The Evidence
FROM THE COURT RECORD
To summarize the provable facts below and attached exhibits, two federal judges subverted the administration of justice that I have been long overdue for by maliciously and intentionally using materially false statements from the court record created by themselves justifying impeachment by Congress for removal from office and prosecuted because they knowingly broke the law by PERPETRATING FRAUD ON THE COURT in criminal judicial acts.
EXHIBIT A is a certified copy of a court order (Doc. 183) signed by former U.S. Magistrate Judge Erin L. Setser (now Wiedemann and for unknown reasons she retired May 1, 2021, in the prime of her judicial career after only 12 years on the bench) who "gave me permission" to file a single 20-page reply to the Government’s answer to my post-conviction habeas petition replacing four previous replies (Docs. 145, 146, 164, 166) that she ruled "would not be considered" (nor even read).
I timely complied with her order filing a single 20-page reply (Doc. 196) but months later she blatantly lied by falsely alleging I "did not have permission to file it" as her reason to not consider it "but did consider" one of the four replies (Doc. 164) that she had ruled "would not be considered" in her court order (Doc. 183).
EXHIBIT B is a certified filed copy of Magistrate Setser's court order (Doc. 204) which "gave me permission" to file a substitute final reply to the Government’s answer to my habeas petition. In that same court order (Doc. 204), she also gave me an option that either (a) the reply already filed (Doc. 196) or; (b) the substitute reply in accordance with that order would stand as my final reply, and whichever option I chose would be "the only reply she would consider" in her Report and Recommendation to the court on my habeas petition.
I chose OPTION B which Magistrate Setser granted me permission to file a substitute final reply that was timely filed (Doc. 206) of which certified filed copies of the captions page (p. 1) and certificate of service page (p. 21) are attached as EXHIBIT C.
Attached as EXHIBIT D are certified filed copies of the captions page (p. 1) and the signature page (p. 35) of Magistrate Setser's long-awaited Report and Recommendation (Doc. 233) almost three years after I filed my habeas petition. In footnote 1 at the bottom of the captions page, she intentionally and knowingly lied by falsely stating that both my final reply (Doc. 196) and my substituted final reply (Doc. 206) "will not be considered, as they were filed without seeking court permission."
To exacerbate those intentional lies, also in footnote 1 at the bottom of the captions page in Magistrate Setser's Report and Recommendation, "she did consider" one of those four replies (Doc. 164) that she had already ruled "would not be considered" (nor even read) which was an unfinished reply with no legal arguments nor exhibits to support the claims of merit in my habeas petition.
Certified filed copies of the captions page and the certificate of service page of that unfinished reply are attached as EXHIBIT E. The certificate of service page factually documents why that reply (Doc. 164) was filed unfinished which was to comply with a deadline set by Magistrate Setser to file it (a reply to the prosecutor's answer to my habeas petition I never received a copy of).
Attached as EXHIBIT F are certified copies of relevant pages of my Objections to Magistrate Setser's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 237, pp 1- 13) that I timely filed and beginning on the second page under the heading of FRAUD ON THE COURT BY JUDICIAL OFFICERS I factually documented the above indisputable evidence in the court record of her intentional use of materially false statements to subvert the administration of justice that I was already long overdue for.
U.S. District Judge Timothy L. Brooks issued his Opinion and Order (Doc. 240) and Judgment (Doc. 241) denying all claims in my habeas petition of which certified filed copies of the captions pages are attached as EXHIBIT G. Judge Brooks intentionally and maliciously adopted Magistrate Setser's Report and Recommendation, in its entirety, including her materially false statements in Footnote 1 at the bottom of the captions page.
Judge Brooks knowingly and intentionally completely ignored all of my Objections to Magistrate Setser's Report and Recommendation with the factually documented and undisputed evidence in the record as shown above and attached exhibits proving she made the materially false statements which was necessary for her to justify "not considering" my substituted final reply (Doc. 206) that was fully briefed, with supporting exhibits, for each of the meritorious claims in my habeas petition.
Judge Brooks lied when falsely alleging "In light of Mitchell's Objections to the R & R, the Court has conducted a 'de novo' review of the record, focusing in particular on the portions of the R & R to which specific objections have been made, in accordance with 28 U.S.C. Sec. 636(b)(1)(C). After review, the Court finds that the objections lodged by Mitchell offer neither law nor fact requiring departure from the Magistrate's findings."
Any honest, fair, and impartial judge would have found that my Objections to Magistrate Setser's Report and Recommendation (R & R) were wrought with her materially false statements, and ordered an evidentiary hearing to overrule her findings. I timely filed motions to disqualify Magistrate Setser and Judge Brooks and to reconsider the denial of my habeas petition by Judge Brooks which again factually documented, in both motions, all of the same uncontroverted evidence from the court record in my Objections to Magistrate Setser's Report and Recommendation proving that she made materially false statements in it.
Judge Brooks denied both motions in a single order once again by intentionally completely ignoring the same indisputable evidence from the court's own record that I had factually documented in both motions I had made in my Objections to Magistrate Setser's Report and Recommendation proving that she blatantly lied when falsely stating that I "did not have the court's permission" to file my final reply to the Government's answer to my habeas petition as her only reason "to not consider" it in her Report and Recommendation.
28 U.S. Code Sec. 453 - Oaths of justices and judges. Each judge of the United States must take the following oath or affirmation before performing the duties of his/her office: "I, __________ __________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as __________ under the Constitution and laws of the United States. SO HELP ME GOD." Both Judge Brooks and Magistrate Setser dishonorably breached this sworn oath they took BEFORE GOD.
The Code of Conduct for United States Judges includes the canons of ethics that apply to federal judges and provides guidance on their performance of official duties. Judge Brooks and Magistrate Setser also breached at least three of these sacred canons: CANON 1: A judge should uphold the integrity and independence of the judiciary; CANON 2: A judge should avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety in all activities; and CANON 3: A judge should perform the duties of the office fairly, impartially and diligently.
These same ethical canons of judicial conduct were promulgated by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime in The Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct to promote public confidence in the judicial system and in the moral authority and integrity of the judiciary because of its utmost importance in a modern democratic society.
The Honorable Amy Berman Jackson, U.S. District Judge from Washington, D.C., with a reputation for holding the government and political officials to a higher standard, has lectured several high-profile criminal defendants (including Paul Manafort, Roger Stone, and former U.S. Representative Jesse Jackson, Jr.) who have appeared before her at sentencing -- "As a public official, you are supposed to live up to a higher standard of ethics and integrity, and that's not unfair. You chose that role for youtrself."
Integrity and ethics mean everything in the federal judiciary where it is a cardinal rule to protect its image by promoting public confidence and trust in our federal judges. Corrupt federal judges Erin L. Setser and Timothy L. Brooks dishonored the sacred black robes they wear while sitting on the bench which the indisputable evidence above and in the attached exhibits proves.
"My religious faith informs my perspective on my judicial duty to obey lawful authority. I have a moral obligation to obey our government and its laws." - Honorable William H. Pryor, Jr., 11th Circuit Court of Appeals Judge, from "MORAL DUTY AND THE RULE OF LAW" published in The Harvard Journal of Law, 31 Harv. J.L. & Pub. Pol'y 153, 163.
While all federal judges have a moral duty to obey the law, Judges Brooks and Setser chose not to, and justice demands they must be held accountable to protect the integrity of the federal judiciary. "Impeachment is not an option, it's an obligation because no one is above the law." - Congresswoman Robin Kelly from Illinois. "Impeachment is necessary because no one is above the law." - Congressman Dwight Evans from Pennsylvania.