From Janet Phelan–US to start rationing medicare–dont they do that already?

Interesting article

My only question is dont they do that already? I mean, Sylvia Rudek had a great case against humana medicare and they got the federal court judge to dimiss that, correct?

And this biog and others report that health care in Illinois and the US is about 70% fraud, so is anyone surprised they are now admitting a direct method to ration?

They’ve been doing it for years in a variety of underhanded ways.

I don’t think it necessary to Applaud them for finally telling the truth

From Rockford, Illinois, a police chief does the right thing to prevent violence and harm to blacks, and HE is prosecuted.

Because this police officer has helped many to prevent violence, diffuse difficult situations and prevent harm to innocent black families, he is now being proscuted and persecuted by the union.

Please pray for him and his family that justice may be done.  This man is selfless and has done much to help so many people.

Please leave as many good comments as you can for this very good man who helps others and cares about his job.

From Janet Phelan–what statutory authority in Cal. permits the AG and IAG to exclude probate cases from investigations for criminal activities?

From: Janet Phelan <>
Sent: Jan 26, 2015 4:25 PM
To: JoAnne M Denison <>, “” <>, Janet Phelan <>
Subject: JoAnne….

JoAnne, can you publish this?


My contact with Kamala Harris’s office was relevant to bundled reports that were sent into that office a few years back by one Marilyn Peters, documenting criminal activity by professional guardians in California. As Harris’s office stated that she doesn’t “do probate,” I requested the legal authority under which the Attorney General for California is allowed to ignore criminal activity by professional guardians.
Sending me a letter issued in 2007 does not address my request to your office.
On the phone a couple of minutes ago, you told me that your office was declining to answer that question. As it is my understanding that there is no legal authority which allows you to ignore these complaints—and you continue to ignore these complaints– I am letting you know that Ms. Harris is in violation of her job description and oath and that this will be widely reported.
I believe your office was informed of the fact that local police are acting as heinously as is your office regarding these matters.  If you refuse to do your job and to protect residents of California from predators and thieves, then you will need to understand that your lack of accountability can and will be made an issue in the press.
I am giving you one more opportunity to reply to the question: Under what legal authority is AG Harris ignoring these complaints?
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Janet Phelan
New Eastern Outlook

From: PIU <>
To: “” <>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2015 3:56 PM
Subject: Melodie Scott et al. / PIU 186052

Dear Ms. Phelan:
Thank you for your follow-up call of January 26, 2015. Pursuant to your request, a copy of our Office’s March 6, 2007 response to you is attached.
As we discussed, if you have information about a crime, please file a report with the police or sheriff’s department in the area where the crime occurred. Local law enforcement authorities are responsible for investigating violations of law within their jurisdictions. After investigating the crime, the local law enforcement authorities may forward the case to the county district attorney’s office for prosecution, if appropriate. The decision whether or not to file criminal charges will then be made by the locally elected district attorney.
If you wish to report misconduct by a professional fiduciary, please contact the Professional Fiduciaries Bureau at  We acknowledge your concern about how the Professional Fiduciaries Bureau has handled your prior complaint, however we are unable to assist or comment on this matter. The Attorney General’s Office is required by law to provide legal representation to state agencies in disputes arising out of their actions. This duty precludes the Attorney General from representing individual citizens in their disagreements with state agencies or providing advice to any individual regarding the disputed activity. While the Attorney General represents state departments in legal matters, she does not seek to impose her own policy judgments or control the administration of the business of her client agencies.
Lastly, we recommend that you consult with an attorney to determine any civil remedies that may be available to you. An attorney would directly represent your interests and is the one whose advice would be most helpful to you. You may obtain a referral to a private attorney by contacting the San Bernardino County Bar Association at
Thank you again for contacting our Office.
Melissa Weikel, Manager
Office of the Attorney General
Public Inquiry Unit

Press Release from Tim Lahrman that Fannie Mae is in receivership…..

and that means a good defense to many of you embroiled in Foreclosures since if a bank sold a mortgage to Fannie Mae and Fannie Mae is in receivership, that means the servicing agent must get the permission of the receiver to file and prosecute a foreclosure, which is never done, at least to my knowledge.

So, don’t be shy and explore this option with your foreclosure attorney if you are in foreclosure.

January 22, 2015
Elkhart County Indiana: A WARD’S LAMENT
A ‘ward’ is a person or entity who has, like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, been placed under conservatorship/guardianship, and in a clash of two opposing wardships an Indiana resident under guardianship has sued Fannie Mae who is under conservatorship of the Federal Housing Finance Agency.
On January 20, 2015, Indiana resident Tim Lahrman filed a federal lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Indiana against the State of Indiana and two Elkhart County Indiana courts for disability discrimination under Title II of the Americans’ With Disabilities Act 1990, and under Count II of the lawsuit Lahrman named Fannie Mae and others for violations of the Fair Housing Act and for engaging in an overt and agreed upon scheme of predatory and discriminatory housing practices designed toward “equity stripping” Lahrman and his companion as American homeowners.
Filed under case no. 3:15-cv-026, the very fact that one ward under guardianship has sued another ward under conservatorship is in and of itself a certain legal rarity but now add to this the fact that Fannie Mae is the defendant and this case has got to qualify as one worthy of keeping an eye on. According to Lahrman, “[A]side of the value of our individual wardship estates, there is simply no rational basis for distinguishing between my wardship from the wardship of Fannie Mae, and if Fannie Mae and its agents can come to the local court to try and take my home, I surely have the same right to come to court to defend my home from the predatory and discriminatory housing practices that are stripping my companion and I of our equity and the continued enjoyment of our fair housing opportunity.” According to Lahrman he has reached out to US Senator Elizabeth Warren who has been critical of the way in which American homeowners’ have been treated by the FHFA conservatorship of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and at the time of this report Lahrman is waiting to hear back from the Senator’s Office in Washington D.C.
Lahrman, who is a nearly thirty year disability rights advocate and among the nation’s leading advocates for reform and accountability in conservatorship/guardianship practices across the country, says he forewarned and alerted both the FHFA conservator and the FHFA Office of Inspector General that Fannie Mae was going to be sued if they did not “put a leash on their dog” GMAC Mortgage LLC and as it is the laments of Lahrman fell on deaf ears at the FHFA and in due course Lahrman filed suit wherein and among other claims, Lahrman alleges that Fannie Mae and its contract mortgage servicers are in fact a nuisance to both Lahrman and the public at large. According to Lahrman, “I lost one corporation, millions of dollars and my two sons to a guardianship years ago, and I’ll be damned if I am going to lose my home to this conservatorship of Fannie Mae who is playing fast and loose with the local courts.” Lahrman, who is likewise a twenty-plus year paralegal says he is working with his local county officials and encouraging them to join the Fair Housing Act lawsuit because Elkhart County Indiana – RV capital of the world – was among the “Hardest Hit” regions in the county during the housing and economic collapse which precipitated the conservatorship of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
For more information contact:

From Texas–changes to the guardianship laws

First the story:

Now the most interesting quote:

A stream of witnesses told emotional guardianship horror stories alleging total disregard of any due process by the courts, denial of access to loved ones and expensive legal battles stemming from

questionable court actions.

While apparently the law did not pass, apparently there is much, much malcontent down in Texas on guardianship issues.  From the comments I get, it is the same here.  Illinois has a great law, the Illinois Probate Act, but for some Judges and court connected attorneys and agencies, it is in pristine condition, because apparently it is little used and quoted in the Illinois courtrooms.

Ruby Peterson–3rd Amended Complaint for an Injunction

From Candice Schwager in Texas, some great ideas for an injunction against harming disableds by targeting them, forcing them to live in a nursing home and then selling assets to pay court connected attorneys fees and nursing home fees, draining the estate and then plan of final demise via drugs and despondency:

From Tom Fields — How the authorities in Australia are using the court system to limit damages to court abuse victims

Abuse compensation priority for commission

By Australian Associated Press

Published: 18:44 EST, 22 January 2015  | Updated: 18:44 EST, 22 January 2015

I think everyone can see the interesting parallels between cutting even modest damages paid to court abuse victims and church sexual abuse victims when the government wants to limit claims when they put kids in abusive state run facilities, and when the church has had abusive contact with children.

Both are seriously and ethically morally reprehensible and wrong.