Yes, you can own your very own judge!
The going rate for buying your very own a judge is estimated to be around $100,000 for serious crimes and $5,000 to $20,000 for lesser crimes. Source: Judiciary Report
Of course, typically you have to use a "Bagman" unless you know the judge personally and then of course you can ovoid the middleman cost. You may even be able to avoid a cash payment altogether with a simple “Quid pro quo” by doing some favor for the judge. Again the "favor" can range anywhere from some quick sex in the judges chambers to a great deal on his next house. Hopefully, either you or your lawyer are good looking! If not you may have to order out.
Typically, the "Bagman" is your lawyer but if you are connected politically you can use the local political party or the judges campaign committee to both act as a bagman and Money Laundry for the money.
Typically, "Money Laundering" is not a problem because a judge can burn through a typical bribe in cash in the form of cash gifts for family members, expensive wine and dinner or jewelry for a mistress etc. As a rule money laundering is only a problem when dealing with major drug dealers, or senior government officials and politicians like a congressman, senators, supreme court judge or president. Of course major drug cartels can't compare with money laundering by government officials through "Black Budgets" that include weapons, training and cash for foreigh officials who we have to bribe to behave. Clearly, the United States is the master of "Money Laundering". We can literally fly tractor trailer loads of cash to foreign dictators with the use of our military aircraft. Of course it can sometimes go sideways as with Ronald Reagan in the Iran - Contra Scandal.
Of course the cost of bribing a public official can range greatly depending on the official you are "buying". In a recent case in San Diego a California Highway Patrolman with a wife and five children was sent to prison for accepting bribes in the form of roadside sex in return for letting the ladies go free of a ticket. But in the case of California Congressman Randy “Duke” Cunningham, the cost of bribing him ran into the millions from defense contractors. Of course the payoff was insignificant compared to the price of the contracts awarded. So your cost will depend on several variables. If you are trying to avoid a DUI a little roadside sex might work but if you are trying to get a billion dollars in government contracts, it may cost you a couple million. Of course if you want to avoid a murder prosecution it might cost you as much as $100,000. Hell if you are a congressman or senator you can get a sodomy charge reduced to following too close.
I recall a friend telling me about one case that included all the elements of a great movie including: "Foreign Kidnapping", "Police Brutality" "Torture", "Conspiracy" "Government Fraud", "Extortion", "Military Contracts", "Judicial Bribery", "Perjury", "Aborted Suicide", and "Contrived False Media Reports".
This case involves an employee of a U.S. Defense Contractor. This employee had raised the issue of overtime being charged to the government under a defense contract and not paid to the employees. Not long after he raised this issue he was arrested by the police of that foreign country for a minor violation of a country custom that had been overlook on a regular basis in the past. Under normal circumstances he would have been released from custody in a matter of hours. In this case he was detained, tortured and threatened with a long jail sentence in that country. It was suspected that the Defense Contractor told the police he was a “troublemaker” and they used this as an opportunity to intimidate him and force his return to the US.
When he pleaded for help from the Defense Contractor, they said there was nothing they could do when in fact they clearly had the political resources, including a former U.S. Vice President on their Board of Directors. Although, action at this level would have never been necessary since they routinely handled this type of minor violation at the local level in that country. All companies have “fixers” in foreign countries. They are sometime called "Government Affairs Managers"
As soon as the employee was released he returned to the United States, thankful to be alive and out of that country. After returning to the United States he obtained an attorney and filed a lawsuit detailing his punishment which originated from his initial complaint about government contracting fraud and retaliation.
During the course of the legal “discovery process” he learned of a current employee in that company who was the “government affairs fixer” and could substantiate his claims involving their negligence or intentional failure to obtain his release from this foreign jail. Their motivation was believed to be punishment concerning his earlier complaint of contract fraud with regard to "overtime". That “fixer” received a subpoena to appear in court and testify concerning the companies abilities and failures to obtain the release of this employee. In fact, the company “fixer” who normally would have handled this type of problem was specifically told to “stay out of it” when he learned of the employees plight during the period in which the employee was in foreign custody and being subject to torture.
Prior to his appearance in court the company “fixer” was "Schooled" by the company lawyers and given a series of potential questions and “desired” responses on the companies behalf. Included in the suggested lies was the fact that he had specifically been told to “stay out of it” when he offered to obtain the release of the employee. In other words the company was coaxing the employee to commit "perjury". When the “fixer” advised the corporate attorneys he was not going to commit "perjury" and in fact tell the truth concerning the companies refusal of assistance in obtaining the release of the employee he was threatened with retaliation since his testimony was a critical component of this million dollar lawsuit raised by the employee. Of course the “fixer” told the truth and the company lost their lawsuit against that employee.
Shortly after his testimony the “fixer” was told that his position was being eliminated “by the military client” and after more than a decade of impeccable service his “position” was no longer needed by the "military client". Of course this employee had access to the current contract being negotiated and rather than his position being eliminated by the "military client", it was being extended and funds being proposed for the extended position. It was obvious that the “fixer” was being terminated for refusing to commit an illegal act (perjury) on behalf of the company. Under normal circumstances a company can fire an employee for any reason or no reason at all but you can not fire an employee for refusing to commit an illegal act. Of course the “fixer” got his own lawyer and brought a suit against the defense contractor. The jury had all of the facts including copies of the new defense contract proposal where they were proposing to charge the government for a position that they had earlier told the "fixer" was being eliminated by the military and was the reason for his termination when in fact the military was being told the "fixer" position was being extended under a new proposed contract. Clearly the contractor was lying to both the military and their employee. The facts were obvious and it was essentially an open and shut case so after days of testimony the jury of 12 citizens awarded the “fixer” a multi-million dollar verdict.
Now, one would think that this is a just ending to a case of a jury of 12 citizens who heard the facts, punished the defense contractor and compensated the “fixer” for his past and future loses as a result of “doing the right thing” and having the courage to testify truthfully in a case that involved another employee in a foreign country.
Wrong! This is where the a judge decided that honesty and exposing a defense contractor was not a good thing and also that since she was a "Republican Judge" up for re-election she had to do something to help the defense contractor and her career. Her solution was an “off the record” "back room deal" where she told the attorney representing the “fixer” that she was "not going to sign the judgment awarded by the jury" and essentially throw out the case and award the “fixer” nothing even though the jury had heard the facts and made their multi-million dollar award based on the facts and testimony from both sides. So the judge told both sides to go in the back room and try to come up with a settlement or she would throw out the entire jury award. Of course the attorneys for the defense contractor were ecstatic because they knew that now they could get off with pennies on the dollar or possibly nothing if the victim objected in this "off the record back room deal" and since the “fixer” had been fired and blackballed for suing his former employer and living off a depleted savings after two years he would have to accept any scrap they threw at him.
Of course the news media published a big article about a defense worker wining millions of dollars in a big court trial and the public never knew the truth that it was all a big lie published in the newspaper and the jury never suspected that a "Republican Judge" running for re-election had thrown out their verdict in order to promote her own career. Of course we don’t know who the “Bagman” was for the judge. Most likely it was the defense contractors lawyer which is typical. So the judge was protected because the “fixer” was required to sign a confidentiality agreement not disclosing how much he got or to tell the media that the article they had published about him receiving a jury award was false. “Technically”, the newspaper article was true in that the jury did award the “fixer” a multi-million dollar award but the fact that the judge threw it out in a back room deal and forced the "fixer" to settle for scraps was never reported.
Once the facts came out in court about fraud, the defense contractor lost their proposed defense contract. It's ironic that a "law and order" "Republican Judge" would protect the defense contractor in her court only to see them punished later by the military by denying their future contract based on evidence that came out in her court. Of course this didn't help the employee who had been victimized first by the defense contractor and then again by the "Republican Judge".
So the next time you hear about someone being victimized by a corporation and you hear that they won in court, you should also be aware that some judge was paid off to assure that the injured party was victimized twice. Once by the corporation and again in court by the United States Judicial System. The best judicial system money can buy!
Of course bribery can come in a lot of forms and involve more than just a payoff to a government official. It may involve a payment by a government official in the form of "access" to someone in the "News Media" for a favorable story. News Media live for their “access” to the people they cover including, military, courts, congress, police, intelligence. So the media can easily be bribed and corrupted by the threat of restricted “access”.
All of the major media outlets have “their” people in bed (sometimes literally) with the people they cover. Christiane Amanpour who was the Chief CNN International Correspondent while being married to James Rubin who had worked in the Clinton White House as diplomat a Senior Official in the State Department. Then you have Andrea Mitchell who is married to Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan. She just happens to be a reporter and have her own show on MSNBC. Of course if you are Mika Brzezinski and you want a "News" job on MSNBC it doesn't hurt to have a daddy who Zbigniew Brzezinski, former National Security Advisor. Then you have David Gregory of NBC who is married to Beth Wilkinson a former Fannie Mae Executive who left following the housing scandal to become the NBC White House Correspondent. These are only a few examples of how "access" can help develop the desired story line.
Of course the media likes a little truth in their reports but not if it involves their "issues". Just ask Keith Olbermann what the penalty is for turning the camera around going off the reservation. He was promptly replaced by Lawrence O’Donnell, Jr. who promptly went to work putting a happy face on the recent General Electric tax scandal. Of course General Electric is also a parent of MSNBC and a huge Defense Contractor which is why Lawrence is on board with sending hundreds of General Electric / Raytheon Cruise Missiles to Libya. War is good for General Electric. After all the government does have to buy more weapons to replace those fired. Lawrence is a team player and not likely to go off the reservation like Olbermann.
While Olbermann went off the Television Reservation, Rick Sanchez went off the Television Planet when he called Jon Stewart "bigot" and said that "CNN and the other networks are all run by Jewish people." It's one thing to use the "N" word like Dr. Laura who was given an opportunity to kiss and make up with Larry King, it's completely different when you use the "J" word in connection with controlling media as evidence by Sanchez immediate termination. In other words the CNN Executives said we will show you we don't control the media. We are going to fire a Hispanic for saying we do. Let me know how you squared that round peg.
So the next time you think that you are going to get an unbiased presentation of the facts you are simply living in a world of others who are equally naive. Just look at who pays them through advertising. This is simply a money laundering operation for propoganda. General Electric = MSNBC, Boeing and Prudential = NPR, Bank of America and Energy Tomorrow = CNN, Marathon Oil and Coal Energy = Weather Channel. So there you have all of "Corporate America" funding their own press agents posing as objective journalist.
So the next time you think that you are going to get an unbiased presentation of the facts you are simply living in a world of others who are equally naive. Just look at who pays them through advertising. This is simply a money laundering operation for propoganda. General Electric = MSNBC, Boeing and Prudential = NPR, Bank of America and Energy Tomorrow = CNN, Marathon Oil and Coal Energy = Weather Channel. So there you have all of "Corporate America" funding their own press agents posing as objective journalist.
Regardless if you are talking about Judges, Politicians, Police, Military, Media or Wall Street, they will all indignantly claim that they can’t be bought! Of course what they really mean is that while they can’t be "bought", but like any prostitute, they can be "rented".
It's like the old joke about the man who offered a woman a million dollars for one night of sex and of course she said YES!! Then he ask if she would take $20.00. She became very indignant and said "What do you think I am?" He explained that we have already established "what you are" now we just need to negotiate the price.
Justice like Power cost money!
