AFI Custom Search

To ensure you are reading the latest post, click the logo above.
SEARCH by topic, keyword or phrase. Type in Custom Search box
Use this Custom Search toole.g. "IBM Eclipse Foundation" or "racketeering"

Thursday, September 26, 2013


D.O.J. stonewalls Leader v. Facebook  FOIA request – telegraphs a rat's maze to avoid public scrutiny & accountability

Contributing Writers | OPINION | AMERICANS FOR INNOVATION  | Updated Sep. 30, 2013 | PDF
Fig. 1—The D.O.J.'s Transparency Merry Go Round. The U.S. Department of Justice has created a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Merry Go Round to avoid ever having to provide actual transparency information to the public. This conduct breaches democracy's most fundamental principles of accountability. Graphic: Melissa Suriel.

(Sep. 26, 2013)—On Jan. 21, 2009 President Obama declared "a democracy requires accountability, and accountability requires transparency." Apparently, the Department of Justice (D.O.J.) and the Patent Office didn't get the memo.[1]

The mission of the D.O.J. is to "ensure fair and impartial administration of justice for all Americans."[2]

On Aug. 15, 2013 the D.O.J.'s Vanessa R. Brinkman responded to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for information regarding Leader v. Facebook with anything but transparency.[6]

Even though the request was addressed according to instructions on the D.O.J. FOIA website, the D.O.J. Office of Information Policy (OIP) who "processes Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and Privacy Act (PA) requests" said nonsensically "this Office nor any of these senior leadership [including the Attorney General] typically maintain records on specific court cases."

Facebook Club
"Wink Wink" Damage Control

''JP Morgan's [Jamie] Dimon meetings with Attorney General Holder.'' REUTERS. 26, 2013
Update Sep. 30, 2013—Jamie Dimon, CEO, JP Morgan Chase (left), was photographed on Thursday, Sep. 19, 2013 leaving an almost unprecedented meeting with Attorney General Eric Holder (right). What could they achieve in person that they could not by phone or video conference? (1) No NSA recording. (2) Lots of non-verbal winking & nodding. Well worth Dimon's trip from New York to keep Holder and Obama in line.

Reuters reported (PDF) that Holder would not disclose the details of the conversation. Holder included two D.O.J. attorneys with close ties to Obama and JP Morgan Chase—one of Holder's sidemen was Tony West. West is another of Larry Summers' Harvard protégés (along with Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg and DST Moscow's Yuri Milner and Alisher Asmanov). West was Obama's 2008 California campaign manager. What rousted Dimon out of New York? Dimon claims the 2008 meltdown was mismangement, nothing more. Could the AFI revelations of 2008 and 2012 election rigging be causing him heartburn? See Comment 4 below. Photos: Reuters, MainJustice.

[Editorial: This statement deserves a ROTFL (rolling on the floor laughing). Here we have our chief law enforcers claiming ignorance about conflicts disclosure information from the people who work for them. This is reminiscent of the President first learning about the IRS scandal from the evening news. If our leaders are not in charge, who is? Answer: The Facebook Club, we think.]

The response goes on to inform the requester that the D.O.J. system for handling FOIA requests is "decentralized" and that the requester should consult Humorously, this website gives the Office of Information Policy contact information—the very ones making the suggestion. In short, contact us, then we'll tell you to... contact us again... then, we'll keep suggesting that you contact us until we've generated lots of official looking paper for our files... and/or until you give up.

Update Sep. 27, 2013
Some of the Federal Circuit's conflicts of interest in Leader v. Facebook
Fig. 2—Just a few of the Actual Conflicts Mapped re. the Federal Circuit in Leader v. Facebook.   These conflicts mapped above do not include Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., Leonard P. Stark, Perkins Coii LLP, Blank Rome LLP, Anita B. Dunn, Robert F. Bauer, Kathryn Ruemmler, Thomas J. Kim, Donald K. Stern, John P. Breyer, IDG Capital Partners China, Roel Campos, David Plouffe, DC Bar Assoc., A.F.L.C.T.A.C.A.F.C., Patent Office, David J. Kappos, Kathryn W. Siehndel, Robert Ketterson, Fidelity Funds, T. Rowe Price Funds, Preetinder Preet Bharara, Mike Sheehy, McBee Strategic, LinkedIn, Square, SquareSpace, Brightsource, Tesla Motors, Instagram, Wikipedia, Jeff Markey, Morgan Stanley, Ellen L. Weintraub, Robert D. Lenhard, Elon Musk, Marc Andreessen, Andreessen Horowitz, Lawrence "Larry" Summers, James Swartz, Ping Li, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Matthew J. Moore, Theodore B. Olson, Eric Holder, Stephen C. Siu, Meredith C. Petravick, Allen R. MacDonald or Deandra M. Hughes, to name just a few of those who have been positively identified during our investigations.

Finally! 7th Circuit Judge Diane P. Wood speaks out in support of AFI’s contention that the Federal Circuit’s monopoly over patent appeals must end

Is a judicial fix for the corrupt Leader v. Facebook  appeal in the offing, or will Congress be forced to fix it? (Rumor has it that Congressional committees are investigating how to fix the corruption emanating from the Executive and Judicial Branches in this case.)

Update Sep. 27, 2013—Yesterday, Seventh Circuit Judge Diane P. Wood proposed ending the Federal Circuit’s exclusive jurisdiction over patent appeals, according to Law360 (click here). Finally, a federal judge has dressed down this court which has become corrupted by the Facebook Club.

The Elephant in the Room
Graphic: Leo Cullum

Even though Judge Wood sidestepped the corruption elephant in the room, her recommendations are welcomed nonetheless. She was careful to discuss only systemic problems, while avoiding specific examples of Federal Circuit abuse of private property rights—as has occurred in Leader v. Facebook and Zoltek Corp. v. US. (Fed. Cir. and their Facebook Club members are working to strip Congress of jurisdiction over private property rights by flat out ignoring constitutional precedent, e.g., the on-sale bar whitewash in Leader v. Facebook.)

7th Circuit Judge Diane P. Wood
Fig. 3—7th Circuit Judge Diane P. Wood calls for the Federal Circuit's monopoly on patent appeals to end, asking "Uniformity is great, but what if it's uniformly bad?" CLICK HERE for Law360 article. Photo: Univ. of Chicago Law School

Is Judge Wood a lone drummer, or will others join her? Time will tell. We at AFI have been hoping and praying for a break in these dark clouds.  Will moral judicial leaders speak up? Or, is the notion of a moral and just judge merely a cruel hoax in early 21st century America?  

Are our federal judges already too compromised into silence by their big infringer paymasters—the Leader v. Facebook judges chief among them, including Stark, Lourie, Wallach, Moore, Rader, Siu, Petravick, Moore, Hughes, MacDonald, DC Bar, Federal Circuit Bar Association, A.F.L.C.T.A.C.A.F.C., Clerk Horbaly, USPTO Director Kappos and Chief Justice John Roberts? In the case of these judges, their inside knowledge of the Facebook IPO planned by Goldman Sachs lured them to the rocky shoals of profligacy. How many others are equally compromised for life?

Prepare for the rats to scurry (some like Kappos, Rea, Stern, Bauer, Plouffe, Ruemmler & Horbaly already have)

The Facebook Club rats scurry

Fig. 4—Members of the Facebook Club, with their pockets and foreign bank accounts full of Facebook stock winnings, will now try and create distance between themselves and their fellow collaborators. Graphic: Michael Northrop.

AFI’s position is that these compromised, constitutionally oath-bound judges and lawyers must resign, be impeached and/or be brought up on fraud and racketeering charges for their collusion with the Facebook Club. They have betrayed America’s trust and must be brought to account if faith and trust in our democratic processes are to return. Until then, nothing said by our institutions will be trusted.

Being a judge is a revocable privilege bestowed by the People. It is not a birthright. The fact that our judges have exempted themselves from accountability for even illegal actions on the bench is contemptible, unconstitutional (creates a privileged class) and must be reversed.

The D.O.J. Merry Go Round

Let’s get this straight.

1. According to the D.O.J. website ( – in the bottom right sidebar titled "" click "FOIA" which goes to:

2. OIP ( The menu on that page presents "OIP FOIA" which goes to the contact information for: 


4. However, Ms. Brinkman responds that while OIP "processes" requests, they don't "maintain records." Huh? This is reminiscence of the Seinfeld car reservation episode where the car rental agency takes reservations, but they don't hold those reservations.

[Cue circus music.]

Why do we pay these people?

These D.O.J. people are either incompetent, or they are intentionally obscuring the FOIA process to discourage public transparency. If its either reason, why do we pay them? The Requester appealed this embarrassing D.O.J. conduct. Click here to read the appeal (also displayed at the end of this post).

Brinkman took great pains to spell out what they do not, will not and are not required to do. The “decentralized” nature of the D.O.J. FOIA system was emphasized, but nowhere was it mentioned that the D.O.J. website promises to "forward your request to the D.O.J. component they determine is most likely to maintain the records you are seeking."[3]

Let's pretend - The Department of Justice's attitude toward citizen FOIA requests
D.O.J.'s FOIA policy toward U.S. citizens. Graphic: 7thBoro

The reader is left with the impression that Brinkman could not be bothered, or is hiding something. Perhaps both.

Given the D.O.J.’s obstruction, the requester spelled out a list of people and organizations suspected of misconduct in Leader v. Facebook, including their possible collusion with members of the Department of Justice. This person even suggested basic search instructions.

D.O.J.’s "decentralized" FOIA maze prevents scrutiny

The D.O.J.’s “decentralized” FOIA data processing system appears to be at cross purposes with the law of the land on conflicts of interest disclosure. That information should be readily accessible, not hidden inside a rat's maze of deceptions and misdirection. The fact that it is hidden begs the question, "What is so important to hide that the D.O.J. won't follow mandates for which they are supposed to be the chief law enforcers?"

The Ethics in Government Act of 1978 requires mandatory, public disclosure of financial and employment history of public officials and their immediate family.[4]

In 2006, well before Leader v. Facebook, the Judicial Conference mandated automated conflicts screening for courts and judges.[5]

How the Facebook Club hijacked U.S. Politics

The misconduct revealed by the Leader scandal begs the question: “What drives the Department of Justice these days, the U.S. Constitution or the Facebook Club?”

The requester's list reads more like a shadow U.S. Government. Their conduct certainly gives one pause:

  • President Obama's protection of Facebook to preserve his 47 million "likes" on Facebook; White House reliance on confiscated private property to sustain its power;
  • 16,000 Patent Office Facebook "likes" protected by Director David J. Kappos, using a patented system stolen from Leader Technologies which the Patent Office is right now trying wipe off the map by autocratic fiat;
  • Fabricated "likes" are used to titillate and manipulate low-information voters (just enough to statistically manipulate any close election);
  • Deregulated Internet electioneering founded upon fraudulent misrepresentation (by Perkins Coii LLP partners — long time person counsels of Barack Obama);
  • Shadow U.S. Government?
    The Facebook Club is a shadow U.S. Government
    The Facebook Club is likely an unelected, shadow U.S. Goverment. See  "Faces of the Facebook Corruption."
  • Protection of the stolen Facebook platform for electioneering and global financial manipulations via massive judicial misconduct in Leader v. Facebook;
  • Lack of electioneering accountability and transparency over the private Facebook data manipulation of "likes" without equal access;
  • Substantial foreign influence in American electioneering via intertwined Facebook Club relationships; and
  • Facebook's Washington, Silicon Valley and Moscow law firms and financiers undermining the Constitutional separation of powers—to secure their own, led by their mentor, Lawrence "Larry" Summers.

We could go on, but the evidence is clear . . .

"Something is rotten in the state of Denmark." (Shakespeare's Hamlet, Act I)

Dept. of Justice FOIA Appeal, OIP/13-04526 (F) VRB:VAV:CMW, Vanessa R. Brinkman, Aug. 15, 2013 by Americans For Innovation

* * *


[1] Barack Obama on Gov't Transparency, The White House, Memorandum of January 21, 2009. ''Title 3 – The President, Freedom of Information Act [FOIA], Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies.'' Presidential Documents, Federal Register, Vol. 74, No. 15, FR Doc. E9-1773, pp. 4683-4684, Jan. 26, 2009 <> ("A democracy requires accountability, and accountability requires transparency.").

[2] About the DOJ. U.S. Dept. of Justice. Accessed Sep. 26, 2013 <>.

[3] DOJ FOIA Requests. Where should I send my request? DOJ, Office of Information Policy. Accessed Sep. 26, 2013 <>

[4] Ethics in Government Act of 1978. Wikipedia. Accessed Sep. 26, 2013 <>.

[5] Mandatory Conflicts Screening For Courts & Judges. Judicial Council of the District of Columbia Circuit. Accessed Sep. 26, 2013 ("On September 19, 2006, the Judicial Conference of the United States adopted a mandatory conflict screening policy requiring courts and judges to implement automated screening to identify financial conflicts of interest.") <$FILE/mandatoryconflictplanfinal2.pdf>.

[6] D.O.J. Leader v. Facebook  Request, Response, Appeal. USPTO FOIA Appeal, OIP/13-04526 (F) VRB:VAV:CMW, Vanessa R. Brinkman, Aug. 15, 2013 <>.

Tuesday, September 17, 2013


Facebook agenda is a clear and present danger to American democracy

Contributing Writers | OPINION | AMERICANS FOR INNOVATION  | Updated Sep. 24, 2013 | PDF
The U.S. Patent Office Freedom of Information Act
U.S. Patent Office FOIA merry go round in Leader v. Facebook. Graphic: Boris Kustodiev
Update, Sep. 23, 2013. Obama's Patent Office continues to stonewall Leader v. Facebook  FOIA requests

Kathryn W. Siehndel, Faces of the Facebook Corruption
Kathryn W. Siehndel, USPTO FOIA Counsel
In another example of stonewalling by the Obama Administration, U.S. Patent Office Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Counsel, Kathryn W. Siehndel, refuses to answer straightforward FOIA requests regarding Leader v. Facebook. Siehndel also ignores calls for her to quit her involvement in this case since she was formerly employed by Facebook's law firm, White & Case LLP. Siehndel's conflicts are joined by the lead patent judge, Stephen C. Siu, who was employed by Facebook stakeholders, IBM and Microsoft. Former Director Kappos himself was formerly employed by IBM.
"This is not a dictatorship"
Siehndel has stonewalled all requests for Kappos' financial reports, although AFI has learned he placed his IBM pension fund under management by another Facebook crony, Fidelity Funds' Robert Ketterson. IBM also sold 750 patents to Facebook during this time. All the Leader v. Facebook judges held multiple Fidelity funds with notorious pre-IPO holdings in Facebook, along with Kappos. Responding to Obama's refusal to follow constitutionally mandated procedures, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich said to CNN's Wolf Blitzer on Sep. 18, 2013: "This is not a dictatorship."

No Conflicts of Interest Checks in Leader v. Facebook. Shockingly, if Siehndel's response can be taken at face value, the Patent Office did not perform mandatory conflicts of interest checks before assigning employees to the Leader v. Facebook matter. Siehndel is essentially admitting that they did not consult their conflicts of interest database (mandated by the Judicial Conference) which they had provided in a heavily whited-out form in a previous FOIA response. This begs the question why they would maintain a conflict of interest database, then not use it as required. The evident answer is because they knew they were conflicted and were instructed by their Facebook Club handlers how to proceed.

Obama abuses patent law to protect his Facebook club & 47 million "likes"
The FOIA request asked for information about the Patent Office's 16,000 "like's" on Facebook. Patent Office Director David J. Kappos started the Patent Office Facebook page in May 2010 and encouraged his 10,000 employees to visit it daily. He did this before the Leader v. Facebook patent infringement trial where Facebook was found guilty of infringing Leader's patent on 11 of 11 counts. After rejecting Facebook reexamination challenges twice, the Patent Office, acting on instructions from shadowy higher ups and without cause, suddenly reversed itself in 2012. They are now attempting to invalidate Leader's entire patent—more than 7 years after the patent was awarded. They are challenging claims that they have already affirmed three times previously. Eleven of the claims were also fully affirmed a fourth time at trial. See previous post detailing this conduct.

This dramatic reversal is nothing short of magical, prompting comparisons to Russian fairy tales and merry go rounds. This nakedly corrupt confiscation of American private property by the Executive and Judicial Branches begs the questions: "What is the Facebook Club's end game? What objective is worth such sins?" Click here to read Kathryn W. Siehndel's latest response. See Siehndel's previous evasive response (click here).
Facebook undermines American elections
Fig. 1—Facebook undermines American Elections. The benefits of Facebook are dramatically overshadowed by its threats to free and fair American elections, its basis in intellectual property theft and corruption, and its abuse of the democratic process. Graphic: Outside the Beltway.

Top 5 Reasons Why All U.S. Politicians Must Quit FacebooK— Without Delay

  1. Unregulated electioneering. Electioneering on Facebook is unregulated and unaudited. It is under the complete control of private parties who exhibit a greater than 9 to 1 bias for Democratic candidates.(A current spin is underway to imply that Facebook is not politically biased, but the facts say otherwise—"contributions of individual staffers skews heavily Democratic." The Washington Post, May 10, 2013.)[01]
  2. Fruit of a poisoned tree. Facebook's technology is stolen from Ohio-based innovator, Leader Technologies, as proven in federal court, after which the courts protected Facebook anyway via massive judicial corruption that has engulfed the Federal Circuit Appeals Court and the U.S. Supreme Court. This state-sponsored confiscation of Leader's property taints all political and economic benefits as the fruits of a poisoned tree. It also makes Facebook users culpable.
  3. No equal time. Not a level playing field. While the political landscape is roughly even between Republicans and Democrats, Republicans and other parties have no equal access to Obama's 47 million "likes" on Facebook.
  4. Substantial foreign involvement. Facebook's shareholders and advertisers include many foreigners. These include Russian oligarchs with ties to money laundering and diversion of International Monetary Fund (IMF) funds. Some of these diverted funds are essentially illegal financial donations to U.S. politicians. In addition, foreign involvement in U.S. politics is expressly prohibited by law, specifically 2 USC § 441e(a)(1) (foreign nationals may not directly or indirectly make contributions or independent expenditures in connection with a U.S. election).[02]
  5. "Free and Fair elections" since 2006 is a myth. The heavy reliance on unregulated social media in electioneering has destroyed the sacrosanct principle of "free and fair elections." The U.S. State Department's handbook states: "Free and fair elections are the keystone of any democracy. They are essential for the peaceful transfer of power."[03] This is no longer true in American elections which are currently monopolized by one player who controls the electioneering data without regulation—Facebook's private handlers.

Without equal access to Obama’s 47 million Facebook "likes," American political discourse is hopelessly skewed to the preferences of the Facebook Club who control a private monopoly on a database that can control the outcome of any close American election for the foreseeable future.

Investigation into the Leader v. Facebook  Washington judicial corruption scandal has uncovered a scheme to manipulate U.S. elections. This scheme appears to have already influenced the 2008 and 2012 elections unduly. Political opponents of candidates favored by Facebook’s key management, shareholders, attorneys and advertisers (the Facebook Club) are not given equal time and access.

For example, Barack and Michelle Obama and their political action committees have over 47 million "likes" on Facebook, as compared to a fraction of that number for opponents.

In addition, Facebook's programmers (self-described "hackers") control ALL data and access to that data. This includes the U.S. electioneering data for both parties.

The election process is one of America's most cherished traditions. We have had 57 Presidential elections since Washington was elected our first President. As citizens, once our votes are counted, we hold the cherished belief and clear expectation that our leaders are chosen fairly, honestly, without electoral bias, and based on one person, one vote.

While the election process has remained an ideal, the flaws in the system are being exploited nefariously by recent developments in technology. Election professionals have always tried to gain an advantage using technology. For example, the printing press vastly improved the ability to generate information (and disinformation) about candidates. According to a report by Bob Schieffer, Thomas Jefferson's campaign against President John Adams was probably the first really nasty one. Jefferson's supporters accused Adams of being a hermaphrodite with "neither the force and firmness of a man, nor the gentleness and sensibility of a woman." In response, the Adams campaign accused Jefferson of being the son of a half-breed Indian squaw and a mulatto father.[04]

Radio, television, and telephone technologies were employed for campaigns starting in the 20th century.

But now, the commercialization of the internet threatens to upset our sacred election principles. As recently as 1996 the internet was little more than an online candidate brochure. Since then it has become an unregulated "difference maker" in directly influencing elections.

With Liberty and Justice for Sale
Fig. 2—With Liberty and Justice for $ale
In 2006, Federal Election Commision Chairman, Robert D. Lenhard, and Facebook's attorney, Perkins Coii LLP, along with his Perkins Coii LLP Commissioner, Ellen L. Weintraub, approved a candidate Obama request allowing him to start raising money via the Internet—without disclosing Weintraub's conflict of interests with Obama's attorney.

This request was submitted by Obama's personal counsel, Robert F. Bauer (of IRS scandal notoriety). These insiders all knew this scheme to give Obama an edge in the next election (how did they know he would be nominated?) would be hidden from public scrutiny, or at worst would not be discovered until long after the damage was done. A year earlier, Lenhard had greased the skids by deregulating Internet electioneering from any public regulation.

On Oct. 14, 2008, another regulatory brake was removed for Barack Obama, Larry Summers, and the Facebook Club by the Securities & Exchange Commission. Fenwick & West LLP (another Facebook law firm), asked for and receive an unprecedented exemption from the 500-shareholder rule. This exemption opened the door for Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley (Facebook's underwriters) to move billions of foreign dollars" of "dubious origins" (Fortune) to purchase Facebook insider stock, pumping its valuation to $100 billion.

Much of this foreign money came from Russian oligarchs directly mentored by Lawrence "Larry" Summers when he was chief economist at the World Bank. Facebook's COO, Sheryl K. Sandberg, was his employee then. This exemption was approved by SEC Chief Counsel, Thomas J. Kim, along with SEC Commissioner, Roel Campos, both former partners at Facebook's law firms Latham & Watkins LLP and Cooley Godward LLP, respectively. Kim was at Harvard with Obama, Summers and Sandberg where these plots were likely conceived.

Obama's and Kim's U.S. attorney friend, Preetinder "Preet" Bharara, formerly with Gibson Dunn LLP, is currently prosecuting/persecuting Paul Ceglia in Ceglia v. Zuckerberg. This action is likely intended to prevent more disclosure of the 28 Zuckerberg hard drives and Harvard emails that Gibson Dunn LLP hid from Leader Technologies' lawyers in Leader v. Facebook. When the Federal Circuit was told about this explosive new evidence, they ignored it. Every Federal Circuit judge in Leader v. Facebook owned Facebook stock and had deep and long standing (undisclosed) relationships with Facebook's attorneys. Also undisclosed on petition to the U.S. Supreme Court was Chief Justice John Roberts' Facebook stock and close mentoring relationship with Thomas G. Hungar, Gibson Dunn LLP, the Facebook attorney who benefited from the decision not to hear the Leader v. Facebook Petition for Writ of Certiorari.

Sources of Facebook's Washington D.C., Moscow, Russia & Silicon Valley Corruption

Our problems today are more than merely "systemic failure" (as Hank Paulson posits—"nobody's fault"). This is naked greed and power mongering. These actors have been planning this assault on the U.S. Constitution since the early 1990's when the World Bank's Harvard "wunderkind" Larry Summers (with Sheryl Sandberg and Yuri Milner) shoved the Russian voucher system down the throats of a failing Soviet Union—creating a private, unregulated, Moscow-based cash cow they've been milking ever since. Not satisfied with the money, they want the power too.

All investigative roads keep leading back to these Facebook lawyers and sympathizers (See also "Faces of the Facebook Corruption" sidebar):
  1. Perkins Coii LLP (Perkins Coii LLP);
  2. Gibson Dunn LLP;
  3. Cooley Godward LLP;
  4. Fenwick & West LLP;
  5. Latham & Watkins LLP;
  6. Weil Gotshal LLP;
  7. White & Case LLP;
  8. Blank Rome LLP;
  9. Orrick Herrington LLP;
  10. Lawrence "Larry" Summers;
  11. Sheryl K. Sandberg;
  12. Mark E. Zuckerberg;
  13. David Plouffe, White House Facebook coordinator;
  14. Robert F. Bauer, White House counsel (Perkins Coii LLP - Facebook counsel);
  15. Anita B. Dunn, White House counsel (Perkins Coii LLP - Facebook counsel);
  16. Kathryn Ruemmler, White House counsel (Latham & Watkins LLP - Facebook counsel);
  17. Donald K. Stern, White House Justice Dept. Advisor (Cooley Godward LLP - Facebook's Leader v. Facebook trial attorney);
  18. Thomas G. Hungar, Federal Circuit counsel (Gibson Dunn LLP - Facebook's Leader v. Facebook appeals attorney);
  19. Gordon K. Davidson, Fenwick & West LLP (Facebook's patent and securities counsel, Leader Technologies' former corporate counsel);
  20. McBee Strategic LLC, Cooley Godward partner; Congressperson Nancy Pelosi mentored; siphoned energy stimulus funds to friends of the Facebook Club;
  21. Goldman Sachs, played on both sides of the bailout, stimulus, Facebook IPO; siphoned funds to friends of the Facebook Club; partnered with DST Moscow who invested in post-exemption Facebook private stock;
  22. Morgan Stanley, ditto;
  23. State Street Corporation, ditto; works on control of banking transactions, including ATM, virtual currencies;
  24. Fidelity Investments, custom-crafted fund containers for Facebook stock by Robert Ketterson, long-time collaborator with Facebook's director and second largest investor, James W. Breyer, Accel Partners LLP;
  25. IDG China, John P. Breyer, the chessmaster;
  26. DST, Digital Sky,, Alisher Asmanov, Yuri Milner, Facebook's Russian king making funders; long time protégés of Lawrence "Larry" Summers with Facebook's ;
  27. U.S. Patent Office; former Director David J. Kappos; Acting Director Teresa Stanek Rea; Judge Stephen C. Siu, formerly with Facebook stakeholders Microsoft and IBM; Deputy Counsel Kathryn W. Siehndel, formerly with Facebook's White & Case;
  28. A.F.L.C.T.A.C.A.F.C., Assoc. of Former Law Clerks and Technical Assistants for the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit—the Federal Circuit's (Judicial Branch) fifth column at the U.S. Patent Office (Executive Branch);
  29. The Federal Circuit Bar Association (FCBA);
  30. The DC Bar Association, "declined" to investigate judicial misconduct;
  31. The Federal Circuit itself, Chief Judge Randall R. Rader and Executive / Clerk of Court Jan Horbaly;
  32. Judge Leonard P. Stark, Obama appointee one week after the Leader v. Facebook trial; Facebook stockholder;
  33. Judge Evan J. Wallach, Obama appointee before the Leader v. Facebook appeal; Facebook stockholder; Gibson Dunn LLP client; protege of Senator Harry Reid;
  34. Judge Kimberly A. Moore, Facebook stockholder; Gibson Dunn LLP client; husband, Matthew J. Moore, works for Latham & Watkins;
  35. Judge Alan D. Lourie, Facebook stockholder; Gibson Dunn LLP client; and
  36. Chief Justice John Roberts, mentor to Gibson Dunn LLP; Facebook stockholder.
Graphic: Georgia Tech Law.

On March 27, 2006, the Federal Election Commission (FEC) voted NOT to regulate the Internet for elections. In fact, the FEC voted unanimously to "not regulate political communication on the Internet, including emails, blogs and the creating of Web sites." This decision made only paid political ads placed on websites subject to campaign finance limitations.[05]

Roger Stone of Advocacy Inc. commented, "A wealthy individual could purchase all of the e-mail addresses for registered voters in a congressional district . . . produce an Internet video ad, and e-mail it along with a link to the campaign contribution page. Not only would this activity not count against any contribution limits or independent expenditure requirements; it would never even need to be reported."[06]

This re-regulation gives deep-pocketed supporters, foreigners and anonymous supporters strong influence over the American election process.

The FEC decision is analogous to the decision to repeal the Glass-Steagall Act which contributed to our disastrous economic crisis in 2008. Glass-Steagall had previously prevented investment banking firms from gambling with depositors' money that was held in affiliated commercial banks. This deregulation led to numerous abuses, including gambling in derivatives by major investment firms.

The lack of regulation of e-campaigning has already led to suspected campaign influence and fraud. Leveraged by the confluence of social networking, the creation of large databases, and "large data" analytics, elections can be manipulated. Facebook has rapidly become the lingua franca of this realm as a result of their nefarity. Virtually every candidate uses Facebook to contact, store, and analyze information about the electorate as well as solicit donations.

On July 27, 2010, Facebook was found guilty on 11 of 11 counts of infringing the patent on social networking held by Leader Technologies—U.S. Patent No. 7,139,761. And yet, corrupt federal judges, including U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, have protected Facebook. Tellingly, Roberts holds stock in Facebook and openly mentors Facebook’s attorney Gibson Dunn LLP, Thomas G. Hungar.[07]

The Facebook Club is threatened by the emergence of "the real deal" from Leader Technologies. This is why they have settled intellectual property disputes with everyone and their dogs, other than the rightful inventor. They know they will lose in a head-to-head competition. They, along with their collaborators including PayPal, LinkedIn, Microsoft, Zynga, Instagram, and Square, would lose their monopolistic grip on U.S. politics. Consequently, Facebook pretends that Leader’s U.S. Patent No. 7,139,761 for social networking does not exist and has used its influence over mainstream media to block coverage of the case.

The Facebook Club supports Barack Obama and Democratic causes approximately 9 to 1. See Footnote 1. If one were to give each Facebook law firm a 1 value only, then the skew is well over 19 to 1.

The emergence of Facebook as the go-to platform for political discourse has been driven by the Obama campaign's success at micro targeting Facebook "likes" to beat John McCain in 2008 by 9.5 million votes, and Mitt Romney in 2012 by 5.0 million votes. Politicians now fear that they will be left behind if they don’t try and catch up.

Facebook's growth was fueled initially by gaming, photo sharing and chat. Those users have grown older and now vote. Many of these users are sometimes called LOFO, or low-information voters. They share their data and opinions freely, allowing Facebook’s hackers to parse their most intimate personal likes, dislikes and predilections, including their political leanings.

Speculation is growing that Obama's 47 million "likes" appeared in large quantities after Facebook’s hackers secretly switched tens of millions of LOFO users to "like" Obama in one of their many "upgrades to enhance social engagement." These hackers then went to work converting those LOFO's into Obama votes using daily propaganda, admiring photos, as well as getting personal visits from local community organizers. It only took 9.5 million LOFOs and others in 2008 and 5.0 million in 2012 to beat McCain and Romney, respectively.

One sophisticated elected official in a local election in the Midwest claims he was able to manipulate and determine the outcome local elections by the analysis of Facebook data bases and public voting records. He is now coaching other candidates how to do it.

At the federal level, virtually every member of Congress and presidential candidate uses Facebook. They also accept coaching of Facebook personnel to ostensibly improve their election possibilities. It is well known that Chris Hughes, one of Mark Zuckerberg’s former Harvard roommates, led Obama's social media strategies. The Republican National Committee has now hired a former middle manager at Facebook, Andy Barkett, as its Chief Technology Officer.[08]

As insiders to both parties, these Facebook people have the opportunity to manipulate the data and swing elections. On average, President Obama posts to his Facebook page more than once a day. No political opposition can keep up with such a barrage of daily narratives without equal access to those 47 million people. The Facebook environment, as currently known, has undermined the checks and balances of the American political process in favor of the political preferences of the Facebook Club.

Mathematically, the only way Facebook can sustain this control over U.S. electioneering is to have no competition. It stands to reason, if you control the sole access to 47 million LOFOs—unassuming persons who vote on emotion— then you can titillate them with your "narrative" with little concern that the opponent will be able to counter you.  And, you can change your message on a dime.

"Equal Time" in Social Media Was Destroyed by the Facebook Club in the Corrupt 2006 F.E.C. Deregulation Scheme

However, if the opponent has the opportunity to counter your narratives, like a good member of the loyal opposition should be able to do, then American political discourse remains freer and fairer. This is the basic concept behind "equal time." Whenever the President makes a speech, a member of the loyal opposition is permitted equal time to express another perspective. This is regulated by the Equal Time Rule regarding broadcast licenses in the Federal Communications Act of 1934.[09]

Facebook’s attorneys were evidently at work from 2002 to lay the groundwork that has made the playing field skewed toward their candidates. Deregulation helped them get there. Now we know why. Their plan to takeover American electioneering required free and unfettered access to the Facebook LOFO votes that they were grooming for candidate Barack Obama. With deregulation in place, they avoided public scrutiny over the most manipulative parts of their plan.[10]

The FEC's Mar. 27, 2006 deregulation of Internet electioneering was presided over by then Chairman Robert D. Lenhard. A year later on Mar. 1, 2007,[12] Lenhard approved Obama’s request, delivered via Obama’s personal counsel, Robert Bauer, Perkins Coii LLP (now implicated in the IRS scandal), to use his Facebook page to solicit donations before Obama was the Democratic candidate. Also notable is the undisclosed FEC conflict of interest. Nowhere did Lehnard disclose that his Commissioner Ellen L. Weintraub was a Perkins Coii LLP partner of Obama’s Robert F. Bauer. Perkins Coii LLP also represented Facebook.

As is the case with so many lawyers associated with the corrupt practices of the Facebook Club, Weintraub counseled clients on ethics, advised the Senate Rules Committee and the House Ethics Committee, recommended changes to the House Code of Official Conduct,  was chief editor of the House Ethics Manual and a principal contributor to the Senate Ethics Manual.

F.E.C. Ellen L. Weintraub's ethical outliar destroyed U.S. electioneering checks and balances. Hank Paulson says these regulators suffered from systemic confusion about right and wrong.

Remarkably, Weintraub ignored those ethics by voting for Obama’s request by her law partner, Robert F. Bauer, without disclosing the conflict. Pundits agree that this request, in concert with the earlier deregulation, dramatically altered the U.S. election landscape. This is more fruit of the tree poisoned by unethical Facebook attorneys.

Robert F. Bauer and his wife, Anita B. Dunn, the current personal attorney to Barack Obama, have recently been identified by the House Oversight Committee on Government Reform as a possible source of the IRS targeting of the Tea Party.

* * *

American internet electioneering – A primer[11]
It’s currently not a fair fight in the social media age.

Obama and the Democrats easily have a 9 to 1 access advantage (or more) in social media where their friends hold a privately-held monopoly.

The internet was first used in the 1996 presidential elections, but primarily as a brochure for the candidate online. It was only used by a few candidates and there is no evidence of any major effect on the outcomes of that election cycle.

In 2000, both candidates ( W. Bush and Al Gore) created, maintained and updated their campaign websites. But it was not until the 2004 presidential election cycle was the potential value of the internet seen. By the summer of 2003, ten people competing in the 2004 presidential election had developed campaign websites. Howard Dean’s campaign website from that year was considered a model for all future campaign websites. His website played a significant role in his overall campaign strategy. It allowed his supporters to read about his campaign platform and provide feedback, donate, get involved with the campaign, and connect with other supporters. A Gallup poll from January 2004 revealed that 49 percent of Americans have used the internet to get information about candidates, and 28 percent said that they use the internet to get this information frequently.

In 2008, the internet became a grassroots and a voice of the people tool-a way for the users to connect with each other and with the campaign, like Dean’s website had done in 2004. All of the major candidates had a website and utilized social networking like Facebook and MySpace. The popularity of a candidate could be measured by the number of ‘friends’ on these sites as well as on websites like Hitwise, which listed the number of hits all of the presidential candidate’s websites had each week.

Internet channels such as YouTube were used by candidates to share speeches and ads for free. This also served as a forum for users to attack other candidates by uploading videos of gaffes.

A study done by the Pew Internet & American Life Project in conjunction with Princeton Survey Research Associates in November 2010 shows that 54 percent of adults in the United States used the internet to get information about the 2010 midterm elections and about specific candidates. This represents 73 percent of adult internet users. The study also showed that 22 percent of adult internet users used social network sites or Twitter to get information about and discuss the elections and 26 percent of all adults used cell phones to learn about or participate in campaigns.

E-campaigning as it has come to be called, is subject to very little regulation. On March 26, 2006 the Federal Election Commission voted unanimously to "not regulate political communication on the Internet, including emails, blogs and the creating of Web sites." This decision made only paid political ads placed on websites subject to campaign finance limitations. A comment was made about this decision by Roger Alan Stone of Advocacy Inc. that explain this loophole in the context of a political campaign,

"A wealthy individual could purchase all of the e-mail addresses for registered voters in a Congressional District... produce an Internet video ad, and e-mail it along with a link to the campaign contribution page. Not only would this activity not count against any contribution limits or independent expenditure requirements; it would never even need to be reported."

New, Sep. 19, 2013. Manipulation of U.S. elections by any party can have disasterous results.

One of the most serious U.S. Presidential election manipulations was made public earlier this year.

On Mar. 22, 2013, the BBC published an article by David Taylor titled, "The Lyndon Johnson tapes: Richard Nixon's 'treason'."[13] The article reveals Nixon's successful efforts to win the 1968 election through "treasonous" activities:

In late October 1968 there were major concessions from Hanoi which promised to allow meaningful talks to get underway in Paris - concessions that would justify Johnson calling for a complete bombing halt of North Vietnam. This was exactly what Nixon feared.

The Paris peace talks may have ended years earlier, if it had not been for Nixon's subterfuge.

Paris Peace Talks
Fig. 3—The Paris peace talks may have ended the Vietnam War years earlier, if it had not been for Nixon's subterfuge in his efforts to win the 1968 presidential election. Photo: AP/BBC.
[Anna] Chennault [a senior Nixon campaign adviser] was despatched to the South Vietnamese embassy with a clear message: the South Vietnamese government should withdraw from the talks, refuse to deal with Johnson, and if Nixon was elected, they would get a much better deal.

So on the eve of his planned announcement of a halt to the bombing, Johnson learned the South Vietnamese were pulling out [of the peace talks].

He was also told why. The FBI had bugged the ambassador's phone and transcripts of Anna Chennault's calls were sent to the White House. In one conversation she tells the ambassador to "just hang on through election."

Johnson was told by Defence Secretary Clifford that the interference was illegal and threatened the chance for peace.
Nixon went on to become president and eventually signed a Vietnam peace deal in 1973, five years later. AFI has been able to verify the information in the BBC article from primary sources who were White House political insiders during those years.

As a result of these manipulations, the Vietnam War lasted almost seven years more until the fall of Saigon on April 30, 1975.

From 1969 forward,
over 20,000 Americans soldiers were killed (out of a total military soul count of 58,000); and[14]

over 100,000 South Vietnamese soldiers were killed (out of a total military soul count of 224,000).[15]

During the entire Vietnam War,

over 200,000 North Vietnamese and Viet Cong soldiers were killed (out of a total military soul count of 1.1 million); and[16]

Nearly 5,000 South Korea, Australia, Thailand and New Zealand soldiers were killed.[17]

On Apr. 4, 1995, the Hanoi government revealed that the true civilian casualties of the Vietnam War were 2.0 million in the North, and 2.0 million in the South. The deaths of these souls represented 12-13% of their entire population.[18]

Nixon Resigns San Francisco Chronicle, Aug. 9, 1974
San Francisco Chronicle, Aug. 9, 1975

In an ironic twist to this U.S. electioneering nightmare, President Nixon copied LBJ’s practice of using technology to tape record White House conversations and wiretaps. Nixon's tapes led to the Watergate scandal, political disgrace and resignation as President to avoid almost certain impeachment.


[01] Facebook Club Bias. Federal Election Commission. Accessed Sep. 16, 2013 (Reid Hoffman, James W. Breyer, Peter Thiel, Marc Andreessen, Matthew Cohler, Chris Hughes, Elon Musk, Mark Zuckerberg, Sheryl Sandberg, Erskine Bowles, Ping Li, James Swartz, Facebook PAC) <>.

[02] Foreign Involvement in U.S. Elections via Facebook. 2 USC § 441e - Contributions and donations by foreign nationals. Cornell University Law School. Accessed Sep. 16, 2013  <>.

[03] "Free and Fair Elections." USA Elections in Brief. Bureau of Information Programs, U.S. State Department, p. 1 <>.

[04] Opposing opinions protected. "Nasty campaign ads an American tradition" by Bob Shieffer. CBS News, Aug. 19, 2012. Accessed Sep. 16, 2013 <>.

[05] Facebook attorney fraud in election rules. "FEC Internet Rulemaking - Background and FAQ" by Vice Chairman Robert D. Lenhard and Commissioner Ellen L. Weintraub. Accessed Sep. 16, 2013 <>

[06] The hidden agenda behind Internet electioneering deregulation. United States presidential election. Wikipedia. Accessed Sep. 16, 2013 <>.

[07] Massive judicial corruption in Leader v. Facebook. Petition for Writ of Certiorari, Leader Technologies, Inc. v. Facebook, Inc., No. 12-617 (U.S. Supreme Court Nov. 16, 2012) <>.

[08] GOP hires a Facebook middle manager as CTO. "GOP Hires Chief Technology Officer from Facebook" by Liz Klimas. The Blaze, Jun. 5, 2013. Accessed Sep. 16, 2013 <>.

[09] Equal Time Rule in U.S. electioneering. 47 USC § 315 - Candidates for public office. Cornell University Law School. Accessed Sep. 16, 2013 <>.

[10] Facebook Club secretly stacked the rules deck. FEC Internet Rulemaking.

[11] Election deregulation loopholes in 2006 big enough to drive a Facebook-Club-Truck through. ''Loophole a Spigot for E-Mail; Critics Fear Voters Will Be Deluged as Fall Elections Near'' by Jeffrey Bimbaum. The Washington Post, Jun. 11, 2006. Accessed Sep. 17, 2013 <>.

[12] Candidate Obama's infamous F.E.C. fund raising request (by Facebook Club Attorney Robert F. bauer, Perkins Coii LLP, IRS Scandal). FEC Meeting, Thurs. Mar. 1, 2007, 10:00 a.m., incl. Agenda Doc. No. 07-18, Minutes of an Open Meeting of the Federal Election Commission, Thurs. Mar. 1, 2007, incl. Chairman Robert D. Lenhard and Commissioner Ellen L. Weintraub, Agenda Item II, "Senator Barack Obama and the Obama Exploratory Committee by counsel, Robert F. Bauer and Rebecca Gordon," Agenda Doc. No. 07-12, Agenda Doc. No. 07-12-A. Accessed Sep. 17, 2013 <>; Also available at <>.

[13] Richard Nixon's Vietnam Electioneering Treason. "The Lyndon Johnson tapes: Richard Nixon's 'treason'." BBC, Mar. 22, 2013. Accessed Sep. 19, 2013 <>.

[14] American soldiers killed in Vietnam from 1969. Statistical Information about Fatal Casualties of the Vietnam War. U.S. National Archives. Accessed Sep. 19, 2013 <>.

[15] South Vietnamese soldiers killed from 1969. Casualties - US vs NVA/VC. Accessed Sep. 19, 2013 <>.

[16] North Vietnamese and Viet Cong soldiers killed from 1969, Id.

[17] South Korea, Australia, Thailand and New Zealand soldiers killed (entire war), Id.

[18] North and South Vietnamese civilians killed (entire war), Id.

Post Comments below

Tuesday, September 10, 2013


Contributing Writers | OPINION | AMERICANS FOR INNOVATION  | Updated Sep. 15, 2013 | PDF

Unmistakable collusion among the executive and judicial branches with wall street and silicon valley in Leader v. Facebook  draws comparison to the Nazis

Lawrence ''Larry'' Summers, World Bank, U.S. Treasury, U.S. National Economic Council, Square, Instagram, Andreessen Horowitz Newsflash: (Sunday, Sep. 15, 2013: 5:15 EDT)
Larry Summers Withdraws as candidate to be Chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank

Just a few hours ago, The Wall Street Journal broke the news that Lawrence "Larry" Summers (one of the "Three Kings" of the Facebook corruption) withdrew his name from consideration as the next chairman of the Federal Reserve. In a letter to President Obama, Summers said "I have reluctantly concluded that any possible confirmation process for me would be acrimonious." AFI has been applying pressure for some time. Recently, the pressure has grown from 350 economists, the Senate Banking Committee and even leading Democrats.

to the growing corp of AFI supporters and activists for this concrete proof that resolute advocacy for "just do the right thing" pays off! Perhaps rumors of the death of the Ten Commandments and the Golden Rule have been greatly exaggerated! Now lets turn our attention to Zuckerberg's meeting later this week with Republican Congressional leaders.

Here's some of the coverage: The Wall Street Journal, The Wasingthon Post, USA Today, CNBC, Reuters and Huffington Post.
Jewish children and their parents being terrorized by Nazi confiscations of possessions, homes and businesses, and arrests of the innocent. Photo: Warsaw, ca. Apr. 1943, The New York Times
Fig. 1—Citizens Abused: Jewish children and their parents were terrorized by Nazi confiscation of possessions, homes and businesses, and abuse of the innocents. Photo: Warsaw, ca. Apr. 1943, The New York Times.
''The Night of the Broken Glass'' (Kristallnacht). The New York Times, Nov. 11, 1938. READ THE PRETEXT FOR KRISTALLNACHT—WHICH SOUNDS EERILY SIMILAR TO THE SO-CALLED 'SPONTANEOUS' BENGHAZI RIOTS IN LIBYA (''In a surge of revenge for the murder of a German diplomat in Paris by a young Polish Jew''). During The Night of the Broken Glass, Jewish property was destroyed and confiscated by the state. The Obama administration’s reliance on Facebook amounts to similar state-sponsored confiscation. Note how the headline makes it sound like the German government (Goebbels) stopped the riot when it actually started it. Source: UC Santa Barbara
Fig. 2—READ THE PRETEXT FOR KRISTALLNACHT—WHICH SOUNDS EERILY SIMILAR TO THE SO-CALLED "SPONTANEOUS" BENGHAZI RIOTS IN LIBYA ("In a surge of revenge for the murder of a German diplomat in Paris by a young Polish Jew") The New York Times, Nov. 11, 1938 reporting on Kristallnacht ("Night of the Broken Glass")(click image to enlarge).

During The Night of the Broken Glass, which occured just two weeks after British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain appeased Adolf Hitler on Sep. 24, 1938, Jewish property was destroyed and confiscated by the state. The Obama administration’s reliance on Facebook amounts to similar state-sponsored confiscation.

"Note how the headline makes it sound like the German government (Goebbels) stopped the riot when it actually started it." Source: UC Santa Barbara.[9]
Jewish home confiscated by the Nazis. This Serz Family ancestral home was confiscated by the Nazis in Germany ca. 1940. The wife and two uncles were killed in a refugee camp. The son was killed in Auschwitz. Before they were imprisoned, the owners were forced to sell to the man on the left at a minimal price. Photo: ca. 1978.
Fig. 3—Homes Confiscated: This Serz Family ancestral home was confiscated by the Nazis in Germany ca. 1940. The wife and two uncles were killed in a refugee camp. The son was killed in the Auchwitz death camp. Before they were imprisoned, the owners were forced to sell to the man on the left at a minimal price. Photo: Serz Family, ca. 1978.
Jewish family business confiscated by the Nazis. This Serz Family ancestral business was confiscated by the Nazis. The owners were forced out of their ancestral home as well (Fig. 2). Photo: ca. 2012.
Fig. 4—Businesses Confiscated: This Serz Family ancestral business was confiscated by the Nazis. The owners were forced out of their ancestral home as well (Fig. 3). Photo: Serz Family, ca. 2012.
''JEW FREE'' BY 1940. This marker stone in the German village where the confiscated house in Fig. 3 is located, chronicles the number of Jews in the town since 1864. The town is part of the Baden region that has the ignominious distinction of being the first ''Jew Free'' region in Nazi Germany. On Oct. 21, 1940, the last 75 Jews of the town, including David Serz's grandparents, uncles and aunts, along with 7,000 others souls from the region, were deported to the Gurs Concentration Camp where approximately 2/3rds of them perished. Tyranny always ends badly for both the tyrant and the citizenry. Photo: Serz Family, ca. 2013.
New, 9/13/13 Fig. 5—"Jew Free" by 1940. This stone marker is located in the German town where the confiscated house in Fig. 3 is located. It chronicles the number of Jews in the town since 1864. The town is part of the Baden region that has the ignominious distinction of being the first "Jew Free" region in Nazi Germany. On Oct. 21, 1940, the last 75 Jews of the town, including David Serz's grandparents, uncles and aunts, along with 7,000 others souls from the region, were deported 700 miles away to the Gurs Concentration Camp where approximately 2/3rds of them perished. Tyranny always ends badly for both the tyrant and the citizenry. Photo: Serz Family, 2013.

(Sep. 10, 2013)—How would you like to have your honestly-earned business confiscated without compensation by the government? No one would. But that’s exactly what the U.S. government and their business associates have done to Leader Technologies.

The facts are abundantly clear. The Obama Administration has coordinated the effort to confiscate the social networking  invention of Columbus, Ohio-based innovator Leader Technologies (Leader).

A senior businessman and former IBMer and economist (we'll use the pseudonym David Serz), said: "I have been closely following Leader v. Facebook. We need to thank Leader's chairman, Michael McKibben, for his remarkable invention and contribution to large-scale collaboration capabilities. We need to do everything possible to return the rights of the invention to Leader Technologies, and compensate them for their multi-million dollar investment."

Serz continued, "My grandmother and uncles were murdered in the Nazi camps at Auchwitz[1] and Gurs[2] after their homes and businesses had been confiscated. I pledged in their memories never to be silent in the face of similar moral obscenities."[3]

Despite Facebook having been proven guilty on 11 of 11 counts of infringing Leader’s patent (i.e., the engine running Facebook is Leader's invention), the federal courts and White House have stonewalled justice and handed the decision to Facebook despite the overwhelming evidence against them. This conduct has insured the Obama White House and Facebook continue to have contact with Facebook's billion users—using the technology they stole from Leader Technologies.

Serz likened Facebook’s conduct to "Kristallnacht" on Nov. 9, 1938.[4] During Kristallnacht ("Night of the Broken Glass") Nazis attacked Jewish private property and synagogues, and murdered almost 100 souls in a coordinated 24-hour assault. Serz said that his grandfather, Albert, was arrested and sent to the Dachau Concentration Camp on Nov. 10, 1938. During the ensuing months, Jews were forced out of their homes and businesses. Historians in Albert's hometown call this night "Pogromnacht" or "Night of the Pogrom."[8]

It took the world over twelve years to bring down Hitler. On Apr. 30, 1945, Hitler committed suicide,[5] just five days after the link-up of American and Soviet forces at Torgau.

Leader Technologies' chairman and lead inventor Michael McKibben said, "My father-in-law, Jerry Hoovler, was a 20-year old American foot soldier in the 69th Infantry Division that linked-up with Soviet forces that day."[6] See Fig. 6.

McKibben said, "Anyone can see from the facts that Leader's shareholders are the victims of state-sponsored property confiscation. Key members of this Administration and their friends are benefiting from our social networking invention, while our shareholders go uncompensated for the risks that they took to support our development."

Numerous signs point to an attempt by Obama's Facebook accomplices to use the overwhelming force of the state against Leader Technologies:

  • 47 million Facebook "Likes" swing elections: President Obama (with Michelle and various PACs) has over 47 million "likes"—dramatically more than any other politician on the planet; (New, 9/13/13) he won the 2008 McCain election by 9.5 million votes, and the 1012 Romney election by 5 million votes;
  • Obama's State Department recently paid Facebook $630,000 for more likes;
  • Obama's personal White House counsels are long-time partners at Perkins Coii LLP, who also represents Facebook;
  • Obama's Patent Office has almost 15,000 likes—even encouraging employee signups before the Leader v. Facebook trial, then suspiciously ordering a 3rd reexamination to try and kill it off;
  • Most U.S. Senators and Congresspersons now feel forced to rely on Facebook to counter Obama’s overwhelming advantage in reaching LOFO voters (low-information voters). Is this Neville Chamberlain-like appeasement?;
  • Obama's campaign contributors read like a Who's Who of Facebook insiders who pocketed tens of billions of dollars from the stolen technology. See SEC Facebook Insider Trading Report;[7]
  • Obama's insiders include numerous Russian oligarchs with close ties to the Kremlin and Wall Street;
  • These Obama-Facebook insiders fleeced the American public multiple times:
    • first in the 2008 bailout,
    • second in the "green" energy stimulus, and
    • third in the Facebook IPO;
  • THREE WORLDS JOINED FORCES TO DECEIVE THE AMERICAN & RUSSIAN PUBLIC: (1) LAWYERS, (2) PROGRAMMERS, AND (3) FINANCE: Obama-Facebook's intertwined associations with Wall Street, Silicon Valley, and a gaggle of corrupt Washington and Silicon Valley law firms (See Faces of the Facebook Corruption);[10] and
  • Dirty Judges & Lawyers:
    1. All of the federal judges in Leader v. Facebook held undisclosed stock in Facebook and its cronies;
    2. Chief Justice John Roberts coaches Facebook's Gibson Dunn LLP attorney, Thomas G. Hungar;
    3. The entire Federal Circuit used Facebook's Thomas G. Hungar, Gibson Dunn LLP, as counsel and failed to disclose this conflict of interest; merely pretending to be unbiased;
    4. Facebook's Cooley Godward LLP attorney coached Obama on appointment of two of the Leader v. Facebook judges;
    5. Obstruction of Justice
      Obama judge appointees and fellow Federal Circuit judges ignored shocking new evidence in 2012 that Facebook's attorneys lied about the existence of 28 Zuckerberg hard drives and Harvard emails from 2003-2004—evidence Facebook's Cooley Godward LLP told Leader's lawyers was lost; evidence verified by Facebook's forensic experts in Ceglia v. Zuckerberg in 2012;
    6. New, 9/13/13: Facebook's Leader v. Facebook appeals attorney, Gibson Dunn LLP, had possession of the 28 Zuckerberg hard drives and Harvard emails the entire time—while also representing the Federal Circuit enmasse;
    7. New, 9/13/13: U.S. Attorney Preetinder "Preet" Bharara sued Ceglia on trumped up criminal charges, soon after this dramatic reappearance of the "lost" 28 Zuckerberg hard drives and Harvard emails; problem is, Bharara is a former employee of Facebook's law firm, Gibson Dunn LLP, and a fellow Harvard Law alum with Obama (note how Wikipedia is jumping through hoops to legitimize him – we have taken a snapshot of this page as of Sep. 12, 2013 11:05:15 AM DST, just in case it changes magically in the coming days);
    8. Facebook's White & Case LLP has men and women at the Patent Office who are attempting to kill Leader's 10-year old patent;
    9. Facebook's stakeholders IBM and Microsoft have people at The Federal Circuit Bar Association ramrodding their "America Invents Act" big-infringer agenda;
    10. Attempting to fabricate new precedent that patents are not private property (Zoltek Corp. v. U.S.);
    11. While enjoying their Facebook stock winnings, Federal Circuit judges press their agendas at the Patent Office through an essentially secret trade association named A.F.L.C.T.A.C.A.F.C.(Assoc. of Former Law Clerks and Technical Assistants for the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit —no, this is not a joke); and
    12. Facebook's Latham & Watkins LLP and Fenwick & West LLP have men and women at the Securities & Exchange Commission to approve Facebook's exemptions that opened the floodgates for billions of pre-IPO, valuation-pumping dollars in "dubious" foreign investments into Facebook, most notably from friends of the Kremlin.
    13. This dirty conduct is just for starters.
  • Lawrence "Larry" Summers, Obama's bailout chief, keeps popping up, like Forest Gump, at all the right times, in all the right places; Summers deep-sixed a Harvard investigation into his dubious Russian voucher recommendations in the early 1990's (some of those Russians are now Facebook's largest shareholders), after having arranged in late 2003 and early 2004 for a 19-year old Mark Zuckerberg sophomore to get more Harvard Crimson news coverage than any other world figure in the months after Leader Technologies' source code was stolen to start Facebook, likely by Leader's former law firm, Fenwick & West LLP, who was also Facebook's James W. Breyer, Accel Partners LLP, attorney at the time—just too many "coincidences" to be chance. See Who is Lawrence "Larry" Summers?

Serz emphasized, "No one can resist an overwhelming use of force by a state authority, like Leader Technologies has experienced. Virtually every federal judge in this case appears to have had close relationships with and held stock in Facebook. This is a gross abuse of their power and public trust."

"Hitler’s confiscation of my grandparent's property was illegal according to German law. The German courts turned a blind eye because they were collaborating with a tyrant. The American court's confiscation of Leader's valuable patent property is equally illegal and immoral."

The Link-Up. The “Meeting at the Elbe” River on Apr. 25, 1945 between the American 69th Infantry Division and the Soviet 58th Guards Division, Torgau , Germany. For a brief moment, the world was united against tyranny. Photo: The Fighting 69th Infantry Division Association
Fig. 6—The Link-Up—Tyranny Defeated: Civilized society rejects confiscation of personal property.

The "Meeting at the Elbe" River on Apr. 25, 1945 between the American 69th Infantry Division and the Soviet 58th Guards Division, Torgau , Germany. For a brief moment, the world was united against tyranny. Photo: The Fighting 69th Infantry Division Association.

Obama following shameful precedent—while lining his pockets

For those who believe that such violations of property rights could never happen in the U.S., there are tragic historical precedents which Obama and his Facebook collaborators are repeating: Native Americans, African Americans, Japanese Americans. America disposessed The Cherokee Nation of their ancestral lands. Americans dispossessed Africans of their property and freedom.

Japanese Americans shipped off to internment camps during World War II
Fig. 7— Dispossessed Japanese American family in 1942–What is Obama's Excuse? What is Obama's excuse for dispossessing Leader Technologies? His right to protect his and Michelle's 47 million "likes" on Facebook and his ability to funnel ten's of billions of $$$ to his collaborators? Photo: Nat. WWII Museum.
Japanese Americans were interred in "War Relocation Camps" in 1942. Executive Order 9066 mandated the relocation of about 120,000 people of Japanese heritage who lived on the Pacific coast of the U.S. to camps in the interior. These people lost their homes and businesses. In 1944, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the exclusion orders. The U.S. Census Bureau assisted the internment efforts by providing confidential neighborhood information on Japanese Americans. The Bureau's role was denied for decades, but was finally proven in 2007.

It was not until 1988 that the U.S. government provided $1.6 billion in reparations to Japanese Americans and their heirs.

McKibben said, "My father-in-law was a part of the American 69th Infantry Division that broke Hitler's back on Apr. 25, 2013—known as 'The Meeting at the Elbe.' This event was symbolic of a world that said to Hitler and his cronies that abuse of property and privacy cannot be tolerated in civilized society."

Ironically, the Cold War began within days of The Meeting at the Elbe. But for a brief moment in the streets of Torgau, the world had raised the bar. To this day Soviet and American veterans meet in Torgau to remember this turning point in world history.

"Like the Founders of America who risked their lives and fortunes to create America, my father, my father-in-law and more recently my nephew in Iraq went into harm’s way to protect constitutional law from such tyrants," McKibben said.

"I am struck by President John Adams' admonition that in a democracy, property and privacy must be revered as sacred as the laws of God. Adams observed that tyranny and anarchy start when these principles are violated."

One hears much talk these days about the "death of privacy." This notion is self-serving in that the only parties who benefit from your loss of privacy are those who wish to resell your data to others. You would not allow snoopers to sell tickets to watch you through your kitchen window, so why do you think digital snoopers are any more responsible or acceptable? Think people! The "death of privacy" mantra is abhorrent to the very foundations of democracy, in any age.

McKibben continued, "The President, Patent Office, Facebook and Facebook's crony-network are benefiting from our social networking invention. None of them have lifted a finger to protect American property rights. In fact, they've done the opposite. They have collaborated with Facebook's law firms and financiers to line their pockets, press their agendas, and ensure that Leader's shareholders never see justice."

"No company can fight state-sponsored confiscation of property. At least with eminent domain, there is compensation. However, in the case of Leader and its shareholders, there is only utter silence from those we have elected and who have all sworn to protect the U.S. Constitution and private property."

McKibben concluded, "The evidence that Leader Technologies has been cheated by this administration and a complicit federal judiciary is clear. What has happened to us is not civilized. We can only hope that once the American people and Congress learn of this injustice, the back of this collusion will be broken, just like Adolf Hitler’s was on Apr. 25, 1945 in "The Meeting at the Elbe."

We Remember 9/11

Expressing bipartisan support for Leader Technologies, a highly-acclaimed professor of American history, himself Jewish and an advocate of the American labor movement, said "If intellectual property theft by the powerful and well-connected is not stopped, future innovation is jeopardized." This person is a former Democratic presidential adviser whose spouse is herself a Holocaust Survivor. Similar sentiments have been expressed on the other side of the isle by the Arizona Tea Party. Indeed, personal property rights are the concern of every American, regardless of political affiliation.

* * *

Special thanks to the Serz Family for allowing AFI to tell a small part of their family's difficult journey.


[1] Auchwitz Concentration Camp. Wikipedia. Accessed Sep. 9, 2013 <>.

[2] Gurs Concentration Camp. Wikipedia, accessed Sep. 10, 2013 <>.

[3] Nazi concentration camps. Wikipedia. Accessed Sep. 9, 2013 <>.

[4] Kristallnacht (English: Crystal Night), also referred to as the Night of Broken Glass, or Reichskristallnacht. Wikipedia. Accessed Sep. 9, 2013 <>.

[5] Death of Adolf Hitler. Wikipedia. Accessed Sep. 9, 2013 <>.

[6] The Fighting 69th Infantry Division Association. Accessed Sep. 9, 2013 <>.

[7] Facebook Insider Trading and Stock Options Report, SEC Form 4, Aug 7 2013 <>.

[8] Pogrom. Wikipedia. Accessed Sep. 10, 2013 <> ("A pogrom is a violent massacre or persecution of an ethnic or religious group, particularly one aimed at Jews.").

[9] Kristallnacht, November 9-10, 1938, Lecture on Oct. 20, 2005, Univ. of California, Santa Barbara, Hist. 33d, L8. Accessed Sep. 11, 2013 <>.

Post Comments below