This statement is provided by Manuel P. Asensio, the founder of the Institute of Judicial Conduct (IJC). It based on his personal knowledge and information of the ongoing investigation at the Judicial Conference of the US (Conference) into the Hon. John G. Roberts, Jr.’s (Roberts) fraudulent conduct. US Attorney General William P. Barr’s (Barr) speeches at the Federalist Society and Notre Dame Law School describe monstrous, fraudulent, and illegal conduct by the federal judges, against the American people and Office of the American Presidency. As a matter of fact and law, Roberts is the one US official and individual responsible and Roberts is the individual permit, allowing and authorizing this criminal conduct.
Mr. Asensio stated, “Roberts is using the nation’s judicial conduct law enforcement agency, the Conference, to authorize leftist state and federal judges to deliberately break law and to use coercion against Americans that have done no wrong, violated no law nor imposed themselves on any other persons rights.”
The American people under the Judicial Conduct Act of 1980 and its related laws (Act) and Office of the American Presidency under the Constitution have the power to cause Roberts to immediately resign.
Roberts is obstructing proceedings under the Act and at the Supreme Court of the US, and the Department of Justice (DOJ), Solicitor General’s Office, the Civil Division, the Office of Legal Counsel, have equities and jurisdiction in this investigation. [The task of the Office of the Solicitor General is to supervise and conduct government litigation in the United States Supreme Court. Virtually all such litigation is channeled through the Office of the Solicitor General and is actively conducted by the Office. The United States is involved in approximately two-thirds of all the cases the U.S. Supreme Court decides on the merits each year. https://www.justice.gov/osg ]
Barr has been personally served in these proceedings. They involve conduct outside of law and Roberts’s jurisdiction. They involve conduct related to any judicial function or legitimate state function. Roberts’s conduct authorizes criminal conduct by judges and the subject matter involves the manufacturing of crimes against innocent Americans. The subject matter is Roberts’s fabrications of rules that authorize fraudulent federal and state judicial conduct under the protection of the fabricated DRE policy.
The DRE case involves a cover up my monumental criminal indifference to civil rights case involving New York State’s leftist judicial rules, and the federal judges that are protecting the New York State judges and senior state officials involved in this activity. These judges sit on the US District Court of the Southern District of New York, the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, and the Judicial Council for the Second Circuit.
As a result of Roberts’s abdication toward these federal judges and Roberts’s relinquishing his obligation to deal with federal and state corruption, Roberts has provided the leftists politician with the opportunity to use state coercion to advance their political agenda.
Barr is the most central most important government official involved in the Roberts investigation at the Conference. Barr is aware of how Roberts is illegally using his executive control of the Conference to abrogate constitutional rights and coerce Americans to accepted radical leftist ideology and to attack families’ privacy, and political and religious freedoms.
The record under investigation at the Conference reveals the seriousness of the crimes being committed by New York’s leftist federal judges. The record should demonstrate to Barr that Robert is authorizing illegal judicial policy making and fraudulent federal judicial conduct at the Conference.
The Hon. Robert A. Kaufmann, who Roberts appointed to the Conference’s two most important committees, is under investigation at the Conference. The DRE case concerns New York’s federal judges protecting New York State’s leftist judicial rules that illegally impinge on constitutional rights including political freedom and the free exercise of religion.
The DRE case addresses exactly what Barr has defined as the leftist’s “monstrous” government conduct. This includes the manufacturing of knowingly false criminal charges, fees, and other financial and emotional burdens, to coerce Americans into accepting leftist political ideology.
Roberts is obstructing essential proceedings to determine if Ronnie Abrams, the judge presiding over the DRE case, is colluding with the New York State defendants. This includes an investigation in Abrams working with the state defendants to plant a false story in the Daily News. Roberts has gone to the extent of deliberately and repeatedly violating the laws, cannons, and advisory to protect Abrams, her supervisor, Colleen McMahon, and Kaufmann.
Roberts is interfering with proceedings at the Conference against Abrams, McMahon and Kaufmann. Roberts interference is permitting the New York State defendants to continue using illegal leftist policies to impinge on the free exercise of religion.
Mr. Asensio stated, “Roberts’s illegal and indecent behavior fits perfectly with Barr’s assessment of leftist judges who use “violation of laws and legal standards and practices that protect truth and fairness to achieve their leftist goals.”
IJC has been advised that President Donald J. Trump has received IJC’s brief on the Conference’s proceedings against Roberts in the New York DRE case. President Trump received the brief at the conclusion of his “Roundtable on Transition to Greatness: Rebuilding and Renewing” event. The event took place at the Gateway Church Dallas Campus on June 12, 2020. IJC also provided President Trump’s White House Counsel with a copy of its brief. The brief was presented to President Trump never the authority of a resolution that addresses Roberts’s illegal policy making.
Mr. Asensio added, “Hopefully, an announcement of Robert’s resignation will come shortly and this will provide President Trump with the opportunity to lead Congress in the process of adding some very simple language into the Act that will prevent the next chief justice doing what Roberts has done.”
On October 11, 2019, Barr announced that he had “set up a task force within the [DOJ] . . . We have regular meetings. We keep an eye out for cases or events around the country where states are misapplying the Establishment Clause in a way that discriminates against people of faith, or cases where states adopt laws that impinge upon the free exercise of religion.”
Barr’s reference to “states adopt[ing] laws” must operate to include judicial policies adopted by New York State’s chief judge at the Administrative Board of the Courts, and judicial policies adopted by Roberts at the Conference.
Under the Act, Roberts as the presiding officer at the Conference is an executive with jurisdiction created and limited by statute. Roberts has no political or constitutional executive authority. The same is true of all the other 26 federal judges on the Conference.
Mr. Asensio stated, “President Trump has Article II executive authority to take care that the law be faithfully executed. President Trump has every right to discipline Roberts for his illegal conduct at the Conference.”
Using the DRE, Roberts has made the Act inoperative and the lower courts, US District Court and US Court of Appeal, a futile and frustrating fraud for Americans. Roberts cannot hide from President Trump at the Conference or in US Courts, or under false grandiose pretensions of judicial immunity or independence.
Mr. Asensio added, “Roberts is using Act to protect the DRE and the federal judges involved in conscious wrongdoing. The Act operates to protect Americans. To discipline the federal judges, not to authorize fraudulent judicial conduct.”
Mr. Asensio added, “I consulted extensively on the DRE case with the US Attorney’s office for the SDNY. This occurred in the months before the filing of the DRE case on November 21, 2018.”
“The IJC is independent of the federal judges and the members of the federal and state bar associations, and the bar organizations themselves. Neither judges nor lawyers have a monopoly on moral standards or decency.” Mr. Asensio added, “These matters are not at all complex, complicated or difficult when considered independently of lawyers and judges. Unfortunately, they are the only beneficiaries of DRE and of all unauthorized judicial encroachment on American’s Judeo-Christian, free, good, prosperous, and civil society.”