Archives

bookmark_borderCertified Mail

Posted on

So I sent the following missive by Certified Mail to Joseph Howard Esq. (on September 19, 2025)

Dear Joe,
On August 21, 2025 I sent you the attached missive regarding e-mails in my case file and you ignored that missive. On September 4, 2025 I filed the attached complaint with your counsel for discipline.
Since you failed to comply with my previous limited request, I now formally request a complete copy of my file (a digital production is preferred – mailed to me on a Memory Stick if it is over 25MB, as that is the limit of e-mail attachments on my server) regarding Case No. 8:13CR108 including: all emails, electronic communications, correspondence, notes, drafts, memoranda, and any other documents or records relating to my case, whether exchanged with me, third parties, opposing counsels (especially Keith A. Becker) or internally with you team.
This request is made pursuant to Nebraska Ethics Advisory Opinion for Lawyers No. 01-3, which clearly states that I’m entitled to the requested files. Therefore, please provide the requested files in digital format within 15 business days of the certified receipt of this letter.
Thank you for your prompt response to this certified letter.

And now I await a reply…

Update: USPS States: Your item was delivered to the front desk, reception area, or mail room at 1:38 pm on September 23, 2025 in OMAHA, NE 68102. Therefore, Joe’s response is due October 14, 2025.

bookmark_borderGoogle AI Thinks Joe Howard is Guilty

Posted on

Google’s AI says: An attorney who ignores a client’s demand to prepare for trial and instead negotiates a conditional plea agreement violates several American Bar Association (ABA) Model Rules of Professional Conduct. The core violations stem from disregarding the client’s authority over the objectives of the representation, failing to communicate adequately, and failing to act with reasonable diligence.

Google’s AI also says: A defense attorney who allows a defense expert to lie in a report to the court violates several ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct, primarily Rule 3.3: Candor Toward the Tribunal. This rule prohibits knowingly offering false evidence and requires lawyers to take reasonable remedial measures, including disclosure to the court, upon discovering false evidence. The attorney also violates the general prohibition against dishonesty and misrepresentation, as well as the obligation to represent their client competently and diligently without engaging in fraudulent conduct.

Joe Howard is in possession of e-mails (or should be) from July 30, 2015 that tell him in no uncertain terms that he was not to negotiate a plea deal and instead prepare for trial (As the previous Post’s PDF alludes too).

I’m in possession of documents that prove Joe knew, or should have known the shill’s 2015 report was full of lies…

Got an e-mail into Megan E. Lutz-Priefert, hopefully she will respond so I can get her thoughts on this “new” information (she was my §2255 lawyer back in 2018).

bookmark_borderWhoop, There it is!

Posted on

During the day on July 30, 2015 Joe Howard was e-mailing me trying to persuade me to allow him to enter into plea negotiations with POS Becker. I denied all his requests in writing (via e-mails) ordering him to prepare for trial. As my previous post today explained, his disobeying my order violates many ABA rules. Thus, that’s likely why he won’t produce them.

It’s in that context that you can understand this brief selection of e-mails provided by the NY Public Defender’s office. While reading the second page of the pdf, keep in mind Howard knows he did not have permission to negotiate and obtain the “Petition to Plead Guilty” under discussion. Damning, No?

July-30-2015

bookmark_borderI Knew It

Posted on

I knew it but couldn’t prove it then (2015). See PDF:

I-knew-it

Shockingly, William Laubenheimer, died recently (RIP) so I can’t ask him to opine on the recent revelations. This is one instance where I think his demise was simple coincidence, thus the exception to my “rule” of not believing in coincidences. Regardless, with the limited information I had at the time (2015), I made a compelling argument that Ashely’s team was lying. As a consequence of Joe Howard’s refusal to comply with my e-mail demands, we can now conclude he was a part of Becker’s railroading conspiracy…

Let’s break it down. The NY Public defender’s office confirmed that I’m entitled to my case e-mails by complying with my request to turn them over (even though some e-mails appear to be missing, probably deleted on purpose — Whether that purpose was benevolent or nefarious will probably never be known).

Without knowing the exact mechanism of my railroading in 2015, the above pdf shows that I had a specific idea of what actually occurred when I declared that: “All these facts indicate that the visits never happened… or occurred inside a hidden iframe…”

When you google: “What ABA rules are violated when a defense attorney ignores his clients demand to prepare for trial and instead negotiates a conditional plea agreement?” Google will return a lengthly list of potential violations, thus explaining Joe Howard’s refusal to produce the requested e-mails. Especially since the chain of e-mails exchanged on July 30, 2015 prove he violated those ABA rules!

On September 4, 2025 I sent the Nebraska Counsel for Discipline a complaint about Howard’s failure to comply with my request for those incriminating e-mails. I await their reply…

bookmark_borderCode Explanation

Posted on

I realize that most of my readers may not understand the code shown in the shills 2016 report. Here is a brief breakdown. Figure 3 shows that gallery.php loaded with a query string. As the link explains a query string is a part of a URL that contains data and parameters to be passed to a web server. So as you can see in Figure 3, gallery.php is loaded with a query string setting parameters “b” to “girls” “t” to “1481” and “u” to /girls/res/1481.html” (the percent sign and the number two represent the /).

Now look at Figure 4, you’ll see $request_uri = isset($_GET[‘u’]) that code falsified the request_uri displayed on Figure 12. Now look at columns “request_uri” and “request_headers” (that fills the rest of the figure”). You’ll see the Referers are the same page as the request_uri. That occurs because the request_uri is falsified by the query strings!

In other words they (the FBI) were also falsifying the actual referring page! (The referring page is the page your browser was on before the current page: request_uri). See how that’s a HUGE problem? Your previous page could have been anywhere. For example, say you’re on a legal website using TOR, that sight could send you to TB2 in a hidden iframe without your knowledge. Then the above code would scrub that information from the table and make it look like you reloaded the page from a link on that page, for Figure 3, 1481.html.

Bottom line, this code is proof of fraud and criminal fabrication of evidence. Also note that I’ve been pointing out that Tinyboard doesn’t have a visitors table since June 2015, so all the government’s NIT evidence was inadmissible from the boot. The Shills knew that and helped Becker conceal it. Thus, I WAS RAILROADED!

bookmark_borderConspiracy Confirmed

Posted on

So, to my surprise, I received a large envelope on Friday September 12, 2025. This envelope contained the response to a letter I sent to the NY Public Defender’s Office On September 4, 2025 where I requested “all e-mails regarding [my case] between this office (e.g Steven Slawinski) and Joe Gross, Joe Howard, Gerry Grant, Ashley Podhradsky, Matt Miller, Josh Stroschein, Keith Becker & Michael Norris from April 2013 until December 2016.”

Not to my surprise, Joe Howard (my Nebraska Defense Counsel) has ignored a similar letter. Here are the relevant parts to give you context:

Beginning in May, the DOJ began releasing pages in response to my FOIA action. Some of those pages contain bombshell information never disclosed before. As you know, I refer to Ashley Podhradsky’s team as government shills; because, I knew that they were colluding with Becker to railroad me. Now, I finally have proof and that you were aware of this fact since June 2015.
As you can confirm from the attached pages, the shills were in direct contact with Becker, a non-expert, answering “questions posed by the FBI team” – WTF?
Anyway, as you know, direct communication is not allowed because Becker (or the FBI) could have (and apparently did) influence my experts to help railroad me. Peculiarly, their May 2015 communications with Becker were (intentionally?) omitted from the FOIA page dump. I eagerly await the Vaughn Index to see their justification for withholding them. I know they exist because the shills reference them in their misleading/false 2015 report – note that they totally impeached their 2015 report in 2016.
Regardless, since you clearly had the un-redacted version of the enclosed e-mails, I’d like to formally request that you send them to me (since they’re technically apart of my case file, so I’m entitled) and every other e-mail you have in your possession regarding Becker and the shills.

With that information you can digest the following PDF:

June-25-2015

Ashley begins lying from the jump on page two, the NIT has been adjudicated as hacking software, specifically malware. On page three she continues lying to every question per her own report (Authored for a conference in 2016 after her team helped railroad me). For example, her lies on page 3 are totally exposed by the objective truth revealed for the first time on page 4 of her 2016 report, where you’ll see the NIT was run in a hidden iframe (Figure 3) and the session_id was fake (Figure 4):

Shills-Final-NIT-Report

When you knowledgeably compare the two posted PDF’s you must agree that the conspiracy has been confirmed. Now I’m in a huge fight to get redacted pages un-redacted, pages withheld released & forcing Joe Howard to produce his conspiratorial e-mails!

bookmark_borderSCOTUS Approves – Show Me Your Papers!

Posted on

Yet again, here is another example of the Supreme Court’s dangerous and cowardly use of the shadow docket (in the words of Jerry Nadler), this time they used it to authorize an American Gestapo.

As the linked article explains, Gestapos have these characteristics:

  • they’re a police force targeting political opponents and dissidents
  • they’re not controlled by other security agencies and answer directly to the dictator
  • the identity of their members and their operations are secret
  • they specialise in political intelligence and surveillance operations
  • they carry out arbitrary searches, arrests, interrogations, indefinite detentions, disappearances and torture.

ICE currently is exhibiting those characteristics, looks like Tim Walz was right…

bookmark_borderA Smoking Gun

Posted on

Below is direct evidence of Collusion between Keith A. Becker and the Shills (Ashley Podhradsky, Matt Miller & Josh Stroschein). The FOIA dump is missing their May 2015 correspondence (I’m litigating) and probably others, but these pages prove that my experts were in direct “conspiratorial” contact with Becker a non-expert. I wonder what’s redacted, because most of the four pages are blacked out. LOL, typical government coverup/corruption. See for yourself:

Colluison

bookmark_borderWelcome to Police State USA

Posted on

Eric A. Johnson has explained that: most Germans may not even have realized until very late in the war, if ever, that they were living in a vile dictatorship. In other words, ordinary Germans looked the other way when Jews were being rounded up and murdered. Therefore, they abetted one of the greatest crimes of the 20th century – not through active collaboration but through passivity, denial and indifference.

Now, much like 1930’s Germans, Americans have become passive, factionally polarized (and indifferent to those outside their faction) and willfully ignorant. “We” are increasingly distracted by entertainment, partisan politics and consuming media that doesn’t challenge our beliefs. Therefore, we are complicit in creating a police state similar to Nazi Germany.

bookmark_borderFOIA Update August 2025

Posted on

The Court issued it’s ruling, the deadline has been moved to November 26, 2025… Typical! Now I await the Vaughn Index for their BS as to why they have withheld 3000+ pages and their BS “declaration” as to why they heavily redacted the 200+ released pages. Today I’m filing a motion to get those two things before the November deadline so that I can argue against everything they claim. For example, I’ll argue that all Exemption 7 claims are invalid do to them not meeting the foreseeable harm standard.

As you can see for yourself in the PDF below, they’ve redacted a lot of information, (under exemption 7 – shown in the documents as (b)(7)(*) – the * is whatever specific exemption 7 claim they’re making) that you can glean from other sources or other public documents thus it’s redacted illegally. As I pointed out previously, this FBI communication is a “smoking gun” because it declares that the Operation Started in 2011, NOT 2012 – thus the DOJ/FBI committed perjury many, many times regarding this specific operation. Removing all the Exemption 7 redactions will exonerate me.

FBI-Electronic-Communication