More Lies from The SPOTLIGHT — June 29, 2001
Bankruptcy courts in the United States are, and have long been, notorious for the degree of corruption generated therein and consequent lives destroyed.
Researchers such as Sherman Skolnick (www.skolnicksreport.com on the Internet) and Robert S. Palmer, who can be found on the Internet using a search engine, have exposed these courts of “bankruptcy professionals” — lawyers all — as “rings and cliques” which are a law unto themselves.
They have actually been assigned executive duties as well as their judicial duties — clearly a constitutional violation granted by our lawyer-heavy Congress but not understood by the people at large.
In 1991, Rep. Jack Brooks (D-Tex.) while chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, said the bankruptcy system is corrupt and should be avoided by any debtor who still has assets because trustees hire lawyers and accountants, with whom they collude to bleed estates. He could not see how they could do what they do in “good conscience,” but he let bankruptcy judges off the hook saying they are “too busy” to see the actual results of their decisions.
No lawyer has sought to invalidate a bankruptcy law that allows bankruptcy professionals, rings and cliques, to victimize debtors and creditors. The law grants impunity to judges and lawyers who commit white-collar crime under the color of law … Lawyers readily abnegate their oaths to uphold the Constitution and sweep judicial crime under the rug. Lawyers who cover up the conduct of a corrupt judge are also put above the law by lawyer-judges, lawyer-prosecutors and lawyer-legislators.
Across the nation bankruptcy rings and cliques are denounced for consuming the assets of estates. The public view that judges and lawyers act in collusion is alarming, but true. Judges are above the law because they are not accountable to a countervailing authority.
Ironically, the corruption of bankruptcy courts is almost always aimed at hiding corporate assets to the loss of the individual, the small creditor whose business survival may depend on gaining unpaid money due for some product turned over or service performed for the bankrupting corporation.
Once again, Liberty Lobby is the exception.
The purpose apparent in court decisions involving Liberty Lobby, both before and after being forced into bankruptcy, is to make certain that Liberty Lobby is left with no assets, no means to continue to serve the American public with truths they can find nowhere else.
Contrary to the theoretical purpose of bankruptcy court — to allow a business, a family or an individual to regroup and gain a new business life, to stem the hemorrhaging of cash so that creditors would eventually be paid — in Liberty Lobby’s case bankruptcy was first made the only alternative to being immediately put out of business. Then, once in the system, bankruptcy was used as a means, an impossible to pay “squeeze” for the purpose of destroying the First Amendment free speech guarantee of Liberty Lobby, to silence the last effective voice of truth open to the American public.