment, constituting willful interference in violation of federal due process. Backed by an active federal RICO lawsuit under 18 U.S.C. § 1962 before Judge Wesley Hsu, the article outlines a pattern of racketeering, forged instruments, false filings, and unlawful evictions. Officials including Pam Bondi, Rob Bonta, Kash Patel, and the FBI have been formally notified but remain silent. This is not isolated misconduct—it is organized crime under color of law. The piece stands as both public notice and evidentiary documentation for further federal action.