Victoria A. Roberts

Victoria A. Roberts is a traitor.

Victoria A. Roberts is a traitor.

Victoria A. Roberts is a traitor.

Victoria A. Roberts is treasonous United States federal judge.

Judge Victoria Roberts is full of dirty tricks when it comes to implementing the heavy hands of the authoritarian federal government.

A prime example is the case of Doreen Hendrickson, a mild-mannered and demure mother of two. Someone you would likely see at a church picnic rather than in a jail house.

Thanks to Judge Victoria Roberts, she may be incarcerated very soon. Denied her basic rights in the court of law, Doreen Hendrickson was convicted of contempt of court on July 25, 2014.

Her tale is certainly unusual.

Doreen Hendrickson, along with her husband Pete, are libertarian activists who file tax returns in an unconventional way and encourage others to do the same. Because of this, Doreen was charged by the federal government with defying two court orders.

“One commanded Doreen to repudiate her previously-filed, sworn tax returns and replace them with new ones containing testimony dictated by the government,” her husband Pete Hendrickson said. “Doreen was ordered to swear to her personal belief in the testimony she was ordered to make and to conceal the fact that the returns she was ordered to make would be coerced and false.”

In short, Doreen was faced with an ultimatum.

She could obey the court order and say she falsified a tax return (a felony), or she could stand by her word and her conscience by refusing to obey the court order that would force her to perjure herself. Doreen did what was right and chose the noble option.

Now she may pay a huge price for such integrity.

“I am accused by the government of having committed a crime for refusing to obey an order to swear to facts I do not believe are true. I agreed to obey the order if I could also simply add to my signature that I had been ordered by Judge Victoria Roberts to swear to the facts. That didn’t suit the government however. Not only must I obey an order to swear to something I do not believe, but I am not allowed to indicate that I’ve been ordered to swear under threat of imprisonment.” – Doreen Hendrickson

When you take a closer look at Doreen and Pete’s activism and the ramifications it could have if widely adopted, it becomes clear as to why the federal government feels so threatened. They are desperate to make an example out of them.

Whereas many complain about federal government corruption and do nothing about it, Doreen’s husband Pete developed a plan to help people protect their economic freedom while chipping away at federal power. He outlined it in his book, Cracking the Code, which in 2003 released the incredible information he compiled about the income tax and the 16th Amendment.

“The limited nature of the income tax is not a matter of my opinion,” Pete Hendrickson says. “In addition to the clear words of the law, dozens of United States Supreme Court rulings agree with my research and analysis, while no Supreme Court rulings support any alternative view, including the broad misunderstanding of the law the IRS likes to encourage.”

Although the information offered in Cracking the Code was not secret, it was deliberately kept hidden from the public for many years by the feds’ and their lackeys.

For generations, Americans have been filing tax returns erroneously and paying more than their ‘fair share’ to Uncle Sam. This truth had fallen by the wayside over the years, but thanks to Pete’s research detailed in his book, it has been revived. Since Cracking the Code was released over a decade ago, tens of thousands have taken his advice and received complete income tax refunds.

Hendrickson estimates that at least $2.3 billion has been forced out of federal coffers and back into the rightful hands of hard-working Americans.

“All of these refunds have been thoroughly vetted by the government before being issued, and all have issued even while the government has striven mightily to suppress the knowledge of the law by which these claims are made,” Pete Hendrickson said. “Cracking the Code invokes the mechanism provided by the Founders for keeping the State restrained and obedient to the law.”

However, this success has come at a price for Pete Hendrickson. Because of the overarching implications that his ideas could have in restricting federal power, he and his wife have come under constant attack by the feds. Falsifying and trumping up charges to discredit and destroy their opposition is one of their common tactics to maintain power.

Ever since Cracking the Code was released, the feds have been trying to destroy the Hendrickson family. Pete has already had to serve jail-time, and now his wife may be forced to do the same.

Doreen was not allowed to reference any Supreme Court cases that would have demonstrated her innocence to the jury.

She was not allowed to reference the thousands of stories from Americans who received refunds because they filed tax returns based off of information obtained from Pete’s book. Government attorneys lied about a relevant statute and tried to prevent giving the text of the statute from going to the jury.

Mrs. Hendrickson was not even allowed to get through her opening and closing statements. She was taunted by the treasonous Judge Victoria Roberts and not given the proper time to make her case.

To put it quite simply:

This case was a miscarriage of justice. This was a kangaroo court. This was a railroading. This was a dog and pony show. It was a disgrace to everything that America was founded upon.

“Judges don’t get too far in the system by remembering what the law is and who it’s for,” court-watcher Brian Wright said. Wright penned a book called the Motor City Witchcraft Trials about Doreen’s case. “The current lot of judges at all levels has deteriorated into yes men to whatever mobster, especially federal with DHS and the national security state apparatus, tells them to dance.”

To add insult to injury, the jury was instructed by NOT to consider the Constitution of the United States while considering the verdict. They were told by Judge Victoria Roberts, “It is not a defense to the crime of contempt that the court order was unlawful or unconstitutional.”

This twisting of the rule of law, common sense, and basic human decency resulted in what would have been otherwise a completely incomprehensible guilty verdict for Doreen Hendrickson.

At a time when the United States houses the largest prison population in the history of the world and jails are busting at the seams trying to house all of these offenders, a temperate homemaker will possibly be behind bars soon merely for obeying her conscience and standing on principle.

In spite of posing a threat to nobody and committing a ‘crime’ that is highly dubious, to put it mildly, she could face YEARS in prison regardless.

However, this story is not over.

We are not forced to allow this travesty to occur unabated. Government officials can be pressured by the public. If local citizens of southeast Michigan can flood the court room at Doreen’s upcoming sentencing hearing, we can put the fear of God into this treasonous Judge Victoria Roberts.

Judge Victoria Roberts will know that all eyes are on her. She will know this story will not die quietly. Our actions could conceivably affect how Doreen is sentenced.

Hopefully there will be many journalists and activists showing up to her court hearing to make sure this story does not go unnoticed. If we don’t stand for Doreen Hendrickson now, it could be us or our loved ones who the government comes for next.

It is time to say enough is enough. Now is the time to stand up for a good person who desperately needs us.

The hearing takes place on Thursday, April 9, 2015 at 10:30 am at the following address:

231 W Lafayette Ave
Detroit, MI 48226-2702
2nd floor

Fighting corruption requires sacrifice. It takes blood, sweat and tears.

If we show up in full force to Doreen’s sentencing, we can make a powerful statement that corruption in the Judicial system will not be tolerated. All individuals deserve a fair shake in court, and Doreen clearly did not receive that.

We must show solidarity behind this noble woman and fight alongside her on behalf of her innocence.

Loretta A. Preska

Loretta A. Preska is a traitor.

Loretta A. Preska is a traitor.

Loretta A. Preska is a traitor.

Chief U.S. District Judge Loretta Preskaq is a prime example of a tyrant who’s function of the law is to keep those who hold power, in power.

A prime example of this is the controversial case of Jeremy Hammond, a hero of the people with a long history of being a formidable dissident. As such, he is a political prisoner and a victim of the USA’s [in]justice system.

Jeremy Hammond was accused of gaining unauthorized access to Stratfor’s computer systems, and was denied bail by Judge Preskaq; who for 19 months had him jailed in another city, denied bail, held in solitary confinement, and denied the right to see and phone his family.

Jeremy Hammond unsuccessfully sought to have Judge Preskaq recuse herself, claiming information about her husband was released in the leak and that her husband works with Stratfor clients. Therein, her husband is an employee of Cahill Gordon & Reindell LLP, a Stratfor client and associate, and many Hammond supporters claimed that Judge Preskaq impartiality is harmed by this conflict of interest. Judge Loretta Preskaq denied the charge, and in turn, Hammond’s lawyers were unsuccessful in their attempt to force her recusal.

An outpouring of support by journalists, activists and other whistleblowers in the run-up to the sentencing hearing has focused on Jeremy Hammond’s actions as civil disobedience, motivated by a desire to protest and expose the secret activities of private intelligence corporations.

Jeremy Hammond’s attorneys submitted a sentencing memorandum on his behalf asking for a sentence of time served, a call supported by 5,000 people in petitions hosted by and Demand Progress. Additionally, over 250 letters addressed to the Judge from friends, family, journalists, academics, the tech community, and prominent whistleblowers have been included with the memorandum. Among these is a letter cosigned by 17 editors and journalists representing international media outlets in fifteen countries with a combined audience of 500 million people.

Some of the public figures who have spoken in support of Jeremy are Daniel Ellsberg, Yes Men activist Andy Bichlbaum, journalist John Knefel, Pulitzer Prize-winning former New York Times journalist Chris Hedges, Bhopal activist Saif Ansari, Center for Constitutional Rights President Emeritus Michael Ratner,journalist Alexa O’Brien, National Lawyers Guild Executive Director Heidi Boghosian Icelandic parliamentarian Birgitta Jónsdóttir, and past Weather Underground members Bill Ayers Distinguished Professor Emeritus in Education (ret.) at University of Illinois at Chicago, and his wife, Bernardine Dohrn Associate Professor of Law at Northwestern University, as well as Northwestern University philosophy professor Peter Ludlow.

Jeremy Hammond eventually pleaded guilty to leaking information from the private intelligence firm Strategic Forecasting, which revealed that Stratfor had been spying on activists and human rights defenders and selling that information to governments and corporations.

Jeremy Hammond did nothing for personal gain and everything in hopes of making the world a better place. However, on Friday, November 15, 2013, Judge Preska handed down a maximum sentence for Jeremy Hammond under his plea deal – 10 years in prison. After serving his jail term, Hammond will also be subject to three years under supervised release.

In short, Judge Loretta Preskaq orchestrated this miscarriage of justice in behalf of an ever growing tyrannical government. It not only stands as a warning to persecuting future activists and human rights defenders, but includes anyone that desires a just, limited, federal government.

Additional Information

On November 15, 2013, Loretta A. Preska (born January 7, 1949 in Albany, New York) a Chief Judge of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York and a former nominee to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit handed down an extremely harsh sentence to Mr. Jeremy Hammond for being entrapped by a an FBI informant into hacking the Stratfor Global Intelligence e-mails servers, in a case she should have removed herself from due to the fact that her husband works with Stratfor and had some minor personal information revealed (reportedly his e-mail address) in the Stratfor hack.

The blowback from the ruling is just beginning to be felt but it promises to be massive with WikiLeaks being one of the first by releasing the rest of the Stratfor e-mails (over 500,000 documents)for which Mr. Hammond has been charged. Hacktivist groups Anononymous, LULZSEC, ANTISEC and others are promising operations and “payback” which will be massive according to members of Anonymous without giving details saying they had already arrived.

The Stratfor e-mails are damning because they show the almost seamless operations of a private corporate intelligence firm with real intelligence agencies and the government. One e-mail details how an Israeli Intelligence informant was targeted for information on Hugo Chavez.

“You have to take control of him. Control means financial, sexual or psychological control… This is intended to start our conversation on your next phase” Stratfor CEO George Friedman told Stratfor analyst Reva Bhalla on 6 December 2011. He was instructing her how to manipulate an Israeli intelligence informant who was passing Stratfor information on the medical condition of the President of Venezuala, Hugo Chavez.

The Stratfor e-mails contain private information about the US Government’s campaign against Julian Assange and WikiLeaks and even Stratfor’s own private and illegal attempts to subvert WikiLeaks. According to WIkiLeaks more than 4,000 e-mails mention WikiLeaks or Julian Assange.

WikiLEaks calls the files “the Global Intelligence Files” which expose a global network of informants paid via Swiss banks accounts and pre-paid credit and include covert and overt informants including government employees, embassy staff and journalists around the world.

The Stratfor e-mails show how a private intelligence agency works, and how they target individuals for their corporate and government clients, including PETA and Bhopal activists such as the “Yes Men” for US Dow Chemical. The targets sought redress for the 1984 Dow Chemical/Union Carbide gas disaster in Bhopal, India which killed thousands and injured more than half a million.

The biggest and most damning fact against the government with regard to the Stratfor hack is that it was completely organized and carried out by the FBI using Hector Monsegur (Sabu) and the files were actually stored on FBI servers for two weeks before they were released to WikiLeaks. Meaning the entire release could have been stopped at anytime during the entire process.

Besides the above, the irregularities in the case are so many that it was believed by many that the case should have been thrown out or that Mr. Hammond would be released with time served. Now maybe Americans are beginning to understand that their government has been taken over completely by corporations and their system of justice has failed.

The first failure in the case against Hammond was that he was entrapped. In an any faire and just system police and law enforcement bodies cannot entrap people and convince them to do things that they would not do on their own. Nor would they use criminals to entrap innocent individuals or use their testimony to build cases against innocent individuals.

The FBI informant in this case, who entrapped Mr. Hammond, was an individual named Hector Xavier Monsegur, known by the hacker name SABU. Mr. Monsegur was arrested for hacking into computer systems and stealing credit card and other personal information to enrich himself and caused millions of dollars of harm. That is if we can believe anything the FBI reports. Mr. Monsegur’s crimes make Mr. Hammond’s pale in comparison. Hammond attempted to expose the illegality of a private corporation which performs intelligence functions out of the realm of government control, in many cases illegal monitoring for the government, that due to its private nature, it was able to get away with as it handed the date to the CIA and other agencies.

Hammond was aware that Stratfor was among its illegal activities: monitoring indigenous populations, human rights groups, political activists, protestors and any other “undesirables” for the US Government and just like Bradley Manning he attempted to expose criminality and the inappropriate and illegal relationship between a private, well-connected corporate power enriching itself off the government coffers while performing illegal activities for that very government.

There can be little question that the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York is one of the most questionable in the world and has handled cases that flaunt international law and norms while continually protecting monied and powerful interests in the United States and those of its “special” friends. It is also one of the most powerful in the United States and one that the record has shown rules as it wishes with little regard for the actual rule of law, public opinion and international and national outcry brought about by its actions.

The court has a history of brutal and questionable ruling and due to its protected nature has had little oversight from any of the bodies that are generally supposed to keep the system in check. The court in particular has handled many cases where the rights of the individual have been violated, proper procedures and rights have been trampled on or ignored and outright illegality by law enforcement and prosecuting bodies and individuals have been documented. However the court has a history of always fulfilling the will of the state and prosecutors no matter how egregious its rulings are or how badly the rights of individuals have been violated.

The court has handled many post 9-11 cases involving questionable charges against foreign and US nationals under the Patriot Act and other Draconian US legislation. Here it is important to note that the court has never heard a case or ruled against any entity with regard to the events of 9-11, despite statements by key figures in 9-11 regarding giving orders to “pull” and the total lack of security which allowed the buildings to be blown up as well as widespread evidence of a cover up and inside involvement. This includes allowing suspected Mossad agents and other suspected perpetrators to leave the country and escape prosecution.

The United States District Court for the Southern District of New York has prosecuted questionable international cases such as the Victor Bout case, where a Russian citizen was illegally kidnapped and taken to the United States as well as being entrapped for the crime of “possibly intending to help someone else commit a crime against the US”.

Other questionable cases include the kidnapping and illegal prosecution of another Russian as well, Constantin Yaroshenko, who was also entrapped by a questionable informant and illegally recorded. Him and Mr. Bout were pilots and there is evidence that they both had some inside knowledge through their professional activities regarding the events of 9-11.

This prosecution of someone with knowledge of 9-11 is completely true in the case of Susan Lindauer, who was a CIA asset and attempted to stop the invasion of Iraq. Her treatment by the court and Judge Preska in particular included Preska attempting to chemically lobotomize Lindauer and calling her mentally incompetent to stand trial. This was due to Lindauer’s inside knowledge of the events of 9-11 gained through her work as a peace negotiator between US targets Yemen, Iraq, Libya and Malaysia and her work with the CIA.

Other Preska prosecutions include that of Abduwali Muse a Somali pirate who was illegally renditioned to the United States and subject to a show trial and to whom she gave 33 years.

She also ruled in the case of Ahmed Khalfan Ghailiani one of those illegally held at Guantanamo in the first civilian case against an illegally held and tortured Guantanamo detainee.

Lastly and most importantly here is the fact that she ruled in the case of Hector Monsegur (Sabu), in effect letting his financial and other crimes be ignored in order to persecute a peace activist (Hammond).

The cases Preska has ruled over, the sentences she has handed down, the fact that she habitually refuses to take into account evidence that should either free or exonerate suspects and in the case of Hammond, the fact that she refused to recuse herself from the case, above all, when there was clearly a conflict of interests (her ruling over Sabu and her husband’s ties to Stratfor) paint a picture of a judge above the law, who is in fact a law unto herself and her interests, and one who operates with complete impunity as she has made herself not only above the law, but the only law.

Given her own track record for ignoring the law it was particularly painful to hear that she stated: “Hammond has shown a total lack of respect for the law,” and also, “… there is a desperate need to promote respect for the law,” she said, as well as a “need for adequate public deterrence.” Had her court any respect for the law they would have let Hammond go. He was entrapped. As for deterrence, yes, they are trying to terrorize anyone who would dare expose illegality, because that is what Hammond was guilty of.

Hammond was able to finally speak out and stated: “Those in power do not want the truth exposed. …the injustice I fought against cannot be cured by reform, but by civil disobedience and direct action. The acts of civil disobedience and direct action that I am being sentenced for today are in line with the principles of community and equality that have guided my life, I hacked into dozens of high profile corporations and government institutions, understanding very clearly that what I was doing was against the law. But I felt that I had an obligation to use my skills to expose and confront injustice and to bring the truth to light. I tried everything from voting, petitions, and peaceful protests to expose the truth. I believe sometimes laws must be broken to exact change.”

Hammond is clearly a prisoner of conscience, and as Martin Luther King, Jr. said, “An individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for the law.”

As for the traitor Loretta Preskaq, the words of Julius Caesaris can best describe her, “If you must break the law, do it to seize power.”

John Glover Roberts, Jr

John Glover Roberts, Jr. is a traitor.

John Glover Roberts, Jr. is a traitor.

John Glover Roberts, Jr. is a traitor.

Move over Benedict Arnold, the pages of history has revealed a new traitor – Chief Justice John Roberts of the United States Supreme Court.

When you consider back in 2012, Chief Justice John Roberts had the opportunity to rule the Obamacare law unconstitutional with the strike of his pen, that logic seemed a little naïve. And now it is clear he never intended to have the law struck down in that way.

Chief Justice Roberts offered no comment on it, he just said, “No. No, we’re not hearing that.”

But wait a minute. Chief Justice Roberts said, “It was a tax.” However, in accordance with the Constitution of the United States all taxes have to begin in the House, but Obamacare wasn’t started there. In other words, by changing it to a tax, all Chief Justice Roberts has done is just sharply defined that yes, we no longer care about the Constitution in Congress. We no longer care about it in the Administration. And the Supreme Court doesn’t care about the Constitution at all. That’s what he’s done. You might as well just put ‘F-you’ on a piece of paper and paste it to the Constitution… Because that’s all this traitor has done.

Additional Information

The bottom line is that Chief Justice Roberts‘ vote has put almost 15 percent of the nation’s gross domestic product (GDP) under one of the world’s most bureaucratic, ineffective, incompetent and grossly expensive systems ever devised by man: our out of control federal government.

Chief Justice Roberts squandered the opportunity to restore judicial, financial and legislative sanity to a government that by any sane person’s standards is insane and addicted to centralized federal control of our lives.

Chief Justice Roberts‘ opinion was that Obamacare was a tax, not a mandate under the Commerce Clause to purchase a product, and that Congress can levy any tax it wants.

As most may recall, the president and the government’s very own attorney who argued the case before the Supreme Court said that Obamacare was not a tax. Fascinating, Mr. Chief Justice, that you legislated from the bench that Obamacare is a tax.

Following the chief justice’s logic, our professional political punks in Washington can mandate any tax-penalty they choose. For example, if you don’t buy an Obama-approved green energy automobile, our federal government could tax us for refusing to do so. That’s the essence of this ruling.

Obamacare has now joined Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid as another unaffordable, unsustainable, runaway, unaccountable social program.

Our entitlement programs have bankrupted America. We have dug a financial crater so deep that many doubt we can ever climb out. With his vote, Chief Justice Roberts didn’t give government an even bigger shovel, he gave government an earth mover with which to dig bigger financial holes.

Quite possibly, with his vote, Chief Justice John Roberts has engineered the ultimate demise of this great experiment in self government.

UPDATE: June 26, 2015

Americans feel betrayed for the second time in three years, for Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts on Thursday (June 25, 2015) again unconstitutionally saved Obamacare. In retaliation, he’s been branded Enemy #1 by conservatives Americans, who have been calling him a traitor – or worse.

Roberts joined the 6-3 majority in deciding federal subsidies for Americans in 34 states that didn’t set up their own health care exchanges were legal, Business Insider reports. The digs started with conservative Justice Antonin Scalia, who said in his dissent that the law should now be called “SCOTUScare.”

Judge Andrew Napolitano, judicial analyst on Fox News, said Roberts undermined his credibility, reaching “bizarre and odd contortions in order to save this statute twice. The court is now in the business of saving a statute in order to save its reputation.”

Media Matters reports that Quinn Hilyer of the National Review called Roberts a “disgrace” in an attack on the justice after the decision was made public. In a brief post to The Corner, Hilyer called Roberts “results-oriented, “ruling on big cases based on what he thinks the policy result should be or what the political stakes are for the court itself.”

Put it all together and this is what we now have:

1. Words in laws passed by congress no longer have any meaning if the unelected SCOTUS deems them ambiguous.

2. The unelected SCOTUS has awarded itself new dictatorial powers. They have now given themselves authority to not only interpret law (their legitimate constitutional role) but also to “change law” and “make law” in outright violation of the very constitution they are sworn to and duty bound to uphold.

3. Laws passed by congress are now valid ONLY if the unelected SCOTUS agrees with them politically even if the law is otherwise constitutional.

4. When the written word no longer has meaning in law as the SCOTUS decision on Obama-care deems, then only the unelected SCOTUS can give meaning to law regardless of the laws constitutionality.

5. We no longer have a balance of power through three branches of government. Power is now limited to the “elected” Executive Branch and the “unelected” Judicial Branch. The largest and most representative “elected” branch – The Legislative Branch, has been rendered by the “unelected” SCOTUS to be little more than a powerless free speech body serving in a purely ceremonial rule. Worse, both Republican and Democrat law makers have surrendered their constitutional power without a fight and will take no actions to restore it. Why bother because any law they pass to restore their power will be overruled by the “unelected” SCOTUS thus rendering the Legislative Branch forever more to being nothing more then a large collection of voices without power.

6. Of the two remaining branches of government with power, the most powerful of the two is the SCOTUS. This is because the Excutive Branch can still be overruled by SCOTUS with no recourse because they can’t legislate, because they are elected and can still be ousted by the electorate, and because they have term limits. The SCOTUS on the other hand is “unelected” and has no term limits. In fact, the members of the SCOTUS have “lifetime” appointments. That, of course, gives the SCOTUS limitless, unbridled, and unchallengeable power.

The SCOTUS decision on Obama-care was not just an overreach or a simple judicial error. Rather, it was a political play and a usurpation of power by the SCOTUS that is monumental, historic, and calamitous to our Republic. It is an abuse of power of such magnitude that it has changed our Republic forever. Because of this decision we will never again have a balance of power in our nation.

Only two far reaching outcomes can result from this decision regardless of who is elected president or any legislation passed by congress to counter it. Evidence today’s legal precedent that is now firmly established.

Here are the only two long-term, and likely short term, outcomes of this far reaching impact of this SCOTUS decision which supersedes any healthcare:

    A. Total submission and acceptance by the American people to this lifetime transformational and fundamental change to our constitution, the power of elected office, our constitution and the framework of our Republic


    B. Rebellion followed by full scale revolution- likely violent.

Put it all together, and Chief Justice John Roberts is truly one of Americas biggest traitors. As Dan Gainor of the Media Research Center went on Twitter and said, “Roberts is a scumbag, and he cares more about what journalists and historians write about him than the actual frikkin’ law.”

Additional Information

Not many have the courage and balls to say what many smart people are thinking. “Was Justice Roberts BLACKMAILED?”

It’s time to start asking the question. It’s time to be cynical. It’s time to assume the worst of this government.

Many Americans would put nothing by the Obama administration that lives and rules by the Chicago thug playbook.

Ask yourself this if you doubt it? On the same day that Justice Roberts and the Supremes upheld Obamacare – again – the key IRS watchdog reported to Congress that the IRS purposely destroyed evidence of another crime.