Fear and Mayhem in Hawaii part IV – RICO Hawaiian Style

If they don’t mind me posting about them with Pictures, then I certainly don’t mind telling people what RICO Hawaiian Style means.

This is the text version of the video narration. It is almost identical to the video.. Its your choice whether to read or watch and listen or both. However in the first part of this video there are three audios not included in the below narration. To get the full impact and understanding its advised that you watch parts one, two and three first as they identify the three audios.

Who Squashed the Grand Jury Investigation    Fear and Mayhem In Hawaii Part II  Fear and Mayhem in Hawaii Part III

You also became aware of suspicions that the affidavit did not in fact get processed according to law or according to Supreme Court Rules nor according to the established rules of Judge Seabright’s own court.  And finally we have established the actual identity of at least two ( not including Seabright himself) culpable persons who not only did not perform their duties but implicated the culpability of the Hawaii US Attorney’s office and possibly the FBI itself.  We have actual evidence that these in actions exist and now there has been a new discovery. It seems that Lian Abernathy  who is Judge Seabright’s head clerk, is also listed as a contact for the Hawaii US Attorney’s office. If this is true it may be a violation of the “Separation of Powers” described in Articles 1, 2, 3 of the US Constitution. We also discovered that Ms. Abernathy’s husband is an attorney that represents the Department of Treasury,Hawaii division of the  IRS.  His name is David Anthony Abernathy. His occupation and associations are not easy to discover as he is also known as D. Abernathy, Tony Abernathy, David Abernathy, Anthony Abernathy and D. Anthony Abernathy.

So now we have an Abernathy with close proximity connections to the Hawaii Judicial branch, the US Attorneys office and the IRS.  A personal connection like this would be a dream come true for anyone in the Organized Crime business. The only US Government  affiliate not discovered yet, is the FBI, or the CIA.  But we are working on it.

Records must be kept in all branches of the United States Government and the concealing or destruction of these records is a Federal Crime.  The failure to properly process and record incoming or existing records by any court is also a crime punishable by 3 years in prison.  The Seabright courts inactions on a legal request for a Grand Jury causes a problem for US Citizens.  If it were not for the recordings, records and emails kept by Codefore Publishing and the exposure given these records, no one would know that this Grand Jury request exists. It’s a poor attempt by the court to stop an investigation. The efforts to stop the Grand Jury investigation  are only a short term delay of the process.

Codefore Publishing is bewildered at this point as to explain why Seabright would risk his career on the likes of the 60 listed defendants who are all small fry with the exception of the Hawaii Community Foundation.  Does not Seabright and of course his clerks remember signing delivery receipts for the documents?  Do they not  know of the recorded voice mails left by clerks that they have possession of these files and are preparing to process them?  Is not Seabright aware of the letter sent by his court to Detective Benish threatening to destroy the records?   With all of this looming over their heads one can only assume that these people either believe that they have total impunity, or they are prepared to go down with the ship to protect someone or some entity.  It certainly is not an exercise  to protect the US Citizens and the Constitution as they are sworn to do.  Even getting rid of Detective Benish will not eradicate their culpability.

As irony would have it, in answer to a legal request for the documents that relate to the Benish affidavit and all relevant communication with the US Attorney’s office and or the FBI was denied by the court. Reason?  They are exempt from the FOI Federal law and they are forbidden to give any information relative to a Grand Jury.  Their claim for exclusion is supported by previous court decisions and opinions.

So Seabright’s Court is claiming protection from revealing information and this protection is based  Grand Jury statutes relative to the releasing of information about a sitting Grand Jury. When it comes down to it, it seems that  the court  cannot prove that they have processed such a Grand Jury request, if you believe an email sent by Lian Abernathy that she did not processes the request but instead made a phone call to a person who’s identity she doesn’t remember.

Judge Seabright’s court failed the test. What are they going to do if Benish goes to a higher court?  What are they going to do if Benish requests personal communication with Seabright’s Grand Jury or request a change of Venue?  What then Judge Seabright?  Is the corruption so deep that it matters not? All Benish wants to do is re-open  an investigation into the murder of 4 year old Lacey Woolsey Ruff .

After viewing the first three videos you should have a fairly good understanding of the botched murder investigation of four year old Lacey Woolsey Ruff by the Kauai Police Department  and the involvement of the Hawaii State justice system in allowing or enabling  the flawed investigator’s work to proceed through the Hawaii Criminal system resulting in the incarceration of one person Aaron Schonlau and not the incarceration of his brother Todd Schonlau who has admitted his participation in the crime.

It was Benish’s reasoning that a request for a renewed investigation into the Murder of Lacey Ruff would probably require the bypassing of local authorities. There was a bad smell about it all. It now appears that Benish was more than correct. He had already formally requested investigations by the Kauai Police Department, the Hawaii Department of Justice, the US Attorney’s office and the FBI and received no positive results. If local authorizes would not co-operate the next step is to request a Federal Grand Jury’s involvement and to do that it would be necessary to include Federal Charges, and hence the whole investigation would be an exclusive Federal Jurisdiction investigation.

His allegation that there was an accomplice in the Murder of Lacey Woolsey Ruff is a Federal Murder violation but it is also a State of Hawaii murder violation.  He feared that his request for a Federal Grand Jury to look into only the Ruff murder would be rejected and passed down to the State Level authorities and or a local Grand Jury.  This option would most likely go nowhere. There were too many local authorities who were mixed up in this.

As luck would have it, there were local Hawaiian citizens who were aware of the Codefore work on this murder and came forward with their own allegations of political corruption.  Benish reasoned, why not include these allegations and then ask for the Federal Grand Jury. It was determined that there were good allegations of violations of the Federal RICO act as well as lesser Federal violations.

The first case listed in the  affidavit as allegations of violations of the RICO Act is the Jack Stahley case. This allegation of violations of the RICO Act is an interesting case and is an in depth example of alleged corruption in Hawaii and a clear example of alleged money laundering.

On or about January 27th 2012 a resident of Kauai, Jack Lee Stahley died. Kauai Police were notified and they entered the home on a welfare check by crawling into an unlocked window because the doors were locked. The police discovered the  body of Jack Lee Stahley and items were removed from the house by the Kauai Police without a search warrant. Police records indicate that items were taken for safe keeping and some of these items were legal documents. The family is also alleging that some of the items taken were Will and Trust agreements . This was confirmed by a partial copy of the Kauai PD Evidence log that was given to the Stahley family after the entry into the Jack Stahley home.

The will and trust agreement taken for safe keeping was created, witnessed and implemented by local attorney Nancy Jo Bud who is a private attorney specializing in Will and Trust agreements. She is also a member of the Hawaii Board of Education, General Adviser to the Hawaii Community Foundation , a nonprofit corporation, and served on the Advisory Committee for Hale Opio Kauai Inc. She also worked for the First Hawaiian Bank with another notable attorney Katherine Lloyd.  Both Lloyd and Budd deny they were colleagues  but internet records disagree.  While in those capacities Ms. Budd also represented  the deceased Jack Stahley in Will and Trust matters. It was Nancy Jo Budd who implemented the designation of the Hawaii Community Foundation as a recipient of 50% of the newly created Jack Stahley Trust Fund.  In doing so, all of the stipulations in the previous Stahley trust fund were negated.

The Jack Stahley items taken from the deceased home were booked into the KPD evidence by KPD officer Gilbert V. Asuncion and KPD Paddy Ramson and when the items were returned to the family, the Stahley family noted that one of the items returned was Jack Stahley’s new Will and Trust agreement. The previous Will and Trust agreement was missing from Jack Stahley’s belongings.  The Stahley family said that their fathers Will and Trust had been altered to reflect changes and the addition of the Hawaii Community Foundation as recipient of 50% of the Trust funds.  Although its entirely  possible that Jack Stahley authorized the change in his Trust agreement, the Stahley family adamantly believe that it’s not probable that he would have made such a change without notifying the affected members of the family. It’s also interesting to note that the only persons other than the deceased who had detailed knowledge of the new trust were people who ultimately benefited from the changes.

The Stahley family specifically Joy Stahley and her brother Jeff Stahley allege that the Will and Trust documents returned to them, by the KPD after the death of Jack Stahley, was notarized by attorney Nancy J Budd but was not witnessed  and  that Robert Silverman and his wife Lolly who are Kauai residents and were friends of Jack Stahley were present shortly after Mr. Stahley died and witnessed the entry into the home of Jack Stahley by the Kauai Police Department.  Later a copy of a notarized Trust agreement surfaced. Joe Moss associate Lynette M. Medrano‐Stine. Stine who is a colleague of Joe Moss notarized the new Will and Trust agreement. Jack Stahley’s signature on the new Trust agreement could not be verified nor disputed.

Joy Stahley stated that she and her brother lived in Oregon and initially relied on information about their father’s death provided by Robert Silverman and his wife.

Joy Stahley said that Lolly Silverman emailed her and said that when her husband Robert entered the home at the time the police were present on the day Jack Stahley’s body was found he, Robert Silverman, looked at the Will and Trust documents laying on a table and noted that it was not the same document that he was familiar with.

Joy Stahley was told by Lolly Silverman that on the day her husband Robert entered the home of Jack Stahley with the Kauai Police that he saw the body of Jack Stahley and that it was bruised, battered and bloody and that there were Will and Trust documents lying on a table in the home. Jeff Stahley said that when he arrived at his father’s home 4 days later the interior of the home had apparently been searched, the home was in disarray and that there was a substance that resembled a black powder that might be used to lift fingerprints, throughout the home as well as the presence of yellow evidence tape.  The Jack Stahley autopsy does not describe any unusual or suspicious injuries.

The Stahley family believes that Nancy Jo Budd orchestrated the changes to the Will and Trust document of Jack Stahley while at  the same time was the legal advisor, and trustee/treasurer to the Hawaii Community Foundation under the direction of another local Kauai attorney Katherine Lloyd.  Katherine Lloyd, at the time of the death of Jack Stahley was  the General Counsel and Vice President of the Hawaii Community Foundation and was employed as General Counsel to the First Hawaiian Bank.  Joy Stahley said that the results of this action ultimately resulted in the Hawaii Community Foundation assuming control of the Jack Stahley Trust Fund. Lloyd who later represented the Hawaii Community Foundation in the Oregon litigation argued that Jeff Stahley, Jack Stahley’s son could not be impartial administrators and should not be designated as trust administrators. The Oregon Court ruled in favor of the HCF  and agreed that the Stahley’s should not be the Trust administrator. At the suggestion of Lloyd, Jack Stahley’s long time friend Robert Silverman was appointed as the Trust Administrator.  At either Lloyd’s or Budd’s suggestion the Trust legal counsel was to be Joe Moss. Incidentally, Joe Moss has an office next door to Robert Silverman’s bar known as Robs Goodtimes Grill.  It has been learned that a man who’s name is Victor Lane frequents Robs Goodtimes Grill. Mr. Lane owns a cleaning business and his business office is next door to Nancy Budd’s office.  The Stahley family allges that it was Mr. Lane who initiated the contact between Jack Stahley and Nancy Budd.

The CEO of the Hawaii Community Foundation is Kelvin H Taketa who is also associated with the American Savings Bank . This Bank immediately benefited from the Death of Jack Stahley and Budd’s new will  when  $336,900.00 of the Stahley Trust  was deposited at the direction of the newly appointed Trust administrator Robert Silverman. with of course the blessing of Joe Moss.

In addition to the fact that Nancy Jo Budd and Katherine Lloyd were colleagues at the Hawaii Community Foundation, Katherine Lloyd’s husband Hugh R. Jones is an attorney at the Hawaii Attorney General’s office in the Tax and Charity Div.  In this capacity Jones formally denied any professional association between his wife Katherine Lloyd and Nancy Jo Budd.  Katherine Lloyd, has since abruptly terminated her employment with the Hawaii Community Foundation.

Copies of certified checks indicate that the new administrator, Silverman, immediately received $25,000 from the Stahley trust fund as the administrator. He was not a listed beneficiary of the Trust.  Copies of certified checks indicate that immediately after Robert Silverman assumed the position of administrator of the Jack Stahley trust, a $227,000 deposit was made into the American Savings Bank where the Board of Director is Kelvin Tekata who is also the CEO of the Hawaii Community Foundation.  $269,000 has been transferred to the Hawaii Community Foundation.. This legal maneuvering removed all control of the Jack Stahley inheritance from the deceased family to the Hawaii Community Foundation.

The Stahley family filed a complaint with the Hawaii Attorney General’s Office and immediately Hugh Jones who is Katherin Lloyd’s husband  responded  via his Hawaii dot gov. email, Hugh.R.Jones@hawaii.gov

Mr.Stahley: I am sorry missed your references to Mrs. Lloyd in your prior email because  it was read on an I phone after normal working hours.”

            “You are correct that Ms.Lloyd is my spouse. For that reason, your July 2013 complaint   was assigned to a different attorney in our Department with expertise in charitable  oversight matters. I was not involved whatsoever thereafter. I do need to correct a  couple of your statements. First, Ms. Lloyd was not terminated by HCF but left to take a  new position with Hawaii Pacific University and she left HCF before the date of your  complaint. Nor is Ms. Lloyd related in any way to Ms. Budd.”

The Stahley family has received no further communication from the Hawaii Attorney General’s Office, or the Kauai Police Department in response to their complaints nor does the Stahley family have any information as to the status of their complaints.

The legal adviser to Mr. Silverman and the Stahley Trust Fund, Joe Moss also serves as Bylaws Chair of The Kauai United Way . The Jack Stahley will and trust documents created by Nancy Jo Budd and dated 6/28/11 is witnessed by Lynette M. Medrano‐Stine who is allegedly on the staff of Joe Moss at the Kauai United Way and was a witness on the Stahley Will and Trust agreement created by Nancy Budd.

The Hawaii Community Foundation is listed as a contributor to the Kauai United Way. Where Joe Moss is associated. Once the Stahley Trust money is contributed to the Hawaii Community Fund it is washed.  It’s almost impossible to determine where money transferred from the HCF to any other entity or person originated .

Joy Stahley said that her father did not have any known life threatening health issues and that her father’s personal doctor was surprised by his death and was not notified of Mr. Stahley’s death. In addition Joy Stahley stated that she feared that her father’s death was not a natural death.

The Stahley family was provided with a partial evidence log list that indicated that a will and trust agreement was removed from the Stahley home but was not informed of her father’s cause of death nor provided with any other police investigation reports.

Ms. Stahley also said that no Kauai Police investigation files had been released to the family, nor has any information as to the cause of her father’s death released to them. However I received a response to a Freedom of Information request for the Stahley Death Investigation . Codefore  received the autopsy report. The Autopsy report states that Jack Stahley’s death was due to a, “Ruptured aortic aneurysm with exsanguinations”.

In an effort to validate the beliefs and allegations of Jeff and Joy Stahley, Benish inquired as to the possibility of accessing past email or text communications their father Jack Stahley may have had with culpable persons such as Lloyd, Budd, or other persons associated with these two lawyers.

The Stahley’s provided Codefore with the Yahoo email address of Jack Stahley and the password to his email and or Yahoo account. After gaining access into the Jack Stahley email account it was discovered that the account had been tampered with. It appeared as if the email account had been terminated and then initiated again using the exact same email address of Mr. Jack Stahely as there was a “Welcome” email sent to the Jack Stahley email account after his death. The termination date of the old email account was approximately 5 months after Jack Stahley’s death. Joy and Jeff Stahley were asked about this email termination and  was told by Jeff Stahley that he nor any member of the Stahley family had changed their fathers email account with Yahoo other than changing the password and did not instigate the forming of a new account that resulted in the email history to become unavailable. Jeff Stahley stated that he has possession of the cell phone and the computer that belonged to his father Jack Stahley.

Jack Stahley died on January 27th 2012 and the interruption and replacement of his email account was accomplished on June 26, 2013. There was no access the original older Jack Stahley email account. Codefore sent an email to the Yahoo security division inquiring as to why the Jack Stahley email did not contain any account history dated prior to the date of his death. No response has been received.

Benish reminded the Court and Grand Jury in his affidavit of the following: Nancy Jo Budd and Katherine Lloyd allegedly were former colleagues at the Hawaii Community Foundation. Nancy Jo Budd was listed on an internet publication as an adviser, trustee/treasurer to the Hawaii Community Foundation under the direction of Katherine Lloyd and that Kelvin Takata is the CEO of the Hawaii Community Foundation. Takata is also is on the Board of Directors of the American Savings Bank that received substantial funds from the Stayley Trust fund. .

Nancy Budd was on the Community Advisory Committee for Hale Opio Kauai that receives donations from the Kauai United Way as well as the Hawaii Community Foundation. In addition other colleagues of Lloyd and Budd at the Kauai United Way are Joe Moss Director of the Kauai United Way and is the Jack Stahley Administrator Robert Silverman’s attorney on matters concerning the Stahley Trust.. As such Robert Silverman and Joe Moss are  in a position of influence as to the Trust distributions.

Associates of Budd at the Hale Opio Kauai Inc , Daryl Perry, Kauai Chief of Police, Shayleen Carvalho previous Prosecuting Attorney, Justin Kollar present prosecuting Attorney are all who would be involved in the investigation into the death of Jack Lee Stahley.

Benish also advised  the Court that to date these entities or their respective County divisions have not contacted the Stahley family in response to their inquiry’s except to return the new Will and Trust agreements retrieved from the home of Jack Stahley.

Katherine Lloyd was employed by the First Hawaiian Bank at the time of the death of Jack Stahley and her past associate there is Benjamin Benzaken who was an investment advisor for Jack Lee Stahley. Additional Trusts known to be controlled with or associated with the First Hawaiian Bank are the Bishop St. Capitol Management, the First Hawaii Foundation and the Bank West Services Inc.

Benjamin Benzaken was described by Joy Stahley as a “Good friend” of Jack Stahley. A telephone interview with Mr. Benzaken. Benzaken did not provide any information other than he did  not want to be quoted. He said that he was a friend to Jack L Stahley and was surprised that he had died.

Katherine Lloyd, has denied any professional association with Ms. Budd except to infer that Ms. Budd was a volunteer for the Hawaii Community Foundation. In an email from Nancy Budd she contradicts Ms. Lloyd and describes her “professional” position with the Hawaii Community Foundation as:

My association with the Hawaii Community Foundation has been purely a professional  one over many years‐‐ most professional advisors in Hawaii have such an association. I  served on a HCF community leadership council , NOT on a board of directors or board of governors or any other entity related to HCF that would require acting as a fiduciary.”

            “I may possibly have caused some confusion by including my participation as a member  of the leadership council on a disclosure related to my volunteer service on the Board of  Education for the State of Hawaii. HCF has set up a “leadership council” on each island to discuss overall trends and needs in the community”.

Although initially Budd seemed to infer that she was more than just a volunteer at the Hawaii Community Foundation, Katherine Lloyd the HCF counsel denied this. She and Lloyd had a close professional relationship in the implementation of the Jack Lee Stahley Will and Trust agreements because Lloyd was Counsel for the Hawaii Community Foundation and as such was the Hawaii Community Foundation representative during the Stahley’s legal contest of the Stahley Trust created by Nancy Budd that granted a 50% interest in the Stahley Trust Fund. However Budd did not mention this relationship with Lloyd in her email to me.

There are internet records that indicate that Nancy Jo Budd has been on an Advisory Board for the Hale Opio Kauai Inc. non‐ profit corporation and that the Hawaii Community Foundation , and the United Way wherein Joe Moss is listed as a previous United Way board of directors and both are are listed as donors to the Hale Opio Kauai Inc.

Also on the advisory board of the Hale Opio Kauai Inc. are Kauai Mayor Bernard Carvalho who is listed as having served on the  Board Directors of the  United way with  Police Chief Daryl Perry, Shayleen Iseri Carvalho, Lucy Douthitt who all served on the Hawaii Board of Education with Budd, and Justin Kollar the Kauai Prosecutor.

It is alleged that Nancy Jo Budd, Katherine Lloyd, and Joe Moss all attorneys, have personally benefited financially from the death of Jack Stahley and his subsequent Estate and accordingly the Hawaii Community Foundation and the other nonprofit organizations that receive and distribute donations to and from each other have benefited or will benefit as a result of hundreds of thousands of dollars that become available for distribution via the Budd created Jack Stahley Will . These funds are to be transferred to the Hawaii Community Foundation and in fact there has been immediate transfers of the Stahley Trust funds that diverted the Hawaii Community Foundation and directly into the American Savings Bank that is directed by the same person who Chairs the Hawaii Community Foundation,    Kelvin Takata..

All of the named persons have participated in some way either directly or indirectly with the proceeds of the Jack Lee Stahley estate. Nancy Jo Budd’s position with the Hale Opio Kauai Inc non‐profit corporation put her in a position to become associated with contributors such as Bernard Carvalho Kauai Mayor, Darryl Perry Kauai Chief of Police, Russell Goo Office of Hawaii Attorney General, Shayleen Iseri Cervalho, former Kauai Prosecutor, William Arakaki Hawaii Department of Education, Justin Kohar Kauai Prosecutor, Joe Moss who assisted in the implementation of the Jack Stahley Will and Trust and who is director of the Kauai United Way Fund..

List of the Jack Stahley Will and Trust participants

Katherine Lloyd is or was the  Hawaii Community Foundation General Counsel, First  Hawaiian Bank. She is  vice president and deputy manager, trust and Investment ,Hawaii Pacific University. Lloyd had a direct involvement in the replacement of Jeff Stahley as  Trust Adminstrator and stated in a letter to Jeff Stahley,

It is clear the interests of Jeffrey L. Stahley as beneficiary conflicts with  his duties as Trustee to deal impartially with all beneficiaries.”

Lloyd makes no mention of her conflict of interest.

Nancy Jo Budd is a colleague of Kathleen Lloyd at the Hawaii Community Foundation Inc. was the legal   adviser to Jack Lee Stahley and created the deceased new will and trust agreement that  replaced the old and granted a 50% interest to the Hawaii Community Foundation in the Jack Lee Stahley trust fund.

She is a colleague of Bernard Carvalho Kauai Mayor, Darryl Perry Kauai Chief of     Police, Russell Goo, Office of Hawaii Attorney General, Shayleen Iseri   Cervalho, former   Kauai  Prosecutor, William Arakaki Hawaii Department of Education,   Justin Kohar Kauai  prosecutor all at the Hale Opio Kauai Inc.

Budd is also a colleague of Attorney Joe Moss who represents Robert Silverman and  she implemented the Will and Trust. Moss is allegedly paid by the    Stahley Trust and   Community Foundation.

Budd is also a colleague of Kathleen Lloyd who was Previous General Counsel for the Hawaii Community Foundation, a non profit corporation, and worked with Bud at the First Hawaiian Bank.

Bradley G.   Parries is the Step son of Jack Stahley. Mr. Parries was not a recipient in the will and trust and   allegedly threatened Jack Staley’s life and the person who was found inside of Jack Stahleys residence after the body was removed. Joy Stahley stated that her father once told her ”If anything happens to me, Parries did it.”

Hugh R. Jones is a Deputy Attorney General Hawaii, Hawaii Tax Division, Ms. Lloyds husband and past colleague of Nancy Budd at the Hawaii Bar Assn. He is a colleague of  Chief Darrel Perry, Chief of Police, Bernard Carvalho, Mayor, Shayleen Iseri‐Carvalho.  Kauai Prosecutor and  said he reclused himself from investigating his wife Katherine  Lloyd.

David M. Louie: Hawaii is He is the former Attorney General of Hawaii, having served  a four-year term from 2011 to 2014. As Attorney General, he was the chief law  enforcement officer for Hawaii, providing advice, counsel and representation to the   Governor, Legislature, state agencies and employees. He is a colleague of Hugh Jones and did not investigate the Stahley allegations involving persons named in the    affidavit. He is currently in private practice. His office is in the First Hawaiian Bank Building.

Joe Moss is an  attorney and is the  Bylaws Chairman for United Way, Per diem judge in the 5th District and Family courts, represents Robert Silverman the current  trustee of  he Stahley Trust and also past Director of the Kauai United Way Fund. He is a colleague of  Nancy Budd who provided him with the Stahley Will and Trust agreement and is a colleague of Katherine Lloyd.

Benjamin ,Ben, Benzaken was financial advisor for Jack Stahley. Joy Stahley alleges that Mr. Benzaken worked with Ms. Budd at the First Hawaiian Bank Mr. Benzaken admits he  worked at the First Hawaiian Bank but denies that Ms. Budd worked with him.

  Robert Silverman is the Trustee of the Jack Stahley will after the removal of Jeff Stahley. Received a $25,000 gift from the estate. Liquidated funds from the Stahley estate and deposited them in the American Savings Bank in Kauai. Silverman’s attorney is Joe Moss.

The Second victims interviewed and accepted were:

Dr. Leonard Horowitz his partner Ms. Sherri Kane.

Dr. Leonard G. Horowitz is the world’s most celebrated pharmaceutical industry whistleblower, YouTube’s most popular, prolific, controversial doctor; a leading humanitarian, political activist, Harvard-trained media expert; and documentary filmmaker and author of 17 books, including three American best-sellers. His works have moved nations to rethink vaccinations, and sourced the Muslim world’s opposition to intelligence agencies’ operations into global “immunization” programs. Dr. Horowitz’s greatest life-time achievement he says is his discovery of the, “Perfect Circle of Sound .” His revelations of nine, “core creative frequencies” have been revolutionizing the music and natural healing industries, as well as Water science. In his latest publication, The Book of 528: by Dr. Horowitz massively evidences his theory that the 528Hz frequency of sound must be considered the “clear channel broadcast of pure love.

Sherri Kane has been associated with Dr. Horowitz s and has been his friend, confidant and administrative assistant for 8 years. Both are what I would call true constitutionalist’s and have been deemed “enemies of the State” for years. They have endured the seizure of their property in Hawaii, dragged into court only to see their case dropped before court appearances and have suffered through the filing of bankruptcy proceedings resulting from legal fees and associated imposed court judgments and fees. Both allege their constitutional rights have been violated, by the corruption within the Hawaii Circuit Courts.

After hearing their case Benish believed that they too, were entitled to their day in court. Not just a day in court as occurs in the State of Hawaii, but a true honest day in court based on facts as recommended by a Federal Grand Jury. He believed their story, and thinks you will also. Their lives in Hawaii have succumbed to prolific, profound and almost unbelievable private lawyers and their dubious legal finagling and the acceptance of all of this by the Hawaii  Circuit Courts.

Based on their allegations that were supported with fact, they were the third victims listed in my affidavit to the court. Their case is much too entwined in legalities, to explain in total detail but as best as I can do, this is their story as recorded in the Affidavit.  It’s been a year now and their battle continues.

As a brief summary and based on the information provided to me  the following incidents have occurred.

1.Jan 15,2004 Horowitz’s organization, Royal Blood Line of David purchased the subject property from Mr. Sulla’s purported client, Cecil Loran Lee for $550,000.00 escrowed by The Island Title Company aka First American Title Company, and title guarantee by Stewart Title Co. Later Horowitz learned that there were 3 liens against the property. The Title Insurance policy provided by Stewart Title did not reveal these liens on the property. The property is approximately, 17 Acres. The aforementioned liens were placed by:

  1. The Federal Government $ 85,000.00
  2. .Philip Maise’s litigation encumbrance and pending liens totaling nearly  $225,000 67
  3. Bond Agent encumbrance of $ 85.000.00

2. Feb 21st, 2008 a $200,000 jury award to Royal Blood Line owned by Dr.Horowitz,  because of fraud committed by lawyer Paul Sulla.

3. Feb, 27, 2009 Royal Royal Blood paid off a $550,000.00 Mortgage to Lee, using the $200,000 jury award as partial payment. (In addition the liens against the property that Lee and Sulla didn’t report were paid for by Horowitz) . Sulla and Lee then refused   to release the Mortgage and provide     clear title to the property.

4.April 20, 2009 Sulla who claimed lein rights to the Horowitz property conducted a  non‐judicial Foreclosure by using fraudulent documents.

5. May 8th 2009 Mr. Lee the seller is dying of cancer, with no money to pay for his   lawyer Sulla.

6. May 15th 2009 Mr. Sulla drafted Articles of Incorporation for a corporation he established called , The Office of Overseer, A Corp Sole and its Successor and designated a young drifter named  Jason L Hester as the responsible person responsible for his new  corporation.

7. May 15, 2009 Using manufactured and forged assignments of Horowitz’s Mortgage and Notes to Mr. Lee, Sulla transfers interest in the property from  Mr. Lee to Sulla’s corporation, The Office of the Overseer.

8. May 26 & 28 2009 Sulla faxes date‐altered and signature altered, fraudulent Incorporation Articles to Hawaii Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs.

10. June 27, 2009 Mr. Lee dies without providing Horowitz clear title to the property  and  Sulla does not acknowledge Horowitz’s payment to Lee. and Title to  the Horowitz property is not transferred to Horowitz.        Horowitz makes a claim to the title  company.

11. June 9, 2011 Jason L Hester who is the responsible agent for Sulla’s Office of   Overseer Church grants a quit claim deed of the property to  Sulla personally. This deed was prepared  by Sulla who also claimed he made a $50,000.00 loan secured by a mortgage on Horowitz’s property to Hester. Sulla  gave the loan to Hester to provide       himself foreclosure rights. It is unknown whether or not Hester actually received  $50,000.00.

12. Sept 19, 2012 Royal Blood is dissolved by  Leonard G Horowitz and Sheri Kane.

Although this is a very brief account of Sulla’s attempt to basically steal the property,

Ms Kane and Mr. Horowitz have suffered through a fraudulent attempt by Sully to auction off the property for falsely claimed nonpayment of the Mortgage between Horowitz and Mr. Lee. Dr. Horowitz and Ms. Kane have  endured a successful criminal impersonation of Cecil Lee by Sulla who allegedly impersonated Lee to file property transfer documents with the State that gave the property to Sulla’s Office of Overseer and then claimed that his colleague Jason Hester was Lee’s nephew who therefore was the last survivor and entitled to Lee’s estate. Investigation later discovered that Hester has a closer relationship to Sulla that Hester did to Mr Lee

Through the years of trying to take possession of property that Horowitz paid for, their attempts to seek relief through the civil courts fell on the deaf ears of Judges, local police and prosecutors and the State of Hawaii Attorney General’s office. Alleged fraud is not a new or unknown scenario to Paul Sulla.

In 2017 Hawaii Judges under the supervision of Judge Michael Seabright ordered the transfer of the Horowitz property to Paul Sulla despite the property being listed as an asset in Horowitz’s  Bankruptcy proceedings.

The Hawaii attorneys and Judges who participated in the property seizure from Horowitz are:

Paul Sulla, attorney and Attorney Dan O’Phelan – Initially represented Mr. Loran Lee  who sold the property in question to Dr. Horowitrz. Sulla received the property  personally.

Glenn Hara. who was the first attorney that Mr. Horowitz hired to represent him in   litigation against Sulla was later appointed a Judge and continually ruled against     Horowitz and for Sulla. He should have reclused himself. Hara was initially referred to   Horowitz by Island Title Company who has since declined to honor the stipulations in        the Title Insurance Policy issued to Horowitz when the property was initially purchased.

John S. Carroll, attorney was hired by Horowitz when Hara was appointed to the Circuit   Judgeship. Carroll’s fees to Horowitz were $25,000.00 and succeeded in getting a court  awarded $200.000.00 judgment in damages that were later “vacated” Judge Ibarra.

Judge Ibarra,  who vacated a previously ordered $200,000.00 judgment in favor of   Horowitz at the request of Sulla and continued ruling against Dr. Horowitz’s legal actions.

Gary Victor Dubin, attorney. Dubin was hired by Horowitz at the recommendation of   Attorney Gary Zamber who unbeknownst to Dr. Horowitz was Paul Sulla’s law partner. Dubin promised Dr. Horowitz to “combat” Sulla’s attempts to seize the property worth  well over one million dollars.  He was paid an initial six thousand dollars but did nothing   for Dr. Horowitz. After Dr. Horowitz refused to pay Dubin $25,000.00 more, remarkably  Dr. Horowitz alleges that Dubin acted as an informal advisor to Sulla himself.

Dubin is no stranger to Judicial Corruption.

Gary Dubin spent 19½ months in a California federal prison and returned to Hawaii in October 1996 to practice law. The state’s Office of Dis­ciplinary Counsel, in an extremely unusual decision concerning a matter of moral turpitude, determined    that a finding of pro­fessional misconduct was “not warranted.” Later, even the U.S. Internal Revenue Service reversed itself, saying he didn’t owe the $1.5 million that was    the basis of his three misdemeanor convictions for failure to file tax returns.

In fact, the agency gave him nearly $100,000, including interest, from payment in an earlier tax year. The IRS had found that he indeed had substantial business losses and   deductions for the years in question, and that they could be carried back.

He can’t recoup the time behind bars; the same goes, thus far, for the $131,000 the judge fined him. In 2006, the IRS looked into the possibility of crediting the fine to his next tax liability, but found it couldn’t because the money went to the court.

Dubin claims Real, now 84, railroaded him 14 years ago. It is a rare federal judge  who   hasn’t attracted such complaints. But there have been many similar complaints  about Real (the judge pronounces it “reel”) over four decades by plaintiffs, defendants and lawyers alike, as well as appellate decisions occasionally attacking the judge’s handling of cases. Three times this year, cases have been summarily removed from  Real’s docket.

Stephen D. Whittaker ,attorney.  Served as a co-counsel with Paul Sulla. Horowitz  alleges that Whittaker appeared in court with a witness, “Jason Hester” who was   actually a impersonator. Its unknown whether or not the court actually identified this  unknown person either with identification or swearing to his identity.

Patrick Sniffin-Sheriff’s Deputy. Dr. Horowitz alleges that Sniffin executed the actual  seizure of Horowitz’s property without proper legal documents.

The third allegation of political and judicial corruption involves another attempt by attorney Paul Sulla to seize Trust funds designated to the deceased relatives upon the death of Stanley M Zedalis.

Between January 2013 to present Paul J Sulla Jr. directed and conspired, with two daughters of deceased Stanley M. Zedalis to redirect approximately $200,000 from the Zedalis Trust and or Estate from California to the First Hawaiian Bank in Hawaii. It is alleged by the Zedalis family (actual trust administrators) that Sulla and the two sisters Mary Ann Jolin and Llian Zedalis committed forgery, fraud and kidnapping to accomplish obtaining a certified check for $200,000 issued by the San Diego Credit Union. The check was in the name of an old dead trust established in 2009 but the trust had been cancelled. The Trust was the Stanley M. Martha B. Zedalis Living Trust. Its alleged by Macia Zedales Maire that when  her two sisters learned of the cancelled trust they conspired to kidnap 89 year old Stanly Zedalis telling him he was flying from New Mexico where he had been visiting his son to Mary Ann Jolin’s home in San Diego. Instead when he arrived at the New Mexico airport Taylor Jolin, the son of Mary Ann Jolin, put him on a plane to Hawaii where he soon after died in the home of Llian Zedalis who resides in Hawaii. It is alleged that Mary Ann Jolin belongs to one of Paul Sulla’s religious organizations and as a member was recruited by Sulla as a client. . After Stanley Zedalis died, the family desired to transport his body to the National Cemetery in North Carolina where his wife was buried, but Paul Sulla petitioned the court to stop the transportation of body of the deceased, and demanded the court allow the body to be cremated in Hawaii. The court Judge, Hara, did not grant Sulla’s request..

Mean while, Sulla was trying to take control of the $200,000 brought to Hawaii by Mary Ann Jolin. The actual trust administrator, William Patrick Zedalis, provided documents validating and defending his position as administrator in an action filed by Sulla before the 1st Circuit Court, Judge Chang. The Judge seized the funds until August 19th, 2015 when Judge Hara 3rd Circuit Court validated the trust administrator as William Patrick Zedalis. However at this point in time, the family does not know what happened to the funds seized by the court.  The trust administrators feel that the sudden death of their father was suspicious as there was no autopsy and Sulla’s request to cremate the body was quite unusual and against the family’s wishes.  Mr. Zedalis now resides with is deceased wife in North Carolina.

This attempt at getting a Grand Jury to investigate all you have seen is not secret. Its all been published on the internet at Codeforeblog.com. All of the appropriate agencies have the information but unfortunately it appears the Grand Jury did not get the information. Because of this inaction the alleged perpetrators are now emboldened and have not ceased their activities in the knowledge that I cannot touch them.  Maybe they are correct.

It was the intention that this part IV was to be the last of these little documentaries  on the Affidavit for Grand Jury involvement into corruption within the State of Hawaii. However new information has come to light just in the last few days that further enlighten me and may even be factual  that the Department of Justice and the Federal Court system in Hawaii has been corrupted. Through all of this its questioned as to why these cases , seemingly insignificant to the whole of the Federal Courts and Justice Department in Hawaii, would become important enough to risk individual careers of people who are physically and economically removed from these incidents.  Some light has escaped through a crack in a door that has recently been discovered. We shall see what is behind this door.

Stay tuned.

Fear and Mayhem in Hawaii Part III

Fear and Mayhem in -Hawaii Part III –

The Drama Continues.

06-02-2017 Judge ‘clerk tells Detective  that there were no Court documents generated based on his Affidavit request for a Grand Jury.   Detective suspects the worst.



The money bucket is dangerously low.

This is part 3 of an ongoing effort to activate a Federal Grand Jury Investigation into multiple Criminal Violations of Federal Law occurring over the last decade in Hawaii.


Good morning.  I’m Jim Benish and this is Part III of a series of discourses about injustice going on in Hawaii.  Unfortunately for me  I find myself muddling my way around and through significant stacks of paperwork that the detective inside of me has written, collected , assembled, and placed in piles neatly placed in chronological order and in distance from my reach according to importance. It’s all as if I was still working as a police detective.  Why.  Because it’s the way its done.

I am not going to present the actual documents referred to in this video. If your interested you can view them, including the emails at Codeforeblog.com title “Fear and Mayhem in Hawaii Part III”

Lacy Woolsey Ruff

The murder cases of two little girls, one in Colorado and one in Hawaii have seduced me and become entangled within my life.  I have written one book about the first murder, Tracey Neef and begun another about the second  case, the murder of 4 yr old Lacey Ruff in Kauai.  But no matter how much I write in the expectation that the last word of the last page would end it all for me it just becomes more intense. There’s more information, and victims reach out in a desperate attempt to accept their own quests for an end to it all.

But its not just about the termination of feelings human beings suffer when they have lost someone they love, or lost their worldly possessions to the corrupt. They have as I have the feeling of loss of something much more important.  Even more important than our dignity, or the respect of others, or our loved ones.

We feelt the loss of  our country, our freedom and our human rights. Without these things we are nothing but third world multicultural slaves.

The first two parts of this were put together in an impersonal, and unprofessional I might add, attempt at a journalistic documentation. I am not a public speaker nor do I want to become one.  But I owe you all, the people who actually looked at the first two videos, an apology.  I don’t know what I was thinking. I used another journalists Television documentaries  on the first video, and on the second in an effort to escape public scrutiny or embarrassment, or just plain sacrificing my privacy I actually reduced myself to using Microsoft “Talk” to produce a talking video.   God help me.

I will loath transforming this from written words to a video of myself that can be watched by anyone with a computer, or a cell phone and an internet connection. But this is exactly why I woke at 2 am this ,morning.  The stakes are high enough that I must not hide.  Im an old man. Im retired and I personally do not enjoy much more than rebuilding the carburetor on my truck or going fishing or writing a novel.

In reality, and to those of you who sit back and do nothing but criticize, well you are the real problem.  Its you, yes you, who have caused me to do this nasty nasty thing. I will now become a male version of a Piers Morgan who tells the truth.

I’m going to be a little redundant and give you a short recap of how this all began for me. This story began simple. At least simple to me. I thought I would assemble a homicide case information, present it to the police, wipe the ink off my fingers and return to life. This is how it was done back in the 90’s and this is how its done today, no?

I became incidentally  involved in the murder of 4 year old Lacey Ruff in 1993 when I was working on the murder of 7 yr old Tracey Neef in Colorado.  The connection was two brothers, Aaron and Todd Schonlau

who lived down the street from where Tracy Neef lived and as it turned out, Aaron Schonlau had been arrested in Kauai for the murder of 4 Lacey Ruff.  Of course I was interested in these two young men.  It only took me a couple of days to snag up Todd Schonlau

Todd Schonlau

who had returned from Kaui to Colorado without his brother Aaron.  Aaron had been arrested for the murder in Kauai.  I couldn’t make a culpable connection between the brothers and the Neef murder but after I interviewed Todd Schonlau I just had the feeling that something wasn’t right. Here was a guy who began by telling me how much he loved his brother Aaron and how bad he felt about the murder and then throws his brother under the bus while at the same time promoting his own moral fortitude in doing so. But the Kauai case was not my case and not my concern.  Just the same I picked up the phone and called the Kauai Police department  and told them what Todd had related to me about the Ruff murder. They were not interested.  I should have learned a lesson from that conversation but back then I had no reason to believe that I would even remotely become entangled in the Kauai mess.

Years went by, I was minding my own business. I relocated to San Diego and was living peacefully on a beautiful sailboat  when in 2011 or 2012 I was contacted by two women who lived in Oregon. They had read the first book I wrote about the Colorado Neef murder. They read about the Schonlau brothers and one of them had some sort of personal interest in Todd Schonlau who was living with her.  This is when the Kauai abyss began to raise its ugly head. Tiffany Kaneko claimed that Todd had told her that he was present when Lacey was murdered and in fact it was he that placed her body in the ocean.  They had both been drinking when Todd made this confession and when Tiffany Kaneko heard what Todd had said she became enraged and physically assaulted him.  The police were called and they took intoxicated Kaneko to jail. The cop who transported her was writing down Tiffany’s rants about what Todd had told here while he was driving.  Now its all in the police files in Oregon.

I interviewed both the women by phone.  Then I began to read my old 1993 notes. I had more questions. I called people in Colorado who knew of the Schonlau brothers and it didn’t take me very long to realize that maybe Kauai had either arrested the wrong man for the Ruff murder or didn’t arrest Todd who probably had something to do with the murder also.

Again I made a call to the Kauai Police department. It was now 2012 and I talked to the same guy I had spoken with in 1993.  And again they were not interested. When I asked if I could review their file, he told me that if I wanted to know about the murder to call the local news paper.

That attitude was difficult for me to stomach.  I had a little internet blog going and wrote an article about this situation.  That’s when I began to get communication from people who lived in Hawaii. Seems the Kauai PD’s attitude about police work was not news to them. They were all complaining about the corruption but all this had nothing to do with the Ruff murder.  But the complaints and information just kept rolling in on the Blog site.

Eventually I had obtained the Police files on the Ruff Case. It was not easy to get any information from the Police Department. The files were heavily redacted, pages were missing and to pour salt on my wound, the KPD Records clerk told me that she had given me everyting I had asked for.  I finally had to telephone Nick Courson the Kauai Attorney and made a complaint.  He was able to get me the Ruff autopsy  and the evidence logs. I don’t think he realized how valuable these documents would turn out to be. Neither did I.  The autopsy report indicated that little Lacey Ruff died from salt water drowning.  This substantiated what Todd Shonlau had told to Tiffany.

I had interviewed more people in Colorado about the Schonalu brothers and had even gotten possession of the Ruff Kauai Court files.

The real eye opener for me was when I began to speak with witnesses who were there during the Ruff murder investigation, and speaking with Lacey Ruffs relatives. These people told me that they had never been interviewed by the police. One woman, who was an eye witness hung up the phone on me. Ill never forget Mary Glass’s words before I heard the terminal click.

She said, “What I have to say is irrelevant.”   Irrelevant? She’s an eye witness and she thinks her information is irrelevant? I wonder why she would say such a thing?  This woman actually saw the suspect carrying Lacey Ruffs body into the ocean.  There’s a lot more to say about the Schonalu brothers and the murders of Tracey Neef and Lacey Ruff but lets fast forward to 2015.

I had compiled all of the documents and interviews I could get  and posted another blog about what I had discovered, the resistance I had encountered from the Kauai Government, and in particular the Police Department. I interviewed and become friends with Lacey’s father Timmy Woolsey,

and contacted other relatives.  One day I received a telephone call from a man who said his name was John Burgess.  Burgess told me that he was a “cold case” investigator for the Kauai Prosecutors office and he had been assigned to “look into” the Ruff case.  I had a good chat with him and sent him all the information I had, including telephone conversations. I later learned that his partner or assistant was the same KPD Cop that I had spoken to before on the phone who told me that the  police were not interested in looking into the case.  Odd   Soon after I received a telephone call from Timmy Woolsey.  He told me that he had been contacted by Burgess and also that Burgess made him feel threatened should he continue to speak with me. He said Burgess had belittled me and said things like “he doesn’t know what he’s talking about etc;”

After reading the Kauai District Court documents it became clear to me why the Kauai PD didn’t want this case opened.  The Prosecutor Justin Kollar had been interviewed by Hawaii Channel 2 News and was asked why he would not re-open the Ruff case. His answer was that Tiffany Kaneko had recanted her allegations and Todd Schonlau didn’t want to speak with investigators.

Kauai Prosecuging Atty. Justin Kollar

After reading the District court files I was astounded.  The KPD had filed a case against Aaron Schonlau that didn’t include statements from witnesses and certain evidence that pointed toward Todd Schonalu not Aaron.  These items were in the police reports given to me by the KPD records department but were not in the Courts case files.  The KPD had apparently intentionally kept this information from the Court knowing by including  that information they did not have a case against Aaron.  And even under those circumstances I was still surprised that the court took the case agains Aaron because there was no physical evidence that he committed the crime. The only evidence was Aaron’s brother Todd’s statements that Aaron had admitted the crime and Aaron’s own confession.  I had interviewed Aaron in 2012 and Aaron said many things that were incriminating but didn’t know certain details about the crime that only his brother Todd knew.  Aaron was a diagnosed schizophrenic and took medication to keep him in this world and out of another. He had been out of his medication on the day Ruff was murdered and said he confessed to the crime to save himself a sentence of life in prison without parole.   Doesn’t matter. The Judge is not supposed to allow these kinds of things to happen.  And last but not least, it was Todd who in 1993 told the police where the Ruff body was placed in the ocean.  The police report only refers to this person as Schonlau. The Court would naturally assume it was Aaron Schonlau.

For me now, this murder case has taken a new form, a new body a new issue that is bigger than either of the murders of the little girls.

Based on the  information that I have just spoken to you about, the information that I have personal and intimate knowledge of, and based on the 5 or 6 other Kauai Citizens  who claim corruption and collusion within the Hawaiian government I must come to the conclusion that there is in fact enough to warrant a full blown investigation.  But by whom?

Theres an indication of involvement by numerous Hawaii police and prosecutors offices, and even in the courts. I have written to the FBI and the US Attorney’s office and have not even received the courtesy of a notification of receipt of my complaints.

In my mind, the only answer is a Federal Grand Jury.  Certainly the Federal Courts cannot be corrupt.

But Im just a citizen, can I ask the courts for a Grand Jury?  I was skeptical.  I had already sent letters to the US Attorney and FBI and received no acknowledgement. I did some research and here is what I learned. It didn’t seem that I should go back to them and ask again for an investigation.

First.  The Supreme court rules say ,in support of the US Constitution,  that a Judge must convene a grand jury when in the best interest of the public. It doesn’t say the request  must come from a government agency.

And second:  Despite the fact that I have been ridiculed by attorneys  for even thinking  that I could do such a thing there are many court decisions that support the notion that a citizen can ask a Federal judge to convene a jury, or the notion that a citizen can    communicate directly with a grand jury under certain circumstances.

For instance In as recently as 2004 In Hott v. Yarbrough, Before appellate  Judges SKILLMAN, COBURN and WELLS.

Larry S. Loigman, the  appellant, argued the cause pro se. against  Deputy Attorney General, H. John Witman III, argued the cause for respondents, the Attorney General and the twenty-one county prosecutors (Peter C. Harvey, Attorney General, attorney;  Mr. Witman, of counsel and on the question can a letter from a private citizen alleging violations of criminal law be processed and delivered to a Grand Jury? They are even questioning whether it can be processed.?

The opinion of the court was delivered :   The court held that a letter from a private citizen to the grand jury, alleging the commission of crimes and seeking investigation, was absolutely privileged and could not provide the basis for a libel suit.

Specifically the court said:

“The questions presented by this appeal are whether a citizen of New Jersey is entitled to directly communicate to a county grand jury a request to testify about a matter within its jurisdiction and  whether the grand jury has a right to receive such communications.   Our answer to both questions is yes.”

My question is this. If these Prosecuting attorneys are elected to represent “The people” why are they even objecting?

In December 2015 I submitted an affidavit request for a Grand Jury investigation to Federal Judge Michael Seabright District of Hawaii.  I assumed that the Grand Jury had been assigned to investigate the allegations and that the appropriate agencies would be assigned to assist the Grand Jury. These agencies would  be the US Attorney District of Hawaii, the FBI office in Hawaii and possibly the Internal Revenue Service.  They would be assisting the Grand Jury and therefore would be in a position of accountability. I assumed that my job had been completed and had no further communication with Seabright’s court.  I was wrong.  My allegations wree many but primarily Murder and violations of the RICOL Act.  There wee over 60 listed defendants . On December 29th I received a letter from the court stating that they had rejected the affidavit and if I didn’t arrange to retrieve them, the document would be destroyed.

Although there is articulation of the details in these  Hawaii Corruption allegations an additional question is, what protects US Citizens from the confiscation of life, liberty or property in the United States?  And what guarantees a US Citizens right to protect his property from corrupt lawyers and Judges. The answer is two fold.  The Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution. In particular the 14th amendment referred to as the “Due Process” Amendment.

“No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. “

Who enforces this amendment?  The Justice Department.  What happens when the Justice Department will not perform?  The participation of a US Federal Grand Jury or a Citizens Petition to the appropriate agency.. Judges are required by law to bring forth a Grand Jury when asked to do so.  There are many court opinions that have to do with the 14th Amendment and or Grand Juries but these opinions do not change the Amendments nor do they change the meaning.

In June of 2016 there had been no indication that an investigation had actually taken  place in response to my Grand Jury Affidavit. The Victims in the case had constant communication with Me during this time and none of them had been approached or interviewed by either the FBI or members of the US Attorney’s office. I admit that I was beginning to have doubts as to the credibility of Judge Seabright’s court or was it possible that  the FBI or the Hawaii US Attorney were trying to squash the investigation?

On 6-21-2016 I  sent an email to Lian Abernathy,  Judge Seabrights clerk.  I wanted some verification that the paperwork, my affidavit had been properly processed.  I knew that any documents that came into the possession of the court must be logged in and properly processed.  I also knew that these records not only must be logged in, they must be entered into the electronic PACER case management system.  This is an internet accessible filing system of all court records and this system was mandated and signed off on by Judge Seabright himself.  I have a PACER account and I could not locate any documents that referenced myname in the system.  I  reasoned that such a record of documents might not apply to Grand Jury documents however there was no such exclusion in the Hawaii Rules of Procedure.

Several emails were sent between me and Clerk Lian Abernathy.  Based  on the emails from Lian Abernathy I became aware that there were no court documents generated as a result of the my affidavit and no court instructions from the Court  to the Grand Jury as required by the Rules of Practice for the United States District Court for the District of Hawaii.  It was my belief that there could only be one reason why Seabrights court did not log in the my Affidavit and did not generate proper transmittal documents to the Grand Jury, or the FBI, or the US Attorney’s office.  It appears that the only proof that the affidavit document exists is theone that I have.

In April, 2017 I was contacted by Mrs. Bobe Doran. Mrs. Doran had been referred to meby one of the original victims listed on the Affidavit.

Paul Sulla

Mrs. Doran was elderly and handicapped and related that she was on the verge of losing her multiple properties to a local Hawaii Attorney Paul Sulla. She told me that her husband was deceased and since his death Sulla had been relentless at filing fraudulent claims in Kauai courts in an effort to assume ownership of the properties himself.

I was very familiar with Mr. Sulla as Sulla had been listed as one of the major defendants to multiple allegations of violations of the Federal Rico Act.  Mrs. Doran’s story was all to familiar to me.  Mr. Sulla had been accused of numerous fraudulent seizures of private property using his abilities as an attorney, and recruiting assistance from fellow attorneys and Judges and even title companies  to assist in his efforts.  Mrs. Doran told me that she could not get an attorney in Kauai to help her keep her property.  She told me that the attorneys she had contacted would not go into court against Paul Sulla and his judges. She said that Sulla had even filed a forged US Tax return signed by her deceased husband after his death.

After listening  to Mrs. Doran I told her that I would contact Seabright’s Court and find out how to add her to the list of victims.

A series of emails transpired between me and Lian Abernathy. She referred me to the US Attorney.

While I was communicating  with Abernathy, I received a phone message  from FBI Agent Jessica Schwalb.  I was surprised and on April 7th, 2017 several emails also transpired between me and the  Agent.  Agent Schwalb had made contact as a result of a letter I had sent to the FBI DC office months prior requesting to add a victim to the case.  This request was made on the FBI web page.

Agent Schwalb asked me about the case. She said that she could not find a record of the case.  I provided her via email a summary to include my suspicion that nothing had been done.  I said I wasn’t even sure the Grand Jury had been provided the Affidavit. Several emails later Schwalb told me that there had been information provided to the FBI and that she was going to check into it.  I requested a copy of any documents provided to the FBI that referred the case to them.  I have not hear from Schwalb again.


Fear and Mayhem in Hawaii Part II

This is part two of a multi part description of an effort to activate/convene a Federal Grand Jury investigation into Murder and Corruption in the State of Hawaii. The struggle began in December 2015 and  goes on even today.

Judge Michael Seabright

The following video is the second and one of more to come.  Please take  note. This Video refers to the Hawaii Police Department. In some cases this is correct, but in this video the reference is meant to be the ‘Kauai Police Department’as this is where the investigation began. In addition you will hear the Hawaii Assistant Attorney General’s email state that the case has been referred to an Assistant Attorney General who is impartial.  It is unknown if this actually happened as there is no evidence that an investigation has ever taken place by the Hawaii Department of Justice.






This is where it is today for Retired Det. Jim Benish. The 1984  Colorado cold case murder investigation of 7 yr old Tracey Neef he was working on in 1993 took him to the murder of 4 yr old Lacey Woolsey Ruff.  He got more than the had bargained for. A simple effort to turn over information to the Kauai Police Department in 2012 opened a plethora of allegations of  Corruption in Hawaii .

This is the first of more followup posts on this case and its getting thicker by the day. Sign up for automatic post updates.

In Janauary of 2016 Benish filed an Affidavit for a Federal Grand Jury investigation into the Murder of Lacey Woolsey Ruff and Violations of the Federal RICO act with Judge Seabrights Federal Court.  Chanel 2 News reported on the Murder part of Benish’s allegations.

HI Channel 2 news became aware of the Benish Affidavit and did a two part documentary on the murder of Lacey Woolsey Ruff.  Reporter Gina Mangieri told Benish that her superiors would not allow her to report on the other more substantial Federal Violations such as the RICO Act.


In May of 2017 Benish telephoned the court to notify them that there was an additional victim of Corruption in Hawaii to be added to the victims listed in his Affidavit to the court.  The court referred him to the Hawaii Federal US Attorney who referred him to the FBI. Seems no-one other than the court new anything about a Grand Jury Investigation.

Keep tuned in there’s much more to come.

Fear and Mayhem in Hawaii Part II











The Truth about the Assad Family, Black September and the Hama Massacre

SUNDAY POST 4-9-2017

Following in the political and inhumane  footsteps of his father Hafez, who was described as a “radical socialist” and “terrorist” and his brother Rifaat known as the “Butcher of Hama”Bashar al Assad has also demonstrated a repeated history of his lack of regard for Syrian lives and for human lives in general.  A rare trait for someone who is a Medical Doctor.

The recent Syrian war crime allegations are not limited to the Assad regime. It’s apparent and alleged that horrific crimes have also been committed by the Syrian ISIS insurgents

On the other side, some rebel groups “fired indiscriminately in attacks that killed and injured dozens, including women and children.” These attacks were launched “without a clear military target” and “intentionally terrorized the civilian population,” 

The rebels’ use of an improvised mortar — known as the “hell cannon” — “terrorized” residents of government-held western Aleppo, according to the report. And it said that some armed groups also withheld humanitarian aid and restricted the movement of local residents, instead using them as human shields. NBC News.

The allegation that Syrian President Assad has gassed Syrian citizens is not the first time Assad  family regime has been accused of war type crimes against its own citizens. . Bashar al Assad assumed control of Syria in July of 2000 when his father, Syrian President Hafez el Assad died in office . In 1982 Syrian president Hafez and his first son General Rifaat al Assad were held responsible for the murder of approximately 1000 Syrians in an incident later referred to a the Hama Massacre.

The Hama massacre (Arabicمجزرة حماة‎‎) occurred in 2 February 1982, when the Army Syrian Arab and the Defense Companies, under the orders of the country’s president Hafez al-Assadbesieged the town of Hama for 27 days in order to quell an uprising by the Muslim Brotherhood against al-Assad’s government.The massacre, carried out by the Syrian Army under commanding General Rifaat al-Assad, effectively ended the campaign begun in 1976 by Sunni Muslim groups, including the Muslim Brotherhood, against the government.

Initial diplomatic reports from Western countries stated that 1,000 were killed. Subsequent estimates vary, with the lower estimates claiming that at least 2,000 Syrian citizens were killed,while others put the number at 20,000 (Robert Fisk), or 40,000 (Syrian Human Rights Committee).[2][6] About 1,000 Syrian soldiers were killed during the operation and large parts of the old city were destroyed. The attack has been described as one of “the single deadliest acts by any Arab government against its own people in the modern Middle East”. According to Syrian opposition, the vast majority of the victims were civilians.

According to Syrian media, anti-government rebels initiated the fighting, who “pounced on our comrades while sleeping in their homes and killed whomever they could kill of women and children, mutilating the bodies of the martyrs in the streets, driven, like mad dogs, by their black hatred.” Security forces then “rose to confront these crimes” and “taught the murderers a lesson that has snuffed out their breath”.Wikipedia

According to author Patrick Seale, “every party worker, every paratrooper sent to Hama knew that this time Islamic militancy had to be torn out of the city, whatever the cost…” The military was mobilized, and president Hafez al-Assad sent Rifaat’s special forces (the Defense companies), elite army units and Mukhabarat agents to the city. Before the attack, the Syrian government called for the city’s surrender and warned that anyone remaining in the city would be considered a rebel. Besieged by 12,000 troops, the fighting in Hama lasted for three weeks – the first week “in regaining control of the town,” and the last two “in hunting down the insurgents.” Robert Fisk, in his book Pity the Nation, described how civilians were fleeing Hama while tanks and troops were moving towards the city’s outskirts to start the siege. He cites reports of high numbers of deaths and shortages of food and water from fleeing civilians and from soldiers.

According to Amnesty International, the Syrian military bombed the old city center from the air to facilitate the entry of infantry and tanks through the narrow streets; buildings were demolished by tanks during the first four days of fighting. Large parts of the old city were destroyed. There are also unsubstantiated reports of use of hydrogen cyanide by the government forces. After encountering fierce resistance, Rifaat’s forces ringed the city with artillery and shelled it for three weeks.

After the initial attacks, military and internal security personnel were dispatched to comb through the rubble for surviving members of the Muslim Brotherhood and their sympathizers.Torture and mass executions of suspected rebel sympathizers ensued, killing many thousands over several weeks. Rifaat, suspecting that rebels were still hiding in tunnels under the old city, had diesel fuel pumped into them and set ablaze and stationed T-72 tanks at the tunnel entrances to shell the militants exiting the tunnels Wikipedia.

It is no surprise that Syrian President Assad would turn on his own people without regard and with impunity  Assad does not understand or will not admit that the US strike on his military installation was in response to his chemical attack on innocent Syrian citizens and not a signal that the United States supports his opposition. Quite the contrary, the US should have bombed them both in a signal that attacks on civilians from either faction  will not be tolerated. . Assad probably and erroneously assumed that since he has had impunity from past US Presidents, his chemical attack would of course be ignored. And Mainstream Media in the US reports that Bashar Assad is fighting terrorism. http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/middle_east-july-dec06-syria-terror_09-14/. . 



Food Prices Drop in Mexico as Trump Threatens to Cancel NAFTA

THE SUNDAY POST 01/29/1917

IS TRUMP A SLY ACHIEVER? Trump’s Threat to Cancel NAFTA has Caused a Reduction in Food Prices in Mexico.

During an interview of both Canadian and Mexican citizens in preparation for this article this Canadian sentiment was voiced.  It may also be the sentiment of other non US Citizens. “Why should we pay the United States to use a pipeline that we own? The Americans are greedy, they want nice new cars, nice new homes at the expense of Canadian citizens.”

NAFTA  vs Oil and the Border

There are two oil pipelines that have been a mired in political rhetoric, accusations of big business interference in National Policies , Indian claims that their land is being ravaged and exposed to profound future pollution as well as  a proposed border wall.  All are influenced by NAFTA.  NAFTA is the one single thing that has enabled all of the above controversies.

The Mainstream Press continues to report inaccurate biased illogical information based on either deception or ignorance  on these issues and  how the Trump Presidency and subsequent Executive Orders affect the US.

The status  of the NAFTA and Oil pipe lines appears to have been easily dealt with by our new President. And both issues appear simple. We will build a wall that Mexico will pay for and we will complete the oil pipe lines. Without knowing all of the facts these decisions seemed to have been made off the cuff during Trumps campaign and followed with actual Presidential Executive orders.

With a little knowledge and in consideration of Trumps history of business success  it’s really not difficult to see through the tsunami  of drama created by the mainstream media.  Many who voted for Trump did so out of desperation, and so the “Jury is out” as to whether his actions are economically reasonable, and logically  in the interest of the United States of America. Its possible that the Politician’s in Washington and the Press wouldn’t know whether or not Trumps actions are  based on solid good business practices or not. But Trump was elected on the assumption that he  knows.

Based on interviews with the Mexican people , knowledge of the Mexican economy, interviews with many Canadian citizens a layman’s reasonable analogy of Trumps decisions can be made.  It’s a simple analogy  that no-one is really talking about much and is outside of the National Media agenda.

First the border wall.  It’s true that NAFTA is an unfair agreement. Why would any business let alone a country like the United States initiate agreements with the likes of Canada, Mexico, China or any other country that allows competitive countries to charge fees and taxes on anything and everything imported into their respective countries and  then allow these same countries to ship anything and everything into the United States fees and tax free?  Did you know that Chinese goods can be shipped from San Diego to New York for the price of a US Postage stamp.?   The Canadian inaccurate press rhetoric is understandable coming from a country that has enjoyed generational tax and tariff free exports to the United States.  Canada’s nationally sponsored news media reports that the elimination of NAFTA would have adverse affects on Mexico. This demonstrates the  poor understanding of the Mexican situation  not only by Canadians but by Americans..

How can manufacturing in the United States compete under conditions created by NAFTA? The answer is they cannot.  Who benefits from this kind of agreement?  The answer is Big businesses benefits .Their goal is to manufacture goods destined for sale in the United States using cheap foreign labor and materials free of tariffs and taxes in the United States.  Big business and the US Press argue that this causes lower prices in the United States. The truth is that no retail prices in the United States were reduced as a result of NAFTA in fact prices have increased.  It’s obvious that the difference between cheap labor and US labor has gone into the pockets of the fat cats in the United States.  It’s a fact that if you shipped a 10 pound parcel containing a new item manufactured in the US to Mexico, there is a minimum Mexican tax of 16% charged on the item. It’s also a fact that if you shipped a railroad car loaded with clothing made in Mexico, or China or Canada (including oil)  to the United States there is NO TAX or TARIFF imposed by the United States.  The boomers can remember paying 10 cents per gallon for gasoline. That was before NAFTA was created by the George Bush Sr. administration.. By the way, the Bush family just happened to be in the oil business.  Ask yourself, has the price of gasoline ever had a sustained reduction in price?

What’s all this have to do with the border wall?  Over the last 25 years the United States has poured over a billion dollars into Mexico to assist in the fight against drugs.

This is where the interviews with local Mexican residents and police officers comes in.  It’s also a fact that very little of this billion dollars actually made its way to the Mexican fight against drugs. Anyone who lives in the United Sates knows that the war to stop Mexican drugs from entering the United States is being lost…  So yes, with the stroke of President Trumps pen, Pena and his cronies will pay for the wall or that billion dollars they are receiving from the US may be diverted to the construction of a brand new border wall. A wall  that we can see and feel. A wall  that may help curb the flow of drugs into the country.  Trump has said that Mexico also will need to pay a tariff on their goods shipped into the United States.

The US news  media has painted a picture of Trumps actions that couldn’t be more inaccurate. The Mexican people are getting panicky about the price of goods in Mexico.  What will happen if Trumps plan to negate NAFTA comes to pass.  They fear the worst.  The US news media is directly responsible for this fear.

It’s also a fact that just this past week when Trump announced his plans to negate the NAFTA agreement, the price of food in Mexico began to fall. Why?  Because its good business that’s why. What are the growers and manufacturers going to do if they no longer have The NAFTA guaranteed  price advantage in the United States. What are they going to do if the US consumers now can purchase the same goods made in the USA for less or the same amount of  money than the goods manufactured in Mexico and China?  In anticipation of this, the Mexican distributors  have already begun to dump goods, especially perishable goods like vegetables into the Mexican economy.  They would rather sell the items for less to the Mexican consumer than get stuck with spoiled vegetables, or warehouses loaded with clothing.   Trump knows this.  So the ultimate truth of the matter is, the Mexican people have already begun to benefit not suffer from the Trump presidency.  Presumably China will be next.

About the Canadian pipelines.  This is a particularly sly move by Trump in the best interest of the US. It’s questionable whether or not Trump would have been in favor of the pipelines at their inception but the facts are (as mentioned above) that the deals with Canada and Mexico were made by previous administrations and now he must clean up the mess.  The NAFTA question must also be asked in reference to the Canadian Pipe lines.

Why would any Country allow not one but two or more new pipe lines to literally dissect the country from North to South and allow a foreign corporation to own the pipe and its contents at no cost other than the cost of construction.  We know what the answer is.  Big business taking care of themselves. The fact is that its not certain that  Canadian crude  refined by US refineries will be sold in the United States.  Its possible that the refined oil could be sent to United States adversaries.

Trump has made it clear that the pipe lines should be completed but the game of cards is going to be changed  to one that favors the “house”. (The United States.)  The pipe lines are a nasty problem not just because the contents pose a threat to the environment, but because they infringe on Native American lands. That being said, it’s very probable that Trump will change the location of the pipe to appease our beloved Indians. It is also known that Trump has made it clear that American Jobs and materials will be used to complete the construction. What is not known is what other changes in the agreements Trump will demand.  A Codefore mole has indicated that with the elimination of NAFTA, there will be Tariffs and Taxes to be paid on each and every barrel of crude that passes through the oil pipe lines and that the Indians will benefit from some of this. The Dakota pipe line is owned by Dakota Access, LLC, a fully owned subsidiary of Bakken Holdings Company, LLC which is a joint venture of Energy Transfer Partners LP (60%) and Sunoco Logistic Partners LP (40%), owns 75% of the pipeline, while Phillips 66 owns a 25% stake.  Transfer of ownership has already begun, and it looks like Sun Oil will be one of the main operations managers.  It would not be a surprise to see individual states end up owning their portion of pipe line and  that this  line will be subject to state regulations as well as Federal regulatilons.  Similar to a state owned “Transit Authority”

Both Canada and Mexico have similar problems.  In Canada’s case, they do not have sufficient if any ability to process their crude oil.  Their best option is to refine their oil at one of the US refineries located on the Gulf of Mexico.  The question is how to get the oil there.  Ship, tank trucks or pipeline?

The case of Mexico is slightly different. Mexico does have refineries but they are only operating at about 70% and the remaining Mexican crude is refined in the US ,Gulf of Mexico shore. Why?  Because the United States imports about 70% of its crude from Mexico. Why would Mexico who’s crude oil comes from the Gulf, ship it back to Mexico when its destined to go to the United States.?  It’s a fact that Mexico’s  crude comes from platforms located on the Gulf of Mexico. It’s a fact that this crude is shipped to the US refineries in the Gulf and then some of it is shipped back to consumers in Mexico.  The logic there is that it’s more profitable for the Mexican government to sell the oil to the US than to the Mexicans. Once they realize that they will be paying a Tariff on the oil, they may decide to sell more oil which equates to lower prices, to their own population.

Based on all of the above information, its reasonable to assume that if Donald Trump wants Mexico to cough up the cost of the border wall that Mexico will do as requested. It’s also a strong probability  that Canada will continue to ship their crude to the Gulf refineries except that now they will pay the United States a fair Tariff and taxes.  It’s also a strong probability that the United States will begin in earnest to explore all other energy options to lessen the reliance on Canada and Mexico’s crude oil.  If the Canadians don’t like the “greedy” Americans, maybe they should build their own refineries.

In any event, new Tariff agreements are needed. Agreements created in the interest of the American people, not created for the elite businesses in the US.

Is NAFTA Good for the US or an International Scam?



Donald Trump has said he will make changes to our international trade agreements, including the China agreement and NAFTA.  If he doesn’t do anything else but this he will have done more for this country than George Bush and Bill Clinton did to harm this country by authoring and  getting the NAFTA passed into law by Congress.

What is NAFTA?

NAFTA stands for the North American Free Trade Act.  and is an agreement between Canada, US and Mexico.  There were side agreements added by President Clinton before becoming law these are:

1. North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation

2 Commitment to Labor Cooperation

Who was responsible for these agreements?  The NAFTA  agreement was actually authored By George HW Bush. He failed to get re-elected and  could not sign it into law. After promising that he would not, Bush’s  successor  Bill Clinton signed NAFTA and revisions into law in 1992 to be effective in 1994.

Representatives approved NAFTA on November 17, 1993, by a vote of 234 to 200. The agreement’s supporters included 132 Republicans and 102 Democrats. NAFTA passed the Senate 61-38.

The signatories were President William Clinton, Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulrone and Mexican President Carlos Salinas de Gortari.

It has been said that the NAFTA idea actually goes back to the Lyndon Johnson presidency but never became a law.

All countries need trade agreements. There are “Trade agreements” and there are “Free trade agreements.  The difference is that “Free Trade agreements eliminate tariffs for merchandise being imported into a country.  The purpose of trade agreements is to promote international trade but should not be so drastic as to  harm businesses in the United States.

Trade agreements involving the United States  should be implemented to establish competitive trade between two or more nations, but caution must be taken not to enter into a trade agreement that is so one sided that whole industries within the United States are  disadvantaged to the point of going out of business.  Trade agreements must be authorized by Congress. Although it is  generally agreed that the result of Trade and Free Trade agreements is  not only to encourage out of country businesses to seek to sell their wares internationally, but to encourage fair competition. High Tariffs placed on incoming goods to the United States can prevent the foreign goods from being priced competitively.  No  Tariffs (Free Trade) placed on incoming goods to the United States can make goods produced within the United States noncompetitive even if sold in the United States.

Current Free Trade agreements with China, Taiwan and Mexico stipulate virtually no tariffs on goods coming from those countries. How has that affected the US Consumer?  It has nominally  lowered prices on products, it has forced many US business to go out of business, and it has resulted in the loss of US jobs as a result of closed business but more than that, these Free Trade agreements encourage US  businesses to relocate out side of the United States to remain competitive and or strengthen their profits. Its a balancing act and our Trade agreements with China and Mexico are out of balance and need to be either negated or re-negotiated to stop the decades of migration of our American businesses out of the United States.

The long term outlook of this action might mean rising prices on some products, but the balance is that we would encourage foreign businesses to relocate into the United States which means jobs. It would mean that our current US businesses would turn larger profits and that also probably means more jobs. When our work force is doing well financially, so is our economy.

In 1984, Congress passed the Trade and Tariff Act. That gave the President “fast-track” authority to negotiate free trade agreements more freely. It eliminated  Congressional input to the ability to approve or disapprove. Congress lost the ability to change negotiating points. NAFTA and the Chinese agreement replaced this “fast track” authority.

The purpose of NAFTA was to designate Canada and Mexico as countries who enjoyed “Most Favored nation status” in import/export matters. It intended to eliminate barriers to trade and facilitate cross-border movement of goods and services, promote conditions of fair competition and increase investment opportunities. It also provided  protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights. (In reality the Chinese have never honored these rights)

NAFTA was supposed to create procedures for the resolution of trade disputes and establish a framework for further trilateral, regional and multilateral cooperation to expand the trade agreements benefits.

The question is who, exactly do these trade agreements benefit today.?  Do they benefit big business or the consumers who live in  NAFTA countries? Generally speaking, the  mainstream media ,who have dubious  motivations, claim that NAFTA has benefited the jobless, lowered unemployment rates and generally is responsible for lower costs of goods and manufacturing. They claim NAFTA is responsible for quadrupled trade figures, lowered prices, increased economic growth, job creations, increased foreign direct investment in Canada and Mexico, and reductions in  government spending by allowing inter governmental contract awards that increase competition resulting in a reduction in the cost of Government expenditures.

The icing on the NAFTA mainstream  media cake is the threat that if the NAFTA trade agreement were changed or negated the result would be the end of low cost manufacturing in Mexico, a reduction in Mexican exports to the United States and Canada and would undercut American workers sent to Mexico to implement American manufacturing. There is also the suggestion that Mexico might refuse to renegotiate in the face of  Mexican export tariffs levied against Mexico and Canada. Canadian exports are primarily fossil fuels. Are these claims, by the National media, of profit, and wonderful economic conditions  created by NAFTA accurate? It would appear not.

Although the NAFTA agreement  basically eliminates tariffs on goods crossing the borders from Canada and Mexico into the United States, it’s a fact that Mexico has and is currently imposing tariffs on all goods imported into Mexico from the United States. The minimum tariff is 16% on most goods but is increased on some goods. Mexico pays no tariffs on goods exported to the United States. The US government has “looked the other way” on the Mexican tariffs on imported goods from the US.mexican-tariffs

The practice of allowing countries to have no tariff charges on goods entering the United States is not unique to the NAFTA agreement. A similar and more beneficial agreement to a foreign country  exists within the Chinese Taiwan/United States agreement.  This agreement is known as the Asia-Pacific free trade agreement. In 2015 China sent 366 billion dollars more in goods than the United States sent to China. This trade agreement also gave the Chinese unheard of shipping concessions on goods after arriving in the United States. China on the other hand has avoided paying established port fees in the United States by shipping goods including automobiles manufactured in China to the Ensenada Port in Mexico. It is reported that this port is actually owned by the Chinese and thus its likely that the Chinese  port fees are negligible.  In Mexico, China can  take advantage of the NAFTA agreement between the US and Mexico and ship the Chinese goods via Mexican trucking companies, North across the US Mexico border. It appears in this case there is no benefit to the United States working force but great benefit to US Businesses who receive goods from Mexico and China from the Mexican Ensenada port at lower costs and sell their products in the US at much the same price as if it were manufactured in the United States. The low cost of goods has not been passed on to the consumer.

The US  price  of consumer goods produced by US industry is not relative to consumers in Canada or Mexico.  The cost of products  in US dollars is the same in Mexico and  Canada as it is in  the United States no matter where the goods are manufactured.  Mexican factory workers get paid much less but the cost of the vehicles and other goods they produce for the United States  is the same as if it were produced in the United States.  What this means is that as indicated in the chart on  the  rising cost of vehicles. A vehicle purchased by a Mexican or Canadian from  a United States distributor for $10,000  will cost the same amount in Canada or Mexico as it does in the US,  plus tariffs. The only difference is the dollar exchange rates. screen-shot-2013-09-06-at-11-03-33-am

The question is answered. NAFTA didn’t do any of the above listed intended benefits to any of the consumers in the three countries except make it legal for industry to make more money using cheap labor in third world countries. The prices went up and in most cases the cost of labor to produce went down. The US consumer is paying the same amount of money for a new car after NAFTA as he would have been paying had NAFTA never existed except that now he probably doesn’t have a job  and more.20120929-the-graph-that-proves-gas-prices-didnt-surge-because-of-obama

This scenario is not unique to the Automobile industry.  Canada has the approval to construct pipe lines across the United States to the refineries on the gulf thanks to NAFTA. Gas prices have climbed up just the same as if there were no pipe lines across our country.  Mexico and China are manufacturing and shipping goods to the United States and selling as if the items were made in Detroit or New York and don’t even afford the courtesy of passing through US ports. If you shop in JC Penney,  Walmart or Macys, the prices have not decreased even though the products come from Tiawan, China or Mexico. How can a US Steel mill compete when China can make a steel product ship it to the US, pay little or no tariff and then ship the item to your door for the price of a US postage stamp?consumerexpendaturepercarjan1967-oct2011wtmk

Our friends in Mexico have been falsely convinced by the Mexican and US media  that the NAFTA agreement has and is providing them with jobs and opportunities that would not exist without NAFTA. They do not realize that they are being used by their own government who in effect has made it possible for greedy businesses in the United States to benefit from near slave labor to produce products for shipment to the United States tariff free. This arrangement with Mexico  is one reason why the United States government has tried to convince us that its necessary to stop the Mexican people from migrating to the United States in search of employment.  It is not because the Mexicans are stealing US jobs or because the Mexican people are shipping drugs across the border.  The United States government is known to have bought and sold significant amounts of drugs itself during CIA operations and it has been said that the US is one of  the largest illegal drug dealers on the planet..   The border closure is because industrialists in the United States do not want the Mexican people to get familiar with wages paid in the United States.  Why would a Mexican worker perform his work in Mexico for 10.00 per day when the same job in the United States pays 10.00 per hour and is only required to work 8 hours per day, received insurance, vacations etc: ?  The same goes for those in the clothing and other Mexican industries. Yes there are jobs in Mexico created by US manufacturing located there  for those who chose to bite the United States pie, but the rest of the Mexican people  and the people of the United States do not benefit from NAFTA and in the big picture, neither do the Mexican people who work like slaves for industry owned by  United States businesses becausechinese-ship-off-loading-ensenada the prices of goods shipped into Mexico from the United States are higher than in the US after including  the Mexican Tariffs. The prices of goods shipped into the United States from Mexico and China are tariff free, but these savings are not passed on to the American consumer. The prices of these goods remain the same as if they were manufactured in the United States.  Who benefits from these Free Trade agreements?  The consumer or big business?

For simplicity purposes the graphs were targeted in reference to the Auto Industry. This was  because the industry is easily defined, and is heavily impacted by the existence of NAFTA and the Chinese agreements. The automobile industry is also impacted by the cost of fuel and that cost is directly linked to Mexico and Canada. The United States imports around 60% of its raw crude from Mexico and because of this is Mexico’s largest exporter.

John Podesta. How to Wash Millions Get Hillary Clinton Elected and Get Away With it.

John Podesta  Claims Center for American Progress Action Fund is a Non Profit “Social Welfare” Organization.  Codefore Publishing Disagrees and Says John Podesta and the CAPA Fund is Laundering money for Hillary Clinton.

Codefore Publishing has been researching and writing about Clinton enterprises for some time. The  early years Clinton Arkansas information is hard to find but some of it is actually there if a person looks hard enough. The Clinton Family Foundation so far has been well concealed and this secrecy keeps them in the money. Money laundering will not work without secrecy.podesta-group

It wasn’t until recently that information became available that provided insight as to how the actual passage of money was performed.  This information came from an unexpected source.  John Podesta and his Center for American Progress. The Clinton methods of operation have not changed since the Arkansas days. Money is electronically transferred from companies, or foundations, to other companies or foundations, sometimes 4 or 5 times before the actual cash shows up.  Please understand that you can transfer money electronically fairly easily and unless the money is actually deposited in an account and left there and spent it doesn’t exist. This is why “off shore” bank accounts are valuable to the money launderer.  This is also why you will not find the name Clinton anywhere in the Center for American Progress. You will however find that when you look at the below  included list of people that make up the Center for American Progress that they are all, in one way or another,are past or even present  Clinton colleagues.


 A case in point. When Bill Clinton was Governor of Arkansas he formed a State of Arkansas foundation named the Arkansas Development Finance Authority AKA the ADFA and Bill Clinton claimed this State owned and operated state organization was going to simulate the Arkansas economy by granting or loaning money to businesses. Bill Clinton was the sole administrator and made all decisions while he was governor. 

To make a long story short 60 million dollars showed up missing from the ADFA and no-one knew where it went..   There were all kinds of money laundering allegations and  people were dying etc. There were NY banks involved including AIG, foreign Asian Banks and numerous insurance companies and eventually journalistic  investigators connected the 60 million  to “The White House” (Clinton) 

Bill and Hillary the early years

Bill and Hillary the early years

The scenario continued and it was, if you could prove that the Clinton’s actually had 60 million dollars they could prove that it was not the 60 million dollars  missing from the ADFA . The Clinton’s position was that ,assuming you could prove that they had 60 million, it  was the 60 million borrowed via AIG and two Asian banks and they had the paperwork to show it.  AIG  most likely didn’t really want any part of explaining where they got 60 million dollars to loan the Clinton’s especially since they were  counting on the Democrat for 180 billion dollars in government  bail out so they created the loan on paper  and then forgave the Clinton note.  It was a debt that never occurred but  added it to their list of bad debts anyway.  Good for the Clintons, good for AIG and Hank Greenburg. A little loan paperwork was all that was necessary to seal the deal and the Clintons never really left their fingerprints on the money. 

Podesta’s Center for American Progress 501 c3 Charity. 

For those of you who do not know who John Podesta is, he is Hillary Clinton’s campaign manager as well as served for Obama and Bill Clinton. He has been pulling the strings for generations.

A review of Podesta’s Center for American Progress charity tax 990 forms filed with the IRS from 2001 thru  2014 indicate that CEO, and President John Podesta filed with the IRS as a 501 c from 2004 thru 2014.  All forms list John Podesta as either CEO President or Chairman of the Board.  He has never lost control, albeit he would like us to believe he has.  Note that the Organization is now referred to as  a ‘Think Tank’ group.  Codefore Publishing says it’s all a IRS veil  to collect and wash money from sources capable of donating millions.

IRS 501(c) Groups — Nonprofit, tax-exempt groups organized under section 501(c) of the Internal Revenue Code that can engage in varying amounts of political activity, depending on the type of group. For example, 501(c)(3) groups operate for religious, charitable, scientific or educational purposes. These groups are not supposed to engage in any political activities, though some voter registration activities are permitted. 501(c)(4) groups are commonly called “social welfare” organizations that may engage in political activities, as long as these activities do not become their primary purpose. Similar restrictions apply to Section 501(c)(5) labor and agricultural groups, and to Section 501(c)(6) business leagues, chambers of commerce, real estate boards and boards of trade.

IRS Political Action Committee (PAC) — A political committee that raises and spends limited “hard” money contributions for the express purpose of electing or defeating candidates. Organizations that raise soft money for issue advocacy may also set up a PAC. Most PACs represent business, such as the Microsoft PAC; labor, such as the Teamsters PAC; or ideological interests, such as the EMILY’s List PAC or the National Rifle Association PAC. An organization’s PAC will collect money from the group’s employees or members and make contributions in the name of the PAC to candidates and political parties. Individuals contributing to a PAC may also contribute directly to candidates and political parties, even those also supported by the PAC. A PAC can give $5,000 to a candidate per election (primary, general or special) and up to $15,000 annually to a national political party. PACs may receive up to $5,000 each from individuals, other PACs and party committees per year. A PAC must register with the Federal Election Commission within 10 days of its formation, providing the name and address of the PAC, its treasurer and any affiliated organizations.

The CAP IRS 990 tax forms list all employees, Board members, Management etc. Coderfore’s editor JD Benish said, “As far as we can tell this corporation began in 2004 with contributions totaling about one million dollars that year  and every year  thereafter they didn’t collect and spend more than about 8 million.”  “Their stated purposes for the year 2004 is that one of their activities is lobbying. They use the term ‘educational work with policy makers‘ instead of the word lobbying.'”

 The original 2004 IRS  filing states the “Primary charity purpose is:  ‘To develop and present arguments that support adopting or maintaining important public policies consistent with the broad principals of progressivism-opportunity, community, equality, justice and mutual obligation…. To educate the public about the consequences of conservative legislation and policies and the values and special interests that such measures promote.

In 2005 the CAP changed one of their purposes to: ‘The Action Fund also promotes a progressive agenda of new policy ideas and battles conservative policies through online activism, state ballot initiatives, and advocacy and educational work with policymakers on Capitol Hill, in state houses, with state legislators, and in City Halls around the country’  $844.966.00 were spent on this purpose.

In 2006 The corporations Program Service (formerly the purpose) Political activities increased: They ‘Published The Progress Report, a daily newsletter (from the Democratic liberal view point) a Political blog, Thinkprogress.org (A political organization that also solicits donations) A daily set of talking points on a current issue. Rapid response communication vehicles including social and economic justice, healthy communities, Global Leadership, and a secure America and offer a sharp and well-researched critique designed to fight corruption, incompetence, media failures and the conservative agenda.’  $467.690.00 went to this activity.

Salaries began to increase with Susan Wartell making $200,000.

In 2006 (2007 IRS report year)  Senator Hillary Clinton was beginning her campaign for the 2008 Presidential election.

The 2007 IRS file for year 2006 indicated contributions of $3,146,131.00 and board members were now receiving compensation. They were no longer a “shell” company and were purchasing furniture and computers.  Their blogging had apparently paid off. Now that Hillary was in the White House as a Senator, the CAP “Service or mission” changed yet again.  The CAP budget allocated $1,865.344 to “Fund promote a progressive addenda of new policy ideas and battle conservative policies through on line activism, state ballot initiatives and advocacy and educational work with citizens and policymakers on Capitol hill, in State houses, with State Legislators and in City Halls and around the country.” The Blogging budget was raised to $511,945.   Since the CAP fund was conceived as a 501 c3 one would expect some grants to the poor or something. To date there have been zero funds for grants or donations to the needy but  $1,137,671.00 in wages and salaries were reported. It appears that John Podesta now had his political machine in place and ready for Hillary.

Later in 2008 Hillary was out of the presidential race and preparing for her tenure as Secretary of State to begin in 2009. The 2008 IRS report (for year 2007 when Hillary was in full candidate mode) CAP reported the astounding increase in donations of $8,653,399.00. The CAP claimed almost 5 million dollars in expenses for “Impacting the national debate and transforming progressive ideas into policy through rapid response communication (presumably their blogging and newsletters) public education grassroots organizing, a partnership with American Citizens, executive, legislative branch policymakers and progressive leaders throughout the country and world.”

 It should be noted that somewhere along the line, Podesta applied for a small change in the CAP tax exempt classification. The new classification on the 2008 tax return was as a 501 c 4 which allows for “Modest” political activity if: The rules should permit 501(c)(4) social welfare organizations to use electoral campaign activity as a modest component of their strategy to accomplish their social welfare missions, while protecting the right of voters to know who is financing electoral campaign activity and eliminating the misuse of 501(c)(4) organizations to sidestep the rules that apply to 527 political organizations.

In the case of CAP, the word modest as is relative to the total budget would not apply. 100% would be the actual expenditures for politics. And so without going through all of the IRS income returns, from 2009 to 2014 there has, like clockwork, been around 7 million dollars donated each of the later years and  all has gone to their political agendas with no modesty. However to protect their tax status they stop short of supporting Hillary Clinton but the big question is where does the 8 mil per year come from and where does it go? 


2014 IRS form 990 summary statement on the says the CAP desires:  “To shape the National policy debate and transform progressive concepts into policy”. The shaping of policy developed expenses of $6,755,176 and just to add a little credibility, $25,000 was given to an organization named Virginia Interfaith.

Codefore Publishing suspected that there might be another Foundation with a similar name and in fact there are  name variations used on the tax forms but all forms use the same Fed.  tax number 30-0192708.

This curiosity developed  because according to an article written by Ken Silverstein of ‘The Nation’  he claimed that the Center for American Progress had enough financial clout to guarantee a 25 billion dollar loan to dish out as “grants or loans” and that CAP at one time had 23 million dollars in assets.

Twenty five billion dollars in assets?  Where? We asked ourselves.  We must be looking at the wrong IRS tax returns. If they had that kind of “clout” it wasn’t in their bank account. There were a few inconsistencies in what the actual name of  Podesta’s charity is but its no issue because they all use the same Federal ID number and what bank would loan 25 billion dollars to a company that generates 8 million of gross income per year?.

This inaccuracy in the names doesn’t seem to cast doubt that they are one in the same as described in ‘The Nation” article, only the amount of wealth is questionable. The IRS may be interested in the differences between 20 million and 8 million dollars in assets  for the company Center for American Progress with  Federal ID number.30-0192708. It doesn’t seem to alarm the IRS that a company who’s reported income at its highest is around $8 million dollars is able to guarantee loans to 25 billion dollars. No mention as to who this lenders might be  but we know that the US government Department of Energy has its hands on numerous loan guarantee programs and we also note that at least one of the CAP employees was connected to the Department of Energy management team.  First Solar was one of the recipients of Government backed money (25 billion dollars) and is owned by CAP. (A charitable organization).  So its no surprise that some of the Federally guaranteed loan money to First Solar made its way into the Clinton Campaign Fund and CAP. 


Additional research on the Center for American Progress and its association with a company named Business Alliance and First Solar  both owned by CAP indicates that the CAP enterprise is possibly actually the size of the Clinton Family Foundation or larger.  Albeit, John Podesta is the Captain  of the  CAP Ship.

Bill & Hillary 7


Ken Silverstein further says: After growing rapidly in its first few years, tax records show, CAP’s total assets fell in 2006 for the first time, from $23.6 million to $20.4 million. Assets started growing again in 2007 when CAP founded the Business Alliance, a membership rewards program for corporate contributors, and then exploded when Obama was elected in 2008. According to its most recent nonprofit tax filing, CAP’s total assets now top $44 million, and its Action Fund treasury holds $6 million more. (Codefore doesn’t know what records “The Nation” is referring to.)

A confidential CAP donor pitch I obtained describes the American Progress  Business Alliance as “a channel for engagement with the corporate community” that provides “the opportunity to…collaborate on common interests.” It offers three membership levels, with the perks to top donors ($100,000 and up) including private meetings with CAP experts and executives, round-table discussions with “Hill and national leaders,” and briefings on CAP reports “relevant to your unique interests.”

The Center for American Progress, Washington’s leading liberal think tank, has been a big backer of the Energy Department’s $25 billion loan guarantee program for renewable energy projects. CAP has specifically praised First Solar, a firm that received $3.73 billion under the program, and its Antelope Valley project in California.first-solar

Last year, when First Solar was taking a beating from congressional Republicans and in the press over job layoffs and alleged political cronyism, CAP’s Richard Caperton praised Antelope Valley in his testimony to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, saying it headed up his list of “innovative projects” receiving loan guarantees. Earlier, Caperton and Steve Spinner—a top Obama fundraiser who left his job at the Energy Department monitoring the issuance of loan guarantees and became a CAP senior fellow—had written an article cross-posted on CAP’s website and its Think Progress blog, stating that Antelope Valley represented “the cutting edge of the clean energy economy.”

Though the think tank didn’t disclose it, First Solar belonged to CAP’s Business Alliance, a secret group of corporate donors, according to internal lists obtained by The Nation. Meanwhile, José Villarreal—a consultant at the power-house law and lobbying firm Akin Gump, who “provides strategic counseling on a range of legal and policy issues” for corporations—was on First Solar’s board until April 2012 while also sitting on the board of CAP, where he remains a member, according to the group’s latest tax filing. 


Just as if you walked into a bank and standing in the corner you saw  three men, all wearing masks and carrying a pistol your logic would tell you that they were bank robbers. This logic is called “probable cause” in a criminal court of law and when a police officer has this logic he is authorized to make an arrest..

So here we have John Podesta the campaign manager for Hilary Clinton and his “Charitable Organization” called Center for American Progress” in 2004 who’s charitable activities did not exist, but the political activities were prevalent from the start and consumed almost all of the budget. And the millions of dollars of contributions to this ‘Charity’ corresponded exactly to Hillary’s political career and aspirations and her need for ‘clean’ money.  But  this didn’t change the CAP statements to the IRS that they  remain tax free because they were a 501 c 3 corporation.

Once the donations became noticeably large, Podesta applied for a slight change to  the IRS non tax designation to allow a small amount of political activity in the good interest of the public and not in favor of any particular candidate or political party.  And just like the banditos in the bank, there are masks worn, not on faces but on the names of the CAP contributors because if it became known that any of this money is linked to Hillary or Bill or any of the Clinton’s own Charities it would violate numerous Federal and IRS laws to include the Federal RICO act. To further the analogy, just like the banditos in the bank probably have been arrested before for theft or bank robbery before,   the people involved in this Charity of Podesta’s are all political associates of Hillary or John Podesta and  although have not actrually been arrested because of lack of proof, as explained above 60 million dollars disappeared from an Arkansas State Agency under Bill Clinton’s watch.. its not Podesta’s or the Clintons  first rodeo as Podesta rode the Mena Arkansas bulls right along with the Clintons.


The word “money washing” should be explained further as to how it applies here.  John Podesta and Hillary Clinton have rules to abide by when it comes to accepting money for political campaigns. The money washing comes in when a non political entity, such as Podesta’s Charity, receives money from sources, whether the contributors are political sources or not and uses this money to the advantage of a certain political enterprise or candidate.(This would probably apply to all of the Clinton enterprises especially Hillary Clinton’s election funds)  And in doing so, disregards the  purpose or reason that Charities are tax free enterprises. Why tax an organization who gives support to the poor?  So in theory, when Hillary or Podesta or anyone interested in electing Hillary Clinton solicits  money and  suggests to the contributors that  it’s advantageous  to give it to Podesta’s charity because the money is going to help the Clinton campaign makes the contributors  complicit in money laundering . The donator and candidate not only circumvent campaign donation limitations, their identity is protected and the money is tax deductable. This tax advantage is a huge benefit for a person or corporation that wants to hide a million or two and support the candidate who usually sees to it that their money is returned to them on the backs of the taxpayers.  The Federal RICO law says that it’s not necessary that the benefactor of money laundering (candidate for office) receive cash.  The benefit can be in the form of many other things including favorable political advertising . And what else does the contributor receive for the donating the cash?  (That’s exactly what all the email controversy is about.) What’s in it for the donator?  Its not hard to figure and usually not difficult to prove violations of the RICO act, unless of course your the Federal Investigator and you are in your Federal position because of the efforts of the accused.

All of this could not be accomplished without secrecy and a wink and a pat on the back by our Congress, Judicial, and Executive Branches. We now  know how in-depth the Clintons influence is within the investigating agencies and DOJ in general


Center for American Progress Colleagues.

Joe Smolskis CEO Treasurer CAP fmr CEO Protestant Episcopal Foundation was fired amid Episcopal scandal involving construction funds from the Foundation “Soper fund.” The Diocese has used nearly one-and-a-quarter million dollars a year from the Soper Trust Fund to cover operating expenses. With the support of Bishop Chane, the Cathedral undertook a huge construction project for an underground parking lot that, according to internal sources, has been a financial loss. Despite the legal requirements of its nonprofit status for open financial disclosure, the Cathedral has not placed a full financial report on its website since 2008. Amid discrepancies surrounding Smolskis

Tory Carter Chief Financial Officer and Senior Vice President of Finance and Administration for the Center for American Progress. Prior to his position with the Center for American Progress, Mr. Carter-Conneen was the CFO and Interim President and CEO of the Victory Fund & Institute, a nonpartisan organization that helps outstanding lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) leaders win elections and serve effectively. Mr. Carter-Conneen also served as the managing director of Victory, overseeing all financial, programmatic, and operational functions of the organization, providing fact-based, metric-driven strategy development to drive organizational success.

Sara Rosen Wartell –Bill Clintons Deputy Assistant

Judith Feder Clinton Administration Department of Health

Hilary B Rosen Huffington Post Political Dir. Long time Clinton Supporte

Thomas Perez Barak Obama Sec of Labor

Peter Edelman Lawyer Author  and long time Clinton Supporter

Broderick D Johnson Barak Obama Assistant and Movie Producer

Clifton Larson Allen dba Allen Weishair & Co. CPA

Jack Jenkins-(Thinkprogress.org.)

Joe Romm (Thinkprogress.org.)

Alice Miranda Ollstein (Thinkprogresslorg)

Kira Lerner (Thinkprogress.org)

Ryan Kornowski (Thinkprogress.org)

Alejandro Davila Fragoso (Thinkprogress.org)

SenatorHarry Reid (Thinkprogress.org)

Aaron Rupar (Thinkprogress.org)

Natasha Geiling (Thinkprogress.org)_

Lindsay Gibbs (Thinkprogress.org)

Josh Israel (Thinkprogress.org)

Laurel Raymond (Thinkprogress.org)

Justin Salhani (Thinkprogress.org)

Zack Ford (Thinkprogress.org)

Adam Peck (Thinkprogress.org)

Aaron Rupar (Thinkprogress.org)

Tory Cartrer (Thinkprogress.org)

Wendy Abrams a major donor to Hillary Clinton’s campaign

Anna Berger supporter

Christie Hefner Hugh Heffner’s daughter, Long time Clinton and Obama supporter

Harold Ickes Bill Clinton.US Interior Secretary, White House Chief of Staff

Ron Klain Chief of Staff Al Gore and Joe Biden. Ebola response Coordinator for Obama

Molly Mckusic

Neera Tanden Political activist. Transition team for Hillary Clinton, Associated with Think Progrss

Ted Strickland Colo. Democratic Ohio Governor

Tom Perriello Lawyer, Member Democratic Party past Representative Virginia

Carmel Martin  Exc VP policy CAP US Secretary of Education Obama Admin.

Deborah Holsten VP Finance CAP

Deborah Fine Hillary Clinton assigned journalist-Huffpost contributor-Clinton Supporter

Arkadi Gernehy CAP Senior Fellow- Expertise Crime, gun control,data innovation Contributor Nat Catholic Reporter Clinton Supporter

Judd Legum  Think Progress associate, Misc: Internet new contributor, Clinton Supporter

Virginia Inter Faith (we don’t know exactly what this is except that is a tax exempt charity)


Revenue Wire, Safe Cart, Search Quarry, PayPal, Blacks Media Inc, Registered Agents Inc., Charles Fink, Roberta Leach and the Federal RICO Act.

Sunday Post. 10-23-2016

Hire Search Quarry  to do a background check and before you know it there are five other companies involved and Safe Cart will cheerfully deduct a$19.99 payment from your bank account  for the rest of your life.


Seems these days organized crime is everywhere from Washington to the smallest  town and from Wall Street to the smallest business. Organized crime is all about stealing money and transferring this stolen (dirty) money into money that can be spent as if its hard earned (gray money).  There’ s no shortage of corrupt politicians and business persons who will take actions to get this “gray money”. The internet presents opportunities for criminal activity that is available to anyone with a computer.

But what about dishonest internet companies that slip through the cracks?  What about internet companies that operate with several partner companies to steal your money without the target realizing that it has happened?  What about companies who keep their owners identity hidden behind the veil of other companies?

US Federal law says that if more than one company, or person is involved in  illegal activities, the activities are a violation of the United States Federal RICO Act.(Organized Crime Act.)

Codefore Publishing had a situation as described above. The people at  Codefore Publishing are investigative journalists, and publish works in book form or internet news outlets.

Obtaining criminal background checks  resumes and  employment histories are prudent and a routine when producing articles based on facts.  Codefore Publishing became aware of many complaints on an internet company  who provides background checks. The company. ‘Search Quarry’ is one of many who have business practices similar to many other so called background checkers except for one sly illegal practice.

The information that caused the interest of Codefore Publishing  in Search Quarry was that some of the customers complained of bank account withdrawals  for services that were not ordered or purchased and that there were two other companies , involved in the transactions.  Paypal and Safe Cart.

Codefore Publishing went to the Search Quarry web site and paid for a background check using a Paypal account.  The purchase was for one criminal history and the onetime fee of $2.50 was charged and withdrawn from the Paypal account.   Although the criminal history provided by Search Quarry was not as complete as is typical from other criminal history searches provided to  Codefore, albeit there was a history provided.


A month later there were two withdrawals from the Codefore Publishing bank account for  19.99 each totaling 39.98 from Paypal. A quick telephone call to Paypal revealed that a company called Safe Cart had invoiced Codefore .

We at Codefore had never heard of Safe Cart .  Paypal explained that Safe Cart had set up a re-occurring $19.98 monthly withdrawal from the Codefore Paypal account and in turn Paypal removed the cash  from the Codefore bank account..  Upon request  PayPal removed all future monthly  payments to SafeCart but Paypal did not have any information as to who Safe Cart was representing.  After a telephone call to Safe Cart a  representative told me that Codefore had made a  purchase from Search Quarry and that Search Quarry had indicated the purchase was for a perpetual monthly $19.98.

Having investigated organized crime allegations before, we at Codefore Publishing know a money laundering scheme when we see one. Further investigation would be prudent.

Codefore’s investigations always begin with background checks on all persons in situations such as this and we began with Search Quarry.


Who and what is Search Quarry?  Like most criminal enterprises the people involved in alleged criminal activity do not want their identity revealed ,for obvious reasons. Utilizing our regular search tools we learned that the Search Quarry.com domain is owned by Charles Fink  and is associated with Search Quarry LLC. a Nevada Limited Liability Corporation.  The registered agent for Search Quarry LLC  is  Registered Agents Inc.  another Nevada  Corporation. The Managing Agent for Search Quarry LLC is Blacks Media Inc.  A look at the ‘Blacks Media Inc”.web site, BlacksMedia.net has absolutely no contact names. They also have a blog. http://blacksmedia.net/blog/ The site says that they are a media company specializing in Paid Search Engine Marketing

Blacks Media Inc. Is a  California corporation.  CA#C3354251. The registered agent is Charles Fink, 2911 State St. Suite 0 Carlsbad CA   and is affiliated with Criminalrecordsau.com  Also at the Carlsbad address is Carol Fink, Charles Leroy Fink, Charles L Fink Jr.

Mr. Charles Fink has succeeded in keeping out of the internet  lime light and  for now its not necessary to know more about him.

Safe Cart was a little more difficult to get information. We at Codefore have  some pretty good IT people and when they opened the Safe Cart Web page HTML we discovered that  Safe Cart is affiliated with Revenue Wire Inc.  a Canadian Company. There is an inactive United States business named  Revenue Wire in the State of Washington. The registered agent is Mercedes Mejia, 33530 1st way S.Suite 102, Federal Way, WA. Inactive means the license to do business in Washington has expired.

SafeCart advertises over a billion of online sales and  operates in over 200 countries but says nothing about any affiliates.

During our aforementioned telephone call to Safe Cart  the young man who answered the phone was familiar with our type of problem and verified that it was Search Quarry that initiated the charges. He was happy to help and reversed our charges. He said that the double charge of $29.98 would be deposited back into my Paypal account. It seemed as if Safe Cart was a part of Search Quarry and this Safe Cart person did not need to verify our information or even speak to a supervisor. He said that Search Quarry’s procedure is to automatically begin monthly deductions unless they are told not to, and advised us that we might want to call Search Quarry  to make sure they don’t  deduct the money again.  This young man did not know who owns Safe Cart.  It appears that the Search Quarry business plan is to throw as much S…t on the wall and keep what sticks.  Search Quarry knows that  the name ‘Search Quarry’ is not indicated on the customer’s  bank statement. This appears like intentional deception because when they “over bill” and the original billing sources is not indicated on the victims bank account, its difficult to dispute the charge..  Hence Safe Cart and Pay Pal  are thrown into the mix. How many people would take the time to find out who Safe Cart is and why they took money from a bank account?  Search Quarry knows that some customers will just ignore the charge every month.  At the very least, this is deceptive business practices, but the fact that unauthorized money is taken from a bank account until the consumer makes an effort to stop it is stealing just as if a bank robber goes into a bank, robs the bank and when caught says, “They didn’t tell me I could not take the money.”

As professional investigative journalists we know that sometimes to track an animal, what isn’t obvious is just as important as the obvious track you follow.  We know that people hide their identity for a reason and in the realm of businesses, hiding identity is usually not a sign of transparency and many times can be an indication of crime.

Who is Revenue Wire?

Revenue Wire, who actually owns Safe Cart is also culpable in any illegal actions by Safe Cart.  Revenue Wire is responsible for the Safe Cart business plan , operations and no doubt taxes.   But more sinister than that, if you are a customer looking for a responsible entity or person for Safe Cart, you will find it hard to locate a connection to anyone unless you visit the Revenue Wire Web site where Safe Cart is touted as a part of the Revenue Wire organization.  But how would a customer with a complaint against Search Quarry or Safe Cart know that the parent company of Safe Cart is Revenue Wire?  It’s as if Revenue Wire has decided that the “Buck” for any problems or issues or in any  investigation stops at Safe Cart and to do this, they have an internet “Arms Length”  connection with Safe Cart.  This is not an actual concealment but just as Search Quarry and Safe Cart are not shown on the victims Paypal bank withdrawal neither is Revenue Wire and Revenue Wire is not  publicly connected in any of the transactions that originate from Search Quarry albeit Revenue Wire and Safe Cart  gets their share of the money collected.


As we stated, we couldn’t find any proprietor names searching Safe Cart until we went into the HTML on their web site.  Its there that we saw the name Revenuewire.com.

There is an inactive business named  Revenuewire in the United States in the State of Washington. The registered agent is Mercedes Mejia, 33530 1st way S.Suite 102, Federal Way, WA. Revenue Wire is a Canadian Company, and searching Canadian records is very difficult. To date using all of the available Canadian official search sites, no company named Revenue Wire, or Revenue Wire Inc. is indicated as an active Canadian company.  Its interesting that Revenue Wire claims to be a Canadian company, yet Codefore Publishing has yet to find a record of Revenue Wire and Revenue Wire claims to have an office in the United States, but the only location that Codefore Publishing could find is the State of Washington and that business license is inactive.

 Revenue Wire has an attractive web site.  It is on this site where they list Safe Cart as one of their affiliates.  The Revenue Wire web site says:

Revenue Wire Inc. an affiliate marketing company operates an e-commerce platform to online businesses for  selling digital and software products. It offers Safe Cart a converting shopping cart for generating sales in various  languages and currencies. The company also engages in the promotion of software products and digital offers in   the industry.  It serves online marketers around the world.”

The company was founded in 2007 and is based in Victoria Canada.  1205-4464 Markham St. Vancouver Island Technology Park Victoria, BC V8Z7X8  Canada. 250-590-2273. The following persons are listed on the web site as corporate officers.

Ms. Bobbi Leach (Roberta Leach)  CEO

Mr. William Ng. VP of Finance

Ms. Kim Krenzler VP Human resources

Ms. Sue Connors VP Business Development

Mr. Trevor Wingert Director of Development.

We did some research on Bobbi  (Roberta) Leach.  (Her published resume says that she worked for Proto Link (soft ware development) and El Group International (Website design company).  She also claims to have attended Athabasca University.   Athabasca is Canada’s only Canada based on line university.  Athabasca is supported by the Canadian Government and is predicted to go Bankrupt next year.  It’s unknown if Roberta Leach actually graduated and with what degree.  Here is what one of the students at Athabasca writes about his experience.

Athabasca University Reviews:
Computing and Info Systems – September 7, 2016 
For an online course this is nothing less than a travesty in design. Read a mediocre FREE textbook,
do some random questions as two or three assignments, receive no feedback through all of this,
write an exam. Rinse and repeat. If you’re after learning, skip AU, buy a QUALITY textbook and find an on-line community to guide you through it. You will be better off (and have saved yourself $700). If you need that piece of paper saying you took a course, well, there are no other on-line options in Canada so suck it up and just accept that you’ll have to do this. It counts. You’ll learn SOMETHING. But, you’ll be left shaking your head. So far I’ve taken three courses and they’ve been getting worse and worse. COMP200 was acceptable though uninspired. COMP268 Java was mediocre, at best and COMP272 Data Structures (& Algorithms) was downright terrible. Don’t get me wrong. I’m a self-starter, capable of self-motivating even through the toughest and driest material. These courses are not exactly tough, but, they are beyond dry and designed to fail. To give you a sense of my background: I have a multiple non-trivial degrees and a decade of experience as a (well paid) professional. I’ve taken great (free) on-line courses in recent years. That was not the Athabasca experience. Essentially what the course “developer” did was take a textbook and turn the chapters into the course. It’s a money making operation. They paid some poor soul a pittance to copy the textbook chapters and borrow assignments from other universities (which they don’t update… plagiarism must be a HUGE problem with these AU courses). Many on-line and regular computer science courses have practice assignments whereby you run your programs through an on-line testing interface to confirm that what you’ve done is correct. You’d think that an on-line course would make extensive use of such an interface. No such luck. You can hand in non-functional programs at AU and get full credit for an assignment. You also can’t get feedback on practice programs. The course advisors simply don’t have time. The only thing they get paid for (poorly) is to mark items and occasionally respond to queries. Hard these courses are not. To be honest, I am shocked, truly shocked that these courses qualify as accredited. It wouldn’t surprise me in the least if an audit of these computer science courses (at least COMP 272 and 268) would rovolk their accreditation.

The fact that money is obtained by deception makes it a crime and the fact that there are more than two companies involved makes it a violation of the Federal RICO Act and the fact that these companies are transferring money internationally suggests the possiblity of numerous other Federal Crimes. 

Charles Fink, Search Quarry, Safe Cart, Blacks Media Inc,  Registered Agents Corp, Revenue Wire  and Paypal become RICO defined  Enterprises once the withdrawal  for charges that were not ordered occurs.   Search Quarry initiates the theft by charging a monthly fee for services not ordered, then gives the collection process to a “veil enterprise Safe Cart” who again transfers the illegal debt to Pay Pal who makes the actual bank withdrawal.  Albeit Pay Pal is probably an innocent company that is being  used for criminal purposes but  they cannot deny they are a part of the money chain.  Commercial Registered Agents Inc and Blacks Media Inc. participate in this organized crime by concealing the perpetrators actual identity. In doing so, these entities are RICO defined  ‘Enterprises’ and may be determined to be actually culpable in any and all crimes committed by the above listed companies.

Codefore Publishing is not going to try to initiate a Federal RICO Act violation investigation over $39.98 bank transaction but more investigation is certainly warranted.  We think that the best solution is to notify everyone via the internet about who and how these enterprises operate.

One must constantly beware of using credit cards or reveal bank information  to internet businesses.  To combat crooked retailers who sell defective products or products that don’t exist , actions have been taken protect the consumer. On line businesses like Amazon, Ebay, and many others have become large sellers of just about anything a consumer could want, from books to used clothing to that hard to find automobile part. And the items are usually sold for less than your local store. The problem purchasing items on the Web can be paying for the item via internet money exchange tools such as electronic transfers of money, credit cards etc:  It appears that Safe Cart has emerged as one of these money transfer companies. However in the Codefore Publishing case they are just a ‘middle man’.  This exposes the purchaser to fraud.  Purchasing and paying for your product involves a trust in your seller.  A trust that you will receive the product, in good condition and pay for the product in confidence that the payment terms and tools are secure and safe from those who would steal money from you.   There are no actual  guarantees that fraud will not happen to you.

Prudent Internet shopping can increase the odds that the veil of security surrounding your purchase has not been penetrated. Protecting your money requires shopping at commercial internet stores that have a good history of providing what they are selling and protecting their customers . A good indication of a reputable company is their transparency.  Many companies provide customer satisfaction reports for your review.

Ebay is a solid user of customer satisfaction reports, and in fact if a complaint of fraud is made to a Ebay about one of their sellers, Ebay will investigate and it there is a very good chance the customer will be refunded their money. Failure to return money for purchased items on Ebay can result in the sellers termination from Ebay. It should be noted that Ebay owns PayPal and another money transfer company Xoom.  All three are  reputable companies.

If your not sure of the company you  expect to purchase from, you can learn about past problems just by googling,  “XYZ company complaints.”   Some companies sell items and steal your money by not providing the item or using your credit card information to withdraw funds from your bank that were not agreed to.  Sometimes these companies simply close the doors and  start a new company when their complaints reach a point that their sales dwindle.  This is why transparency is so important.