Don Mashak, The Cynical Patriot, Minnesota USA
NOTICE AND DEMAND
FOR THE
IMPEACHMENT
OF
JUDGE MARY YUNKER
AND THE
ARREST and PROSECUTION
OF
LAWYER LEE WOLFGRAM
PROLOGUE
 |
| MN Judge Mary Yunker |
According to the 1st Amendment, Citizens of the United States are guaranteed the right to Petition the Government for redress of grievances (without fear of reprisal).
In fact, the refusal of King George to hear and address the concerns and issues of the American Colonists was among the primary reasons for the American Revolution and is enshrined in the Declaration of Independence.
In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people. http://bit.ly/ruPE7z
This author has suffered unconstitutional retaliation for being one of the perceived leaders of the Judicial TAR Movement. This author has been involved in the Judicial TAR (Transparency, Accountability and Reform) movement for 20 years. However, it is only with the advent of internet and its inherent quality to allow us to find like minded persons and organize that the movement has had substantial impact. For 7 years the Minnesota House and Senate Judiciary Committees have refused to 100′s of Minnesotans to Petition those respective Committees with evidence and testimony of corruption in the Minnesota Judiciary.
Thank God for the Renegades
In Unconstitutional reprisal, the Minnesota Courts and Minnesota Legislature have conspired to fix a court case against this author in which he was the Plaintiff. It will be plain upon simple reading, that the Minnesota Courts departed from the Rule of Law and acted criminally in fixing this case against this author.
It is a common practice of our Government to destroy the leaders of political dissent and/or would-be champions of rank and file America:
FINAL REPORT OF THE
SELECT COMMITTEE TO STUDY GOVERNMENTAL OPERATIONS
WITH RESPECT TO INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES
UNITED STATES SENATE
From December 1963 until his death in 1968, Martin Luther King, Jr. was the target of an intensive campaign by the Federal Bureau of Investigation to “neutralize” him as an effective civil rights leader. In the words of the man in charge of the FBI’s “war” against Dr. King:
No holds were barred. We have used [similar] techniques against Soviet agents. [The same methods were] brought home against any organization against which we were targeted. We did not differentiate. This is a rough, tough business.
http://www.icdc.com/~paulwolf/cointelpro/churchfinalreportIIIb.htm
This same strategy was used against this author. And this voice of political dissent takes to heart the words of J. Edgar Hoover:
“The individual is handicapped by coming face-to-face with a conspiracy so monstrous he cannot believe it exists. The American mind simply has not come to a realization of the evil which has been introduced into our midst. It rejects even the assumption that human creatures could espouse a philosophy which must ultimately destroy all that is good and decent.”
J. Edgar Hoover Director of the FBI 1935-1972
This author leaves it to the reader to determine the following:
If you were subjected to the facts which follow, would you consider yourself just another “disgruntled loser” or the victim of a crime perpetrated by a systemically corrupt judiciary as unconstitutional reprisal for exercising your first amendment rights?
You can find this document in the original format that it was sent to almost all members of the entire Minnesota House and Senate here http://scr.bi/GZPLQ7 and here http://bit.ly/HogJpg
Without further delay:
KEY MEMBERS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA’S STATE HOUSE AND SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEES AND THE JUDICIARY OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA HAVE COLLUDED TO INFLICT UPON CITIZENS UNLAWFUL AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL REPRISAL FOR SIMPLY ATTEMPTING TO EXERCISE THEIR CONSTITUTIONAL, 1ST AMENDMENT RIGHT TO PETITION THE GOVERNMENT FOR REDRESS OF GREIVANCES(WITHOUT FEAR OF REPRISAL).
For about 20 years, Minnesota Citizen Don Mashak has sought Judicial Reform in the State of Minnesota. It was not until the advent of the Internet that Don Mashak had greater success finding and communicating with like minded individuals.
For 7 or more years, the Minnesota House and Senate Judiciary Committees have denied 100’s of Minnesota Citizens the Right to Petition the Government for Redress of Grievances. These 100’s of Minnesotans wanted to give testimony and evidence of corruption within the Minnesota Judiciary.
Pursuant to some alleged House and Senate rules the Chairs of those committees have absolute control of their agenda and refused to yield any committee time for these said 100’s of Minnesotans to give said testimony.
In frustration, in 2009 after 4 or more years of being denied their right Petition, these Minnesotans had a Ad Hoc Committee meeting, with no real power or effect, to evidence and memorialize the denial of their rights in this alleged Home of the free.
MN House and Senate Judiciary Committee members and the Minnesota Judiciary came to see Don Mashak as one of the perceived leaders of this group seeking Judicial TAR – Transparency, Accountability and Reform.
In the meantime, in early 2008, Don Mashak filed litigation as a Plaintiff against two former employees who, among other things, embezzled money, stole real and intellectual property from his business while he was on vacation.
At the direction or acquiescence of said Key members of the Minnesota House and Senate Judiciary Committees, Judge Mary Yunker and others did seek to inflict unlawful and unconstitutional reprisal upon Don Mashak by fixing the previously said litigation against Don Mashak.
AUTHORITY
Under the Minnesota Constitution the Minnesota State Legislature is responsible for the oversight and discipline of the Minnesota Judiciary. According to the US Judicature Society: “Judges may be impeached by a majority vote of the house of representatives and convicted by a two-thirds vote of the senate.”
Citizen Mashak will submit these documents to the Minnesota State House and Senate Majority and Minority leaders, as well as the Minnesota State Attorney General, Lori Swanson. This document is not directed to the MN House or Senate Judiciary Committees because, as previously noted, Key members of those committees either directed or were complicit with this illegal and unconstitutional reprisal inflicted on Citizen Mashak for merely attempting to exercise his right to Petition the Government.
EVIDENCE
While Petitioner Mashak has included a long list of “irregularities” that occurred in this litigation, Citizen Mashak will focus for now on only 4 of the irregularities as they are almost incontrovertible proof of the impeachable and illegal activities. The related case designations are 30-CV-09-429 and A11-638
UNLAWFUL AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL ACT ONE
Judge Yunker from denied any hearings, physical or telephonic, to Plaintiff Mashak and his attorney Wolfgram for 3 months from on or about 9/29/2010 to on or about 12/29/2010. Judge Yunker on September 29, 2010 set a Discovery and Dispositive Motion deadline of 12/17/2010.
Plaintiff Mashak’s own attorney Wolfgram assured Plaintiff Mashak that Judge Yunker would have to continue the discovery deadline because the Judge herself had refused to set any hearings before the 12/17/2010 deadline.
Despite not allowing any hearings between 09/29/2010 to 12/17/2010 to resolving Discovery disputes and motion practice, Judge Yunker on or about 12/29/2010 and on or about 1/9/2011 did deny all of Plaintiff Mashak’s Motions as “Untimely”.
Clearly, it is not consistent with the Rule of Law, nor with Plaintiffs’ unalienable Natural Law Right to Due Process, for Judge Yunker to prevent Discovery, Depositions, Motion Practice and Amending of the Complaint by not allowing any hearings for 3 months, and then only after the 12/17/2010 deadline the judge herself set, passed.
Clearly the act of refusing to set hearings for 3 months, refusing to extend the deadline that Judge Yunker had caused to be missed and then ruling Plaintiffs’ Motions untimely form the unshakable foundation for proceeding with impeachment.
This act was done in furtherance of a conspiracy to inflict reprisal upon Mashak for exercising his 1st Amendment Right to Petition the Government for redress of grievances.
UNLAWFUL AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL ACT TWO
Shortly after the last hearing in which adverse decisions were received, Plaintiff Mashak’s own attorney admitted the case had been fixed against Plaintiff Mashak… Among what was said in that conversation were words to the effect that they (meaning he and the court) had reduced me to the appearance of a “bumbling eccentric”
Clearly, the admission by Plaintiff’s own attorney Wolfgram that he had colluded with the Court to fix the case against Plaintiff Mashak is clear and convincing evidence of an unlawful act in the case of Wolfgram and an impeachable act by Judge Yunker.
At the very least, Plaintiff Mashak was fraudulently induced into paying Attorney Wolgram money with Lawyer Wolfgrams false representation that he would represent Plaintiff Mashak to the best of his ability and the Minnesota Judiciary’s and BAR’s fraudulent representation that Minnesota Lawyers are required to adhere to the Minnesota Lawyers’ Code of Professional Conduct.
This point for Judge Yunkers’ Impeachment is self evident.
This act was done in furtherance of a conspiracy to inflict reprisal upon Mashak for exercising his 1st Amendment Right to Petition the Government for redress of grievances.
UNLAWFUL AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL ACT THREE
When Judge Yunker and Attorney Wolfgram found out that Plaintiff Mashak was going to appeal, Judge Yunker and Attorney Wolfgram CONSPIRED TO OBSTRUCT JUSTICE and TAMPERED WITH EVIDIDENCE.
Before returning the client file, Attorney Wolfgram removed large amounts of documents from said client file. Said documents evidenced the reason Plaintiff Mashak should prevail, but more importantly to Lawyer Wolfgram and Judge Yunker, said documents evidenced their wrong doing.
Judge Yunker and/or her agents removed almost the identical documents from the Court file.
Plaintiff Mashak sought to replace the documents missing from the Client file with the copies from the Court file.
For weeks, Court personnel failed to return calls and/or stated they could not find the documents. Judge Yunker ignored calls, correspondence and motions seeking to recover said documents.
Finally, when the deadline for the appellate brief was almost upon Plaintiff, Plaintiff physically went to the Court house and was told, that the documents never existed.
Only when Plaintiff Mashak went to the Police Department did the allegedly “never existed” documents suddenly turn up in Judge Yunkers’ chambers.
Unfortunately, this was after the Appellate Court deadline.
Clearly, the removal of the documents from the client file by Lawyer Wolfgram and the Court file by Judge Yunker and/or agents of Judge Yunker in and of themselves are unlawful in the case of Wolfgram and an impeachable event by Judge Yunker.
The removal of the documents from both files demonstrates the conscience knowledge by Wolfgram and
Yunker that these documents were incriminating to both Lawyer Wolfgram and Judge Yunker. Lawyer
Wolfgram and Judge Yunker tampered with evidence by removing it to obstruct justice by removing documents that evidenced their guilt.
The fact that the documents missing from both files were almost identical is evidence of collusion and conspiracy.
Unlawful for both Wolfgram and Yunker, Impeachable for Yunker.
This act was done in furtherance of a conspiracy to inflict reprisal upon Mashak for exercising his 1st Amendment Right to Petition the Government for redress of grievances.
UNLAWFUL AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL ACT FOUR
Upon finally receiving the documents, Plaintiff Mashak did submit a brief and the documents describing what had happen and also motions to preserve is right to pursue his causes of action.
The Appellate Court said it did not need to consider those documents, because the un-amended Complaint before them did not merit paying much or any attention to the briefs, memorandum and the finally “found” documents.
In essence, the Minnesota Appellant Court aided and abetted Lawyer Wolfgram and Judge Yunker in their criminal conspiracy. They allowed Lawyer Wolfgram and Judge Yunker to benefit from the intent of their crime by refusing to consider the documents and related motion practice as was the intent of the Wolfgram/Yunker Criminal Conspiracy.
As the intent of the criminal conspiracy was to inflict unconstitutional reprisal upon Petitioner Mashak for openly criticizing the systemic corruption of the Minnesota Judiciary (Right to Petition for grievances) we now have before us the motive for the Minnesota Appellate Court aiding and abetting the Criminal Conspiracy of Wolfgram/Yunker.
This act was done in furtherance of a conspiracy to inflict reprisal upon Mashak for exercising his 1st Amendment Right to Petition the Government for redress of grievances.
ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE
Other persons have made similar complaints about Judge Yunker.
My understanding is that Paul Volkommer has a claim about to be heard by the Legislative Claims Commission.
I only know Mr. Volkommer after the fact of most of what happened to him at the hands of Judge Yunker.
We met at various Judicial TAR and TEA Party meetings.
My understanding is that in his case:
Mr. Volkommer was a founder the Baldwin Township fire department. Mr. Volkommer was elected to the township board. Mr. Volkommer discovered $80,000.00 illegally spent by Baldwin Township. Baldwin township Board Members advised him to shut up. Mr. Volkommer reported his findings to the State Auditor as required. The MN State Auditor agreed with Mr. Volkommer on about 90% of his concerns. The Sherburne County attorney refused to prosecute. The Baldwin Township illegally fired Mr. Volkommer from the Baldwin Fire Department for whistle blowing.
Mr. Volkommer sued over the illegal firing and on behalf of the citizens of Baldwin Township.
My understanding is that Mr. Volkommer experienced simulated litigation and fact shaping similar to that that Petitioner Mashak experienced.
More specific to my Demand for Impeachment Judge Yunker and the arrest and prosecution for my attorney Wolfgram is the following:
Mr. Volkommer alleges his own attorney “John Fabian” of Fabian, May and Anderson, PLLP did not represent him honestly, ethically and to the best of his ability.
In its secret unpublished Landmark decision Fabian, May and Anderson PLLP v Volkommer A10-1205, the Minnesota District, Appellate and Supreme Courts ruled that no Minnesota Attorney has the duty to treat their client(s) ethically [Minnesota Lawyers’ Code of Professional Conduct not an implied covenant of contract between Minnesota Lawyer and their client(s)]
There can be no doubt that with this ruling the Minnesota Courts have established that they are systemically corrupt.
FURTHER DEMAND
As a further demand, this Petitioner demands that the Minnesota Legislature immediately past legislation condemning Fabian v. Volkommer A10-1205 and reaffirming that all Minnesota Lawyers are subjected to a Code of ethics drafted and approved by the Minnesota Legislature.
Is it really the intent of this legislature to allow the courts and lawyers to ruthlessly take the money of Minnesota Citizens and not represent them ethically?
How many people are in jail already because there Public Defender threw there case to advance their career as a Government Prosecutor because they were not ethically bound to represent their clients to the best of ability.
CONCLUSION
THE EVIDENCE FOR IMPEACHMENT, ARREST AND PROSECUTION IS CLEAR AND CONVINCING
Judge Yunker cannot explain away three months of refusing to set hearings
Judge Yunker cannot explain away then ruling that various motions of Plaintiff were untimely
Judge Yunker and Lawyer Wolfgram cannot explain away how large amounts of almost identical documents were missing from the client file and the Court file.
Judge Yunker cannot explanin away why the allegedly missing documents were found in her chambers and then only after Plaintiff Mashak went to the police to file a police report.
Lawyer Wolfgram cannot give a legitimate reason why he waited until 7 days before the deadline to to serve Notice of Deposition nor why the Defense said they did not receive said Notice of Deposition.
FAILURE TO ACT WOULD DAMAGE THE LEGISLATURE’S OWN PUBLIC IMAGE
The Minnesota Legislature and Attorney General have no choice but to fully proceed with this Notice and Demand to Impeach, arrest and Prosecute.
To fail to do so, will establish that not only is the Minnesota Judiciary Systemically corrupt but so is the Minnesota Legislature.
RARE OPPORTUNITY
The Minnesota Legislature and Attorney General must seize upon this rare opportunity to crack down on corruption in the Minnesota Judiciary.
What Minnesota Citizen (other than a lawyer who would have to forfeit his career) has the knowledge and ability to draft this Notice and Demand and present the associated evidence in a clear and concise manner?
What other Minnesota Citizen would survive and keep their wits about them, to allow this corruption to be successfully
NEED FOR IMMEDIATE ACTION
This Petitioner is greatly concerned for his fellow citizens who have been savaged by the systemically corrupt courts of the state of Minnesota.
How many lives have been wrecked or destroyed by the whim of these corrupt judges and their confederates who protect their wrongdoings from being addressed and redressed?
This Petitioner is particularly concerned about those persons in jail who are actually innocent. The ones that are just their because a Public Defender sought to gain favor with the prosecution as a means of career advancement. A Public Defender who was not bound to treat their client ethically because of the absolutely evil ruling in Fabian v Volkommer A10-1205.
For 7 years, hundred of Minnesotans have been denied the 1st Amendment Right to Petition for redress of grievances by giving testimony and evidence of corruption in the Minnesota Judiciary.
None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free!
Johann Wolfgang Von Goethe
This Petitioner will refuse to hear excuses of lack of time and lack of notice. The Minnesota House and Senate Judiciary Committees have actively stalled this Judicial TAR Movement for 7 years. No more stalling. (As an aside, as a result of the stress this Petitioner has and continues to endure at the hands of Minnesota’s corrupt court, his health is rapidly declining. Petitioner would like to see resolution of this matter before he is dead.)
Finally, this is the opportunity for all Minnesota Legislators to demonstrate whether they are on the side of the corrupt status quo or WE THE PEOPLE.
If this Legislature fails to act in a manner to overwhelm the evil of the systemically corrupt Minnesota Courts, know they this:
“No amount of handshaking, baby kissing and/or welfare handouts will relieve the Citizens of the Minnesota of the knowledge that each and every Legislator is as evil and systemically corrupt as the Minnesota Judiciary.”
Myself and others look forward to the opportunity to meet with each of you and to give testimony before the entire Minnesota Legislature.
The long list of irregularities appears after the signature.
The incomplete list of publications where the progress on this matter will be reported will be found after the list of irregularities.
Further this Petitioner sayeth not:
Those were my thoughts.
In liberty
Don Mashak 3/19/2012
The Cynical Patriot 612-326-6070
Rt 1 Box 231 Albertville MN 55301
Short list of Person sent to:
MN Senate Minority Leader NO REAL EMAIL Thomas Bakk fax 651-225-7572
Republican Caucus fax 651-296-5378
Democrat Caucus fax 651-296-9411
MN AG Lori Swanson fax 651-282-5700
Cc: All MN legislators w/ real email addresses
Tweet
2 Comments
TEST
This is a test
Ya cant even recommend this. From a fellow Minnesotan
what gives?