Kamala Harris's father slams her as a Race-Grifter for making a 'travesty' of her Jamaican heritage

MEDIA ADVISORY
Kamala Harris Isn’t African-American. She’s Ethnically Indian and Jamaican. That’s Not The Same Thing.
KCamela Everything Everybody BlackJoe Biden recently implied blacks in America are a monolith. Now, by calling his Vice Presidential pick Kamala Harris “African-American,” the media is endorsing his racist position that all blacks are the same.
While the media will continue to portray Harris as African-American, it’s important to note her mother was from India, and her father from Jamaica.
That’s not typically what people think of when they say “African-American”, but she can go around pretending to be “Black”.
And I suspect there will be a large number of African-Americans across the United States who aren’t happy with their ethnicity or race being co-opted to suit a political candidate who shares little with them.
The same for the Native Americans who weren’t so hot on Elizabeth Warren prancing around pretending to be one of them, in order to further her career.
The truth many are learning, and that many already knew, is that the left does in fact class all immigrants as one group, and they ruthlessly attack ethnic minorities who deviate and criticize the liberal plantation. I should know, I’ve been one of them.
Kamala Harris needs to be “CALLED OUT” as a race-grifter. She can’t run as an “African-American” and let true Blacks- starving for anything that remotely fashions itself as “their success”, and the Democratic Party Pimps get away with co-opting race in this shameful way.
Political activist Ali Alexander — of half African extraction himself — noted the matter over a year ago, tweeting: “Kamala Harris is *not* an American Black. She is half Indian and half Jamaican. I’m so sick of people robbing American Blacks (like myself) of our history. It’s disgusting.”
He was met with derision from white liberal reporters in the establishment media, who demanded there was no difference.
The fact the Democrats would select an Indian-Jamaican candidate and bill them as African-American in year marred by Black Lives Matter riots would usually be unthinkable.
Then you remember they continuously call men who identify as women, “women,” and allow them to “be women”.
Her mother is Indian and her father from Jamaica.
https://t.co/ZXLyECgUqD
— Raheem Kassam (@RaheemKassam) August 11, 2020
Of course this short post is going to send the media into a tailspin as they attempt to defend Harris and steer Biden toward the White House.
They’ll call this important distinction a “racial attack,” on Harris, as they have on the past.
But don’t take my word for it.
Kamala Harris’s own father has lashed out about her race-grifting, telling a Canadian magazine in 2019:
My dear departed grandmothers, as well as my deceased parents, must be turning in their grave right now to see their family’s name, reputation and proud Jamaican identity being connected, in any way, jokingly or not with the fraudulent stereotype of a pot-smoking joy seeker and in the pursuit of identity politics. Speaking for myself and my immediate Jamaican family, we wish to categorically dissociate ourselves from this travesty.
See the full story below:

Kamala Harris’s father is slamming her for making a ‘travesty’ of her Jamaican heritage


Kamala Harris’s father is slamming her for making a ‘travesty’ of her Jamaican heritage
Allen Abel: Donald Harris’s rebuke over ‘pot-smoking joy seeker’ stereotype is one thing the Democratic presidential contender is disinclined to talk about. Another is her time in Canada.
By Allen Abel February 18, 2019 
Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., speaks during a campaign event at South Church in Portsmouth, N.H. (Elise Amendola/AP/CP) 
Updated on Feb. 19, 2019 at 12:40 p.m. ET to include response from Kamala Harris and details of later appearances
Eighty-nine weeks from the White House, front-running, formidable and fierce, yet publicly scorned as a “travesty” by her own father, Kamala Harris, hyper-ambitious presidential candidate and former unwilling Quebecker, paces the old stone cathedral.
We’re at South Church, founded in 1713 in Portsmouth, New Hampshire on the Atlantic’s snow-flogged shore, but it could be anywhere in the 50 American states; anywhere that there are cameras and dollars and votes to be pocketed and rivals to be slandered and slain. Hundreds of New Englanders cram the prayer hall, the home of a Unitarian Universalist congregation that is based not on a single Savior, but on “Wisdom from the world’s religions which inspires us in our ethical and spiritual life.”
Like South Church, the campaign to confront Donald Trump in the 2020 election offers—at this ridiculously early but already fraught and frantic stage—a deity to suit every desire. At least two dozen Democrats already have, or soon will, enter the contest. In June, they will begin to debate each other on stages as wide as wheat farms. Next February—that’s still a year away!—the first intra-party primary elections and arcane county caucuses will begin to winnow the crop. So here we go.
Senators, congresswomen, mayors, governors, billionaires—Beto, Bernie, Bloomberg, Biden; Amy, Kirsten, Tulsi, Pocahontas; Hickenlooper, Inslee, Buttigieg, Bullock—all are in it now, or soon will be. Just as it was with the Republicans in 2016, she or he who talks loudest and most profanely is most likely to be heard above the Democratic din. At every whistle stop, in every city and hamlet, the raw odors of vanity and conceit assault the nose. But also, this time, there are coos of love and healing in the air.
Here’s another metaphor—imagine a round of pool with 25 multi-colored balls on the baize and only one corner pocket. Charge the ablest players half a billion dollars to ante up. Estimate the trillions of permutations of rebound, ricochet, angle, scratch and spin. And then try to run the table while an orange-skinned shark—call him Fifth Avenue Fats—leans over the rail, licking his lips, chalking his cue, eager to eat the winner.
RELATED: The Nancy walking all over Trump
Back to Portsmouth, New Hampshire. Kamala Harris, a first-term U.S. Senator and former San Francisco prosecutor and state attorney general—“the best-looking attorney general in the country,” Barack Obama once called her, a career-ending slur for anyone else in these touchy times—is on her first campaign visit to the Granite State, a sliver of bedrock, ski slopes, and escaped Bostonians whose “first in the nation” primary gives it a numinous status among this country’s peripatetic career politicos. (Iowa, South Carolina and Nevada also are in the early-state recipe, with Harris’s behemoth California to join them in February balloting for the first time in 2020. Advantage, Kamala?)
The senator’s stump speech, which she will give from 20 to 50 times a week for the next 21 months, should she last that long in the race, is heavy on her prosecutorial experience and her eagerness to take on a divisive, calamitous incumbent. Even at the pulpit, she never invokes the homilies of her multiple religious roots, or gives thanks for the support of her husband of four and a half years—a California attorney of the Jewish faith—or mentions his two college-age children by a previous marriage: a son named for John Coltrane, a daughter for Ella Fitzgerald. Domesticity, her culinary skills, the multi-cultural and bi-national aspects of her life—none is touched today. Eighty-nine weeks from the White House, the business of the campaign already is serious business.
“I plan on prosecuting the case against people who do not tell the truth,” she says to a roaring, whooping, left-leaning clientele that has been waiting in the fluffing snow for hours, snaking around Portsmouth’s preciously curated shops and its handy-crafty market-stalls, with the first balloting still a spring and a summer and an autumn and another winter away.
Then (on the need for a single-payer, government-run health care program):
“The system is immoral.”
And (on gun control):
“We should never bow down to those who have a love of money while people are dying in the streets.”
And:
“We are looking at an America today where American values and American dreams are under attack.”
But there is much more about Kamala Harris to be said, and told, and learned. As with all of our lives, there are conflicts and complications, secrets and mysteries. But unlike all but two dozen of us on this planet, she yearns to be President of the United States, and she may well succeed.
“I am a proud daughter of Oakland, California,” Harris said in January, when she formally announced her candidacy at Howard University, her “historically black” alma mater in Washington, D.C. That she considers herself to be African-American is beyond dispute—“I was born black and I will die black,” she told a radio interviewer a few days ago. Crucial to her candidacy will be her defense of her record of filling the penitentiaries of the Golden State with legions of young African-American men. But the annals of American politics reveal that personality and personal history will triumph over policy every time. So it matters deeply to the voters of all the nation’s Portsmouths not only what Kamala Harris says, but who she is.
RELATED: Seven signs Joe Biden is gearing up to run for U.S. president
Again: “I was born black.” Yet Sen. Harris’s mother, née Shyamala Gopalan, was a Brahmin Hindu born in Chennai (Madras), the oceanside megalolopolis of the South Indian state of Tamil Nadu; and her father, raised in Brown’s Town, educated in Port Antonio and at the University of the West Indies, is as Jamaican as the sun and the sea. (Dr. Shyamala Gopalan Harris died in 2009 at the age of 70.) Just as Barack Hussein Obama is the mixed-race descendent of tribal Kenya and sunflowery Kansas, Kamala Harris, potentially Obama’s successor’s successor, is every bit as not-really-a-real-American as her desperate opponents may choose to make her out to be. Will that matter?
(For a few days in January, an asinine and racist “birther” conspiracy against Sen. Harris circulated on the Internet’s extreme right wing—namely, that since her mother was from India and her father was from Jamaica and neither of them had lived in the United States for five full years before Kamala’s birth, she could not be a “natural-born citizen” as required of the president and vice-president by the U.S. Constitution. This was patently and crudely false—Harris’s birth in California swaddled her in American citizenship the instant she drew her first breath. President Trump often has ranted against “birthright citizenship” to enflame his base, but 
The Donald’s nativist ravings carry no weight in law; at least not yet.)
So far in the 2019-2020 campaign, there has not been much in the way of personal slander. None of the six or seven or eight sitting senators in the race has torn a colleague to shreds. (“That will come later,” Sen. Lindsey Graham coyly predicted to a Maclean’s reporter in Washington last week.) 
But when Sen. Harris sniggered on New York City radio program that, like the sky-high Honolulu stoner Obama, she had thoroughly enjoyed marijuana—and that, unlike Bill Clinton, she had inhaled—she explained her behavior by saying, “Half my family’s from Jamaica! Are you kidding me?”
Her father exploded.
Donald Harris, 81, professor emeritus of economics at Stanford University, divorced from Shyamala Gopalan since 1972, offered this comment to the website Jamaica Global Online, whose editor, Ian Randle, shared it exclusively with Maclean’s:
My dear departed grandmothers, as well as my deceased parents, must be turning in their grave right now to see their family’s name, reputation and proud Jamaican identity being connected, in any way, jokingly or not with the fraudulent stereotype of a pot-smoking joy seeker and in the pursuit of identity politics. Speaking for myself and my immediate Jamaican family, we wish to categorically dissociate ourselves from this travesty.
This was not Harris’s first incursion into the ambitions of the elder of his two daughters. (His younger child, Maya Lakshmi Harris, a prominent liberal attorney, professor of law, senior adviser to Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign and the wife of Obama’s associate attorney general, Tony West, is Kamala’s national campaign chair.) In a December article on Jamaica Global Online, the girls’ father took pains to enumerate Kamala’s Caribbean experiences and to reassert the depth of her island heritage. Yet in her new campaign manifesto, The Truths We Hold, Prof. Donald Harris disappears on Page 20 of 300, and never is mentioned again.
The early phase of interaction with my children came to an abrupt halt in 1972, Dr. Harris wrote, when, after a hard-fought custody battle in the family court of Oakland, California, the context of the relationship was placed within arbitrary limits imposed by a court-ordered divorce settlement based on the false assumption by the State of California that fathers cannot handle parenting (especially in the case of this father, “a neegroe from da eyelans” was the Yankee stereotype, who might just end up eating his children for breakfast!). Nevertheless, I persisted, never giving up on my love for my children or reneging on my responsibilities as their father.
In the United States Senate—and especially in her vehement shredding of Brett Kavanaugh (“I’m asking you a very direct question: yes or no”) during his Supreme Court confirmation hearing and Jeff Sessions (“I’m not able to be rushed this fast. It makes me nervous”) during the Russian-collusion investigations, Kamala Harris presented herself as anything but a pot-smoking joy-seeker. “There are flaws in the criminal-justice system and this system needs to be reformed,” she said at Howard U. “Instead of being soft on crime or tough on crime, we need to be smart on crime.”
Barack Obama’s father bolted back to Africa when his son was three years old. They met only once more before Obama, Sr.’s death. But Donald Harris is very much alive. “I have decided to stay out of all the political hullabaloo,” he told Ian Randle, the editor of the Jamaican website (Donald Harris declined to be interviewed for this story). But his vow already has been broken. How much more will we be hearing from him about his daughter’s histories?
And then there is the Canadian/Québécois chapter, another blank page in the candidate’s life.
Shyamala Gopalan of Chennai and Donald Harris of Brown’s Town met and married on the campus of the University of California at Berkeley amid the seething ferment and sexual electricity of a social and cultural revolution. Shyamala—the daughter of a man who had crusaded alongside Jawaharlal Nehru in the campaign for India’s independence from the British Raj—had graduated from the University of New Delhi. At 19 she was confronted with an existential choice—to weigh millennia of expectations and an arranged marriage against emigration and a new life of laboratory science and freedom to choose her own love.
Swept up in the Bay Area’s white-hot protests for equal rights for blacks, Shyamala chose the side of the oppressed minority, and weaned her girls on chanted slogans, justice marches and home-drawn picket signs.
“These were my mother’s people,” Kamala writes in The Truths We Hold. “In a country where she had no family, they were her family—and she was theirs. From almost the moment she arrived from India, she chose and was welcomed to and enveloped in the black community. It was the foundation of her new American life.”
RELATED: What lies ahead for the Democratic party?
Then, suddenly, Shyamala Harris—scientist and single mom—turned her back on the struggle and flew away. Again, from Kamala’s book:
When I was in middle school, we had to leave. My mother was offered a unique opportunity in Montreal, teaching at McGill University and conducting research at the Jewish General Hospital. It was an exciting step in advancing her career.
It was not, however, an exciting opportunity for me. I was twelve years old, and the thought of moving away from sunny California in February, in the middle of the school year, to a French-speaking foreign city covered in twelve feet of snow was distressing, to say the least. My mother tried to make it sound like an adventure, taking us to buy our first down jackets and mittens, as if we were going to be explorers of the great northern winter. But it was hard for me to see it that way. It was made worse when my mother told us that she wanted us to learn the language, so she was enrolling us in a neighborhood school for native French speakers, Notre-Dame-des-Neiges—Our Lady of the Snows.
It was a difficult transition, since the only French I knew was from my ballet classes, where Madame Bovie, my ballet teacher, would shout, ‘Demi–plié, and up!’ I used to joke that I felt like a duck, because all day long at our new school I’d be saying ‘Quoi? Quoi? Quoi?’
“By the time I got to high school, I had adjusted to our new surroundings,” she later concedes. And then not another word about Westmount High, about Montreal, about Quebec in the parlous hour of the first independence referendum, about her own coming-of-age.
“Let me begin with a simple statement: Indonesia is part of me,” Barack Obama said in the Bahasa language in Jakarta in 2010. (He lived there from age six to 10 with his mother and her Indonesian husband.) So Canadians may wonder, how much is Quebec part of Kamala Harris, if at all?
The morning after the whoop-fest at the old seacoast Universalist church, the junior senator from California speaks to a far more restrained gathering at the New Hampshire Institute of Politics on the campus of Saint Anselm College in Manchester, an hour inland. The affair is called “Politics & Eggs” and it has been attended by every presidential candidate since the days of the black-and-white photograph. Yes, even Donald Trump came here, and Donald Trump almost never speaks to the unfiltered public.
 Manchester,  the phrases that brought down the temple in Portsmouth barely ripple the pond. Harris’s tripwire pledge of “Medicare For All” garners only silence; the words “Kavanaugh,” “Trump,” and “Green New Deal” are never even uttered. There are at least 20 other Democrats yet to hear from, and 50 weeks before the Granite State primary for all of them to be heard.
When the breakfast concludes, a Maclean’s reporter approaches the candidate and asks about Quebec in 1980, how—if—a high school student’s exposure to the crucible of ethnic, linguistic “identity politics”—the very words her own father abjures—affected her values and her views.
“It was certainly very significant,” she responds. “It was about people wanting to be recognized, wanting equal treatment for their culture.”
“Were you a Oui or a Non?” the candidate is asked.
“It was a very significant moment,” says Kamala Harris. “But I was too young to vote.”

Judge Tigar Rewards his Attorney's in al-Hakim v. CSAA Case

 

MEDIA ADVISORY

Judicial challenges themselves are not, however, evidence a want or delay of prosecution. A party is entitled to challenge a judicial officer for cause or bias.” “The challenges appear to be filed in an earnest belief that the judges of this Court ought to be disqualified from deciding this case and that each successive challenge will overcome the prior’s shortcomings.””the Court hopes and encourages both parties to take this new judicial assignment as a good time to wipe the slate clean, forgive any earlier acrimony, and proceed to resolve and adjudicate the claims raised by the Complaint in normal order and good faith. Al-Hakim deserves a chance to have his claims adjudicated.” “Both parties deserve the rights to fair procedure and due process guaranteed to them by law. In short, this case deserves a chance to proceed on its merits, and now is an opportune time as any to do so.”

Judge Stephen Kaus, Tentative Ruling made September 11, 2018.
Judge Kaus admits to the courts acrimony and animus toward al-Hakim, and asks to wipe the slate clean and move forward in good faith as al-Hakim deserves a chance to have his claims adjudicated with the rights to fair procedure and due process guaranteed to them by law!
al-Hakim’s Declaration to Bigoted Judge Brand Order to Show Cause to DECLARE ABDUL- JALIL AL-HAKIM a Vexatious Litigant: Brand OSC Vex Litg Decl copy
al-Hakim’s Opposition to Bigoted Judge Brand Order to Show Cause to DECLARE ABDUL- JALIL AL-HAKIM a Vexatious Litigant: Brand OSC Opposition to Vexatious Litigant copy
Judge Tigar Rewards his Attorney’s in al-Hakim v. CSAA Case
Tigar’s Criminal Legal Charges

al-Hakim v. California State Automobile Association, C-811337 
This is a case where al-Hakim’s home was damaged by a sewage backup caused by Rescue Rooter that was covered by his insurance CSAA.
The case is an over $100 million, 20 year; contentious action; was the largest, continuous case file in the history of Alameda County Superior Court, over 80 file boxes; over 300 motions and responses; plaintiff had over 300 exhibits; over 5,000 pages of exhibits; 3,000 pages of documents for rebuttal argument; 20 expert witnesses; 77 other witnesses; over 100 pages of jury instructions; with numerous allegations of judicial misconduct, where EVERY judge in this case has admitted error, committed perjury, recused themselves, or all three!
Due to the continuing, 20 year grand fraud, this case has NOT been exhausted to finality!
Thus merit or frivolousness is NOT a consideration!
CSAA began to work with the defense in the underlying case of al-Hakim vs Rescue Rooter, et., al., even fabricating court orders to do so and were the defendants in this case of al-Hakim vs. CSAA. They also had al-Hakim investigated by the Department of Insurance, FBI, and other governmental, law enforcement, judicial and legal authorities and still worked as an operative, agents and informants with law enforcement trying to create a case against al-Hakim for fraud that NEVER existed, and still works with those forces today!
This was their beginning of the racist, Islamophobic, Xenophobic, hate induced campaign of calumny deceit in the law

Annette Bening’s Brother, Defendant Brad Bening

enforcement and legal community and public at large to obtain a litigation advantage! The Rescue case ended with the retiring judge David Lee informing the jury that ALL the testimony of the defense had to be disregarded due to the subornation of perjurious testimony of ALL their witnesses and the source of most of the basis for their documents.
In the CSAA case the defendants were found guilty of fraud in the appraisal and to have used illegal values by judge James Richmond. (see Richmond order of February 23, 2003, in Al-Hakim v. California State Automobile Association, C-811337)
Judge James A. Richman by his Order dated February 23, 2003 set aside the appraisal award because, among other grounds, “the award was procured by corruption, fraud, or other undue means”; or the appraisers “exceeded their powers and the award cannot be corrected without affecting the merits of the decision upon the controversy submitted”. The order further cited the improper use of “cash value” as replacement cost, use of erroneous “used cost” figures, denial of coverage, injection of fraud, concealment, breach of contract, and coverage issues without any reason or evidence
Due to their subornation of perjurious testimony in the Rescue trial, they did not have any witnesses nor experts the could present at their own trial.
APPROVED BEREAVEMENT LEAVE: Three Deaths in Two Weeks, Granted Permission to Attend Funerals, Case Decided While Attending Funeral With Prior Permission
This CSAA case was decided while al-Hakim was away attending TWO (2) funerals, with previous court permission, after deaths (the second and third during the trial) of over forty year friends.
On Thursday, March 20, 2008, Plaintiff al-Hakim faxed a letter to Judge Jon Tigar in Department 21 and defense counsel Steve Barber to notify them that he had received the news of the tragic passing of Jerrold Woods, a very dear 40 year friend and associate and of plaintiff’s imminent leave for bereavement. He did so to facilitate the courts efforts and give them advance notice so that when the need for him to take the leave was necessary, he could do so without any unexpected disruption and then resuming the expected trial. While in open court, Tigar acknowledged the closeness of the relationship, the pain that al-Hakim must be enduring, and the request for leave of bereavement at some point and granted court permission while on the bench, to attend the funeral/memorial upon noticing the court of it scheduling.
On April 3, 2008, news was received by the community of the second and third deaths of over forty year friends occurred hours apart during the trial.
Since al-Hakim had not taken time to grieve and pay proper respect, on these occasion, it was not only necessary and desired, it was religiously obligatory. There was no other alternative comfortable for al-Hakim and the trial could surely be continued for three-four days given the circumstances of now two MORE deaths during the short time of the trial
al-Hakim, with previous court permission to attend the funerals less than two weeks earlier after the first death (the first of the trial) of the very close over 40 year friend from Judge Tigar, noticed the court Five times via personal service, fax, and email of his intent to attend the funerals with the courts prior approved leave seeking direction from Tigar, including personal service on Judge Tigar in the courtroom, Five days BEFORE the trial resumed and attending the TWO funerals and memorials, and Tigar took advantage of the opportunity, DID NOT RESPOND TO THE 5 NOTICES and decided the case in al-Hakim’s absence!
Jayne W. Williams- former Oakland City Attorney, now at Myers Nave

It should be noted that Tigar ADMITTED THAT HE HAD COMMITTED SUCH EGREGIOUS ERRORS THAT THEY DEMANDED A MISTRIAL, WHICH PLAINTIFF DECLARED AS WELL. Plaintiff acknowledges that this fact is a major factor in Tigar deciding the case in his absence in attempt to evade in many legal transgressions he committed during the case.
NOW WE ARE HERE TODAY WITH THE SAME MATTER BEFORE BRAND and COLWELL TO ADJUDICATE AND ACT AS DEPUTY DEFENSE COUNSEL TO EARN HER COMPENSATION WITH THIS RULING FROM THE BENCH!!!

IT MUST BE NOTED THAT THE ONLY EVIDENCE PRESENTED AT TRIAL BY THE DEFENDANTS CSAA WAS THE FABRICATED NOTES PLANTED IN THE CITY OF OAKLAND CASE FILE BY COLWELL’S MANAGING PARTNER AT MEYERS NAVE, JAYNE WILLIAMS AND GIVEN TO JUDGE TIGAR AND HER CLIENT JUDGE DAVID LEE AT TRIAL fostered the perjurious testimony given by the defendants witnesses that was denied at the end of her client retired judge David Lee’s trial.

Respectfully,

Abdul-Jalil

al-HAKIM has Seventeen (17) Successful Recusals from Judicial Challenges

JudicialTyranny
MEDIA ADVISORY

Judicial challenges themselves are not, however, evidence a want or delay of prosecution. A party is entitled to challenge a judicial officer for cause or bias.” “The challenges appear to be filed in an earnest belief that the judges of this Court ought to be disqualified from deciding this case and that each successive challenge will overcome the prior’s shortcomings.””the Court hopes and encourages both parties to take this new judicial assignment as a good time to wipe the slate clean, forgive any earlier acrimony, and proceed to resolve and adjudicate the claims raised by the Complaint in normal order and good faith. Al-Hakim deserves a chance to have his claims adjudicated.” “Both parties deserve the rights to fair procedure and due process guaranteed to them by law. In short, this case deserves a chance to proceed on its merits, and now is an opportune time as any to do so.”
Judge Stephen Kaus, Tentative Ruling made September 11, 2018.
Judge Kaus admits to the courts acrimony and animus toward al-Hakim, and asks to wipe the slate clean and move forward in good faith as al-Hakim deserves a chance to have his claims adjudicated with the rights to fair procedure and due process guaranteed to them by law!
Presiding Judge Northridge Conceals Corruption:

al-Hakim’s Declaration to Bigoted Judge Brand Order to Show Cause to DECLARE ABDUL- JALIL AL-HAKIM a Vexatious Litigant: Brand OSC Vex Litg Decl copy
al-Hakim’s Opposition to Bigoted Judge Brand Order to Show Cause to Declare ABDUL- JALIL AL-HAKIM a Vexatious Litigant: Brand OSC Opposition to Vexatious Litigant copy
al-HAKIM has Seventeen (17) Successful Recusals from Judicial Challenges
As with other judges, Brand was challenged PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA CCP §§170.1-5, (CCP §170.1(6)(A)(iii)), § 170.3 (c) (1)), the Canons of the Code of Judicial Conduct 1, 2, 2A, 2B(2), 3B(2), 3B(4), 3B(5), 3B(8), 3C, 3D(1), 3E, 3E(1), 3E(2), 4, 4D(1) and 4(E)( a corresponding Federal Statute, 28 United States Code section 455(a) (adopted by Congress in 1974); and FOR CAUSE UNDER CCP DUE TO CRIMINAL CONDUCT IN VIOLATION OF 18 U.S.C. §242, NOT just CCP §170.1 or 170.3. At the hearing on February 25, 2019, Brand denied the challenge as to CCP §170.1 ONLY, after a five minute break claiming he read the challenge. He refused to address any of the aspects of the challenge after being repeatedly asked and insisted that it was being denied as to CCP §170.1 ONLY,  He remained silent as to ALL other aspects of the challenge! 
This OSC is exclusively because al-Hakim has filed challenges, BUT FOR CAUSE, none are frivolous or unmeritorious, but for cause!
There have been many, fifteen (15) successful recusals from Challenges filed in al-Hakim cases for Judges Paul Herbert, Evelio Grillo, Stephan Kaus, Jennifer Madden, Yolanda Northridge, Sue Alexander, Taylor Culver, James Reilly, Micheal Ballachey, Winifred Smith; where Kim Colwell, Henry Needham Jr. and Judith Ford (appellate review timed out without court response) did not answer the last challenges filed and served against them thus consenting to the challenges. Judges Judges Evelio Grillo, after five (5) challenges and Stephan Kaus, after four (4) challenges, were recused in two cases each, the AT&T and EBMUD cases!
Additionally, Judges Ronni MacLaren, Frank Roesch and Jo-Lynne Lee issued ORDERS OF SELF DISQUALIFICATION/REFUSAL pursuant to C.C.P. §170.1 (a)(6)(A)(ii) and C.C.P. §170.1 (a)(6)(A)(iii). This fact demonstrates that there has been and continues to be pervasive illegal ex-parte communications between the judges regarding al-Hakim because al-Hakim has NEVER had any contact with some judges that recused.
That’s fifteen (15) successful judicial recusals and (3) additional failures to file answers striking the challenges before leaving the court/department, with Brands challenge matter still pending CLEARLY DEMONSTRATE THEY ARE NOT MERITLESS NOR FRIVOLOUS  BUT PREEMINENT, THE EMBODIMENT OF THE RULE OF LAW, AND MANDATED TO ESTABLISH AND PRESERVE  ALL OF al-HAKIM’S CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS!
Alameda County Superior Court Corruption

Ret. Judge Richard Hodge recused after being appointed an umpire by Roesch in the CSAA appraisal case (administrative hearing) after being a judge in the case.
Defendants argue “Mr. al-Hakim’s repetitive challenges to any judge assigned to the instant case have delayed the proceedings. Mr. ai-Hakim should know better since he filed at least seven challenges to Judge Tigar in the same case.”
These fifteen (15) successful recusals DO NOT include Judge Jon Tigar’s TWO RECUSALS, 1) staged recusal granting the April 30, 2007 al-Hakim first Challenge for Cause on June 7, 2007 pursuant to C.C.P. section 107.6, ONLY, disregarding ALL the other causes plead! (see Tigar order Granting Challenge of June 7, 2007, CSAA, case no.: C-811337) CSAA defense counsel Stephan Barber moved to represent Tigar, the interest of the Insurance Company, and himself by filing a Motion for Reconsideration to deny Tigar’s recusal and restore his illegal place in this case. Tigar GRANTED THE MOTION, restoring HIMSELF as judge, officially made himself a defendant and fourth element in this case though sitting as the judge in this matter, he is now a defendant, co-defense counsel and deputy defense judge ruling in matters that he has lied and has been deceitful about and is personally involved in, was represented by defense counsel Barber himself in an action that was brought by Barber BEFORE TIGAR to establish HIS right to sit and rule in the same matter that HE is now personally involved in and HE sits in judgment of HIMSELF BEFORE HIMSELF!!! (see Tigar July 6, 2007 order Granting CSAA Motion for Reconsideration on Tigar’s own motion Vacating Order of June 7, 2007, CSAA, case no.: C-811337) and 2) now again recusing in a matter pending in Federal Court.
Tigar’s representation by the defense had the unfortunate consequence of making him a litigant, obliged to the defense and their counsel by leaving his defense to one of the litigants appearing before him in the same case. ( Kerr v. United States District Court, supra, 426 U.S. at pp. 402-403 [48 L.Ed.2d at p. 732].) Judges should be umpires rather than players. This is a travesty and a mockery of justice with clear conflict while it wreaks of corruption and collusion.
Respectfully,


Abdul-Jalil

Judge Tigar Charges http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PKlKBVWaK2g

COURTEL “WRIT RACKET”


MEDIA ADVISORY

Judicial challenges themselves are not, however, evidence a want or delay of prosecution. A party is entitled to challenge a judicial officer for cause or bias.” “The challenges appear to be filed in an earnest belief that the judges of this Court ought to be disqualified from deciding this case and that each successive challenge will overcome the prior’s shortcomings.””the Court hopes and encourages both parties to take this new judicial assignment as a good time to wipe the slate clean, forgive any earlier acrimony, and proceed to resolve and adjudicate the claims raised by the Complaint in normal order and good faith. Al-Hakim deserves a chance to have his claims adjudicated.” “Both parties deserve the rights to fair procedure and due process guaranteed to them by law. In short, this case deserves a chance to proceed on its merits, and now is an opportune time as any to do so.”
Judge Stephen Kaus, Tentative Ruling made September 11, 2018.
Judge Kaus admits to the courts acrimony and animus toward al-Hakim, and asks to wipe the slate clean and move forward in good faith as al-Hakim deserves a chance to have his claims adjudicated with the rights to fair procedure and due process guaranteed to them by law!
al-Hakim’s Declaration to Bigoted Judge Brand Order to Show Cause to DECLARE ABDUL- JALIL AL-HAKIM a Vexatious Litigant: Brand OSC Vex Litg Decl copy
al-Hakim’s Opposition to Bigoted Judge Brand Order to Show Cause to Declare ABDUL- JALIL AL-HAKIM a Vexatious Litigant: Brand OSC Opposition to Vexatious Litigant copy
COURTEL “WRIT RACKET”
California Appeals and Superior Court Corruption

al-Hakim has filed multiple complaints for years against Justices Jones, Burns, James Humes, Terence Bruiniers, Sandra Margulies, Anthony Kline, and Kathleen Banke as well as Challenges for Cause against Associate Justice James Richman and Henry Needham, Jr. whom apparently sit in this group but has not openly participated in the decisions.
al-Hakim has filed multiple complaints for years against California Supreme Court Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye, former Chief Justice Ronald M. George, Federal Chief District Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton, and former Chief District Judge Claudia Wilken also.
In these matters, it has been established and admitted that there has been illicit ex parte collusion and conspiracy between Superior Court judges Wynne Carvill, Kim Colwell, Jeff Brand, Robert Freedman, Frank Roesch, Stephan Kaus, Mike Markman, Don Clay, Stephan Pulido, Ioana Petrou, Yolanda Northridge, Morris Jacobson, Jon Rolefson, Evelio Grillo, Kevin Murphy, Jo-Lynne Lee, Scott Patton, David Krashna, Jennifer Madden, Sue Alexander, Glenn Oleon, George Hernandez, Tara Desautels, Leo Dorado, Dennis Hayashi, Julia Spain, several commissioners, and the Superior Court Administration of Chad Finke and the Appeals court with the judges mentioned above. Three of the judges have offered the same unsolicited.
Additionally, Judges Ronni MacLaren, Frank Roesch and Jo-Lynne Lee issued ORDERS OF SELF DISQUALIFICATION/REFUSAL pursuant to C.C.P. §170.1 (a)(6)(A)(ii) and C.C.P. §170.1 (a)(6)(A)(iii). This fact demonstrates that there has been and continues to be pervasive illegal ex-parte communications between the judges regarding al-Hakim because al-Hakim has NEVER had any contact with some judges that recused.
These superior court judges have conspired with the appellant courts to independently take it upon themselves to broadcast their “dog whistle signal to the appeals court” to deny al-Hakim’s petition and issue orders in their support forcing al-Hakim into the “WRIT RACKET”! This is NOT having a trial, this is being “railroaded by the court in a case that is ALREADY fixed against you!”
This action are part of what litigants have come to know as the “WRIT RACKET” instituted by the legal system, judges, courts, the judicial administrative and regulatory agencies, both State and Federal! 
These entities have made such a mockery of justice that now these judges do not hesitate to deny or violate a litigants rights and defy them to file a writ knowing that the Supreme Court, Appeals Court, Superior Court Administration, the Judicial Council, and the Commission on Judicial Performance, will cover up and white-wash their criminal activity! These criminal justices are forcing appellants into the Appeals Court cemetery for civil rights, where the Rule of Law is Overruled and Outlawed, the death of due process, where justice is a miscarriage, the treason of truth, the homicide of human rights, the dumpster for denial, where litigants rights are banished to rot in oppression, and die!
al-Hakim’s legal opponents, CSAA and others are engaged in corruption and conspired, consorted, colluded, conceived and employing this “WRIT RACKET” criminal entrapment defense litigation strategy with third parties, other judicial, governmental, law enforcement and legal entities employees, associates, members, agents, contractors, and informants of the U. S. Attorney General- Northern California, Homeland Security (NSA), F.B.I., U. S. Federal Court- Northern California District, California State Supreme Court, California State Appeals Court, Governor of California, California Attorney General, Alameda County District Attorney, Oakland City Attorney, California State Senator, California Congressperson, Alameda County Supervisors, Mayor of Oakland, Oakland City Councilpersons, Alameda County Superior Court, Judicial Council of California, among others, inciting the courts acrimony, animus, and persecution of al-Hakim with judicial calumny deceit!
To understand the “WRIT RACKET”, one needs to know what a “racket” and “racketeering” mean and depict in the legal community and population at large. The definitions are:
Racket
“A racket is a planned or organized criminal act, usually in which the criminal act is a form of business or a way to earn illegal or extorted money regularly or briefly but repeatedly. A racket is often a repeated or continuous criminal operation.”
Racketeering
“Racketeering, often associated with organized crime, is the act of offering of a dishonest service (a “racket”) to solve a problem that wouldn’t otherwise exist without the enterprise offering the service. Racketeering as defined by the RICO act includes a list of 35 crimes.”
Moreover, this is exactly what the judges meant by their “dog whistle” signal/statement at the hearings that they would rely on their “colleagues (in the Appeals Court)” to support their decision to ignore the Rule of Law knowing that the appellate judges would do just as Jones, Burns, Bruiniers, Margulies, Kline, Humes and Banke did, “cover-up for him”.
Brand and the courts actions are a content- and viewpoint- based restriction on speech and lacks any objective criteria for suppressing speech and censorship of constitutionally protected free speech, engage in discriminatory business practices with impunity in violation of the U. S. Constitution First Amendment and California Civil Code § 51, and Article I, section 2 of the California Constitution for Violations of Free Speech, provides: “Every person may freely speak, write and publish his or her sentiments on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of this right. A law may not restrain or abridge liberty of speech or press.” when Plaintiff‟s viewpoints, are protected speech under the California Constitution, where the court harassed Plaintiff by engaging in a severe and pervasive scheme to suppress his constitutional and statutory right to engage in protected activity, by executing against him punitive and adverse judicial actions, and termination of his basic rights to due process?
By operation and application of judges restrictions set forth herein has unlawfully deprived Plaintiff of their full and equalJudicialTyranny accommodations, advantages, facilities, privileges, or services in violation of CCP §51 and abused its discretion and improperly prejudice al-Hakim, under color of law, the Judges sought to deprive him of litigation due him contrary to the right to due process and immunity from takings without due process guaranteed by the 5th and 14th Amendments to the United States Constitution.
These Constitutional violations of Plaintiff’s rights and prejudices Plaintiff suffered herein, when the judges denied his civil rights and due process, an equal opportunity to participate in unbiased pursuit of his legal claims, on the basis of Plaintiff’s race, religion, whistleblowing activities, bias, Islamophobic, Xenophobic, vindictive, retaliatory agenda, prejudice, favoritism, bigotry and racism; exhibited bad faith and deceit; denied al-Hakim’s civil and human rights, the rights to the truth, justice, to evidence and testimony, to due process; illegal ex-parte communications regarding al-Hakim; denied the appeal with criminal intent under the color of law and authority in violation of the rights guaranteed by U. S. Constitution Amendments I, V, VI, XIV, Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment Under Color Of State Law; Section 1983, Unruh and Ralph Civil Rights Acts, and the Bane Acts.
When the conduct of the Judges was unreasonable and undertaken intentionally with malice, willfulness, and reckless indifference to the rights of others, plaintiff’s injuries and the violations of his constitutional rights were directly and proximately caused by the policies and practices of the Appeals Court, which were the moving force behind the acts described herein caused damages to plaintiff, and will continue to cause damage to plaintiff in violation of his civil rights, and due process and equal protection of the laws under the U. S. Constitution Amendments I, V, VI, XIV by this denial of equal access to an unbiased legal process.
Given the principle involved in this case is not merely one of fairness to al-Hakim but also one of maintaining respect for the law and promoting confidence in the administration of justice. (As the United States Supreme Court stated in In re Murchison, 349 U.S. 133, 136 [99 L. Ed. 942, 946, 75 S. Ct. 623, 625]: “A fair trial in a fair tribunal is a basic requirement of due process. Fairness of course requires an absence of actual bias in the trial of cases. But our system of law has always endeavored to prevent even the probability of unfairness. … Such a stringent rule may sometimes bar trial by judges who have no actual bias and who would do their very best to weigh the scales of justice equally between contending parties. But to perform its high function in the best way “justice must satisfy the appearance of justice.” Offutt v. United States, 348 U.S. 11, 14 [75 S. Ct. 11, 13].”)
Where the court acted as described herein with reckless disregard for Plaintiff’s rights with the intent to injure, vex, annoy and harass Plaintiff, subjected Plaintiff to cruel and unjust hardship in conscious disregard of Plaintiff’s rights with the intention of causing Plaintiff injury and depriving him of his constitutional rights when in these circumstances, there was denial of a substantial right rendered the ensuing commitment illegal because it is impossible for this or a reviewing court not to conclude that “a different result would have been probable if such error … or defect had not occurred or existed.”? (CCP § 475.)
Respectfully,

Abdul-Jalil

VENDETTA- TARGETED al-HAKIM aware of Court Entrapment Litigation Strategy

MEDIA ADVISORY

Judicial challenges themselves are not, however, evidence a want or delay of prosecution. A party is entitled to challenge a judicial officer for cause or bias.” “The challenges appear to be filed in an earnest belief that the judges of this Court ought to be disqualified from deciding this case and that each successive challenge will overcome the prior’s shortcomings.””the Court hopes and encourages both parties to take this new judicial assignment as a good time to wipe the slate clean, forgive any earlier acrimony, and proceed to resolve and adjudicate the claims raised by the Complaint in normal order and good faith. Al-Hakim deserves a chance to have his claims adjudicated.” “Both parties deserve the rights to fair procedure and due process guaranteed to them by law. In short, this case deserves a chance to proceed on its merits, and now is an opportune time as any to do so.”
Judge Stephen Kaus, Tentative Ruling made September 11, 2018.
Judge Kaus admits to the courts acrimony and animus toward al-Hakim, and asks to wipe the slate clean and move forward in good faith as al-Hakim deserves a chance to have his claims adjudicated with the rights to fair procedure and due process guaranteed to them by law!
al-Hakim’s Declaration to Bigoted Judge Brand Order to Show Cause to DECLARE ABDUL- JALIL AL-HAKIM a Vexatious Litigant: Brand OSC Vex Litg Decl copy
al-Hakim’s Opposition to Bigoted Judge Brand Order to Show Cause to Declare ABDUL- JALIL AL-HAKIM a Vexatious Litigant: Brand OSC Opposition to Vexatious Litigant copy
VENDETTA- TARGETED al-HAKIM aware of Court Entrapment Litigation Strategy
Judge Tigar’s Nullification of Trial
https://youtube.com/watch?v=R9tuXVxGVGs%26hl
al-Hakim is aware that the Superior Court administration and judges have been working with law enforcement trying to entrap, frame and incriminate him in criminal activity that is fostered by the hearings in his cases that are selectively being recorded by the court reporter whom arbitrarily goes on and off the record at the judges silent instruction, thereby editing the proceedings while in progress! The main purpose for the courts using this tactic and employing “court observers” and colluding with the opposing parties and the entities mention in the “WRIT RACKET” criminal, civil, vexatious entrapment defense litigation strategy with third parties in the next paragraphs was to enable the filing of this motion. The court costs of addressing the challenges can NOT be a consideration when the courts has deviated far from the norm of standard litigation by employing their own private court observers, reporters, and agents in their cause to fabricate a case against al-Hakim and this vexatious motion. 
JudicialTyrannyJudge Kaus admits to the courts acrimony and animus toward al-Hakim, and asks to wipe the slate clean and move forward in good faith as al-Hakim deserves a chance to have his claims adjudicated with the rights to fair procedure and due process guaranteed to them by law! But it took four challenges and multiple rulings challenged for fraud on the court, abuse of discretion, bias, prejudice, perjury, and failing to disclose conflicts of interest for Kaus to finally recuse retroactive to his assignment because he failed and refused to disclose a know conflict in these cases that now have to re-litigated at a heavy cost to the parties and the court!
Respectfully,

Abdul-Jalil

VENDETTA- TARGETED al-HAKIM Entire “Illegal” Proceedings are Grand, Systemic and Endemic Corruption

 

JudicialTyranny
MEDIA ADVISORY

Judicial challenges themselves are not, however, evidence a want or delay of prosecution. A party is entitled to challenge a judicial officer for cause or bias.” “The challenges appear to be filed in an earnest belief that the judges of this Court ought to be disqualified from deciding this case and that each successive challenge will overcome the prior’s shortcomings.””the Court hopes and encourages both parties to take this new judicial assignment as a good time to wipe the slate clean, forgive any earlier acrimony, and proceed to resolve and adjudicate the claims raised by the Complaint in normal order and good faith. Al-Hakim deserves a chance to have his claims adjudicated.” “Both parties deserve the rights to fair procedure and due process guaranteed to them by law. In short, this case deserves a chance to proceed on its merits, and now is an opportune time as any to do so.”
Judge Stephen Kaus, Tentative Ruling made September 11, 2018.
Judge Kaus admits to the courts acrimony and animus toward al-Hakim, and asks to wipe the slate clean and move forward in good faith as al-Hakim deserves a chance to have his claims adjudicated with the rights to fair procedure and due process guaranteed to them by law!
al-Hakim’s Declaration to Bigoted Judge Brand Order to Show Cause to DECLARE ABDUL- JALIL AL-HAKIM a Vexatious Litigant: Brand OSC Vex Litg Decl copy
al-Hakim’s Opposition to Bigoted Judge Brand Order to Show Cause to Declare ABDUL- JALIL AL-HAKIM a Vexatious Litigant: Brand OSC Opposition to Vexatious Litigant copy
VENDETTA- TARGETED al-HAKIM Entire “Illegal” Proceedings are Grand, Systemic and Endemic Corruption
Entire “Illegal” Proceedings are Grand, Systemic and Endemic Corruption (see 2/25/19 Brand Challenge at ¶¶ 3, Page 23-25)
Based on the matters contained herein, on the United States and California State Constitutional rights and on this document filed herewith, al-Hakim’s cases, these entire “illegal proceedings” are solely for the purpose of the unscrupulous judicial, law enforcement, governmental and legal entities illegally utilizing the full force and resources of the government in a covert criminal undercover sting operation by fostering, fabricating and manipulating any filing, pleading, argument, facts, truth, faxes, emails, phone calls, voicemail messages, letters, hearings, request, reservation numbers, motion practice, motion titles, ex-parte applications, hearings, parties, appearances, continuances, schedules, proceedings, register of actions, Court Domainweb, statements, evidence, testimony, documents, word, inference, vague reference, or gesture that they can remotely interpret as evidence of any remote action they seek to advocate to incriminate, charge, try, convict, incarcerate and eliminate al-Hakim!
These are cases that al-Hakim has filed, they are his cases, NOT the courts, nor judges, nor law enforcement, nor government, nor legal entities in power! Yet they have hijacked al-Hakim, his religion, his truth, his family; their home, their lives; their personal, real, and business property; his businesses; his community; those they serve; his cases; his rights; his freedom; his pursuit of happiness; justice; the Constitution; his very existence!
Judge Tigar’s Mental Meltdown

Grand, Systemic and Endemic Corruption (see 2/25/19 Brand Challenge at ¶¶ 3, Page 23-25)
This Grand corruption is systemic and endemic in ALL al-Hakim cases involves the unscrupulous judicial, law enforcement, governmental and legal entities in power colluding and conspiring using the judicial arm of government whom perform and serve in the roles as suspect, culprit, criminal, evidence, testimony, facts, truth, perjury, investigator, witness, defendant, conspirators, corruptors, colluders, co-counsel, judge, jury, executioner, as the opposition party with their agenda of criminal corruption and persecution to the detriment and oppression of al-Hakim through the illegal use of public funds!
Judges do not have discretion not to disqualify themselves. By law, they are bound to follow the law. Should a judge not disqualify himself as required by law, then the judge has given another example of his “appearance of partiality” which further disqualifies the judge. al-Hakim again renews the request for those affected Judges to disqualify themselves, ALL of them, including ALL those named herein.
The fact that the trial court, the judges, clerks, and court administration are parties is an insuperable moral, ethical, and legal obstacle since they are more than a nominal party. (People v. Cimarusti, supra, 81 Cal. App.3d 314, 320; U.S. Financial v. Sullivan (1974) 37 Cal. App.3d 5, 12, fn. 6 [112 Cal. Rptr. 18].)
“I don’t care about challenges, they don’t mean anything to me, I’m not scared of them!”. “He has said
that he files complaints, files challenges to document the actions of the court”. “He filed complaints with me when I was presiding court judge”, “he’s a litigator in his own way”

– Judge C, Don Clay on al-Hakim’s challenges and 56 complaints filed with and against him over the years
The 56 complaints listed in the 140 PAGE COMPLAINT and CHALLENGE against judge Clay is only a small sample, but since 1980, and more recently 2000, as a matter of documentation, al-Hakim has filed and served a variety of letters, formal complaints, legal actions and legal challenges with the United States Attorney General’s Office- Department of Justice; Federal and California State Judges, their ruling bodies and Associations; the Alameda County Superior Court of California, United States Attorney’s Office- Northern District; United States District Court- Northern Division, Attorney General of California, Alameda County District Attorney; City of Oakland and Oakland City Attorney; Federal, State and local law enforcement; Federal, State and local politicians; regarding the many blatant civil rights violations, fraud, criminal activities and corruption of these judicial, law enforcement, governmental and legal entities that was widely distributed over the internet and posted on many websites. (see 140 PAGE COMPLAINT and CHALLENGE of Judge Clay filed OCTOBER 3, 2018, and “al-Hakim 56 Complaints listed Document Communications with Clay Detail Corruption and Cover UP!”, filed December 19, 2018, in al-Hakim v. Interserver Inc., RG18-888371)
In July, 2005, al-Hakim filed a Federal Corruption Complaint with the United States Attorney General, Department of Justice, of a hate crime of Islamophobia and Xenophobia committed against him during the trial al-Hakim v. CSAA and Rescue, et. al”  in Superior Court of Alameda County, California.
al-Hakim’s initial investigation of his USDOJ demanded a change in this criminal, tactical policy of isolation, victimization, criminalization and the attempted entrapment of al-Hakim as the continuing victim, including the use of government initiated, Nixon era “White House Plumbers” and CoIntelpro style dirty tricks!
This State sponsored persecutory terror and civil conspiracy has brought into play Federal, Sate County and local judicial, law enforcement, governmental and legal entities and agencies (“entities”) to further their continued investigation of al-Hakim whom has been surveilled for years and continues today with the compromising of many agents and informants covers due to their sloppiness. These actions of these judicial, law enforcement, governmental and legal entities and agencies are just one example of the continuing efforts of law enforcement to silence and eliminate al-Hakim, even by death, as their “enemy of the State” adversary when al-Hakim has caught and exposed them as they have been entrapped in their own criminal snares!
Respectfully,

Abdul-Jalil

VENDETTA- TARGETED al-HAKIM by ”FIXING CASES” in Furtherance of Corruption Agenda

MEDIA ADVISORY

Judicial challenges themselves are not, however, evidence a want or delay of prosecution. A party is entitled to challenge a judicial officer for cause or bias.” “The challenges appear to be filed in an earnest belief that the judges of this Court ought to be disqualified from deciding this case and that each successive challenge will overcome the prior’s shortcomings.””the Court hopes and encourages both parties to take this new judicial assignment as a good time to wipe the slate clean, forgive any earlier acrimony, and proceed to resolve and adjudicate the claims raised by the Complaint in normal order and good faith. Al-Hakim deserves a chance to have his claims adjudicated.” “Both parties deserve the rights to fair procedure and due process guaranteed to them by law. In short, this case deserves a chance to proceed on its merits, and now is an opportune time as any to do so.”
Judge Stephen Kaus, Tentative Ruling made September 11, 2018.
Judge Kaus admits to the courts acrimony and animus toward al-Hakim, and asks to wipe the slate clean and move forward in good faith as al-Hakim deserves a chance to have his claims adjudicated with the rights to fair procedure and due process guaranteed to them by law!
al-Hakim’s Declaration to Bigoted Judge Brand Order to Show Cause to DECLARE ABDUL- JALIL AL-HAKIM a Vexatious Litigant: Brand OSC Vex Litg Decl copy
al-Hakim’s Opposition to Bigoted Judge Brand Order to Show Cause to Declare ABDUL- JALIL AL-HAKIM a Vexatious Litigant: Brand OSC Opposition to Vexatious Litigant copy
VENDETTA- TARGETED AL-HAKIM “MUSLIM BAN” by ”FIXING CASES” in Furtherance of Corruption Agenda, IS PURE RETALIATION
The judges, clerks and court administration has been and are “fixing” cases against al-Hakim attempting to protect the opposition as they have scheduled proceedings DEMANDING the hearing be on a date al-Hakim can NOT attend due to religious commitments that has been known to the defendants and the court for nearly 40 years, while REFUSING to have those proceedings on a date al-Hakim can attend, yet! (see “Opposition to Case Fixing”, filed April 4, 2018, in al-Hakim v. Interserver Inc., RG18-888371)
As mentioned earlier, on April 3, April 15, and today, April 17, 2019, al-Hakim sent two faxes and emails each time to the court and opposing parties announcing the fact the court has scheduled these proceedings Friday, April 19, 2019, a date that Brand knows al-Hakim will NOT be able to attend due to a 40 year religious commitments know to Brand, defendants and the court, in another effort to take a default against al-Hakim in furtherance of their VENDETTA Targeting al-Hakim with their Muslim Ban and al-Hakim requested the hearing date be changed to a Monday or Wednesday. After TEN REQUESTED NOTICES FOR A CONTINUANCE and they were NOT answered. Finally, later on April 17, 2019, al-Hakim received an email from the department 511 clerk stating “Abdul-Jalil – Emailing the department is not sufficient notice for a continuance. If you need help obtaining a continuance please feel free to seek counsel or contact the self help center. This email address is only for people seeking reservations.”. (see April 17, 2019 email from Dept 511)
This response clearly establishes their intent to take a default by design as the court suggest that he seek legal aid in filing a motion to continue! A COMPLETE WASTE OF TIME AND MONEY SOLELY TO PERSECUTE AL-HAKIM AND REWARD THE COURT AND DEFENDANTS!
Oakland City Attorney John Russo’s Political Suicide- Planted Evidence

If it is NOT possible to have litigation with the schedule proposed when the court is open EVERYDAY, the time is free and the court is paid to be there, then bigotry, Islamophobia, and Xenophobia are the specious basis for this continued Grand, Systemic and Endemic Corruption (see 2/25/19 Brand Challenge at ¶¶ 3, Page 23-25), Manipulation of the record and Register of Actions; Obstruction of Justice, Conduct To Pervert or Obstruct Justice, or the Due Administration of the Laws (Pen.Code, §§182, subd. (a)(1), 4570)1 and Conspiracy to Pervert or Obstruct Justice (§182, subd. (a)(5)); the continued Fraud Upon The Court by Judge Brand regarding Motions clearly have a double standard! al-Hakim’s Religion and religious obligations on those days are NOT going to change for judge Brand nor the court.
al-Hakim has had to make multiple requests, once THIRTEEN times, another SEVEN TIMES to have a “Reservation Number to File a Noticed Motion and Ex-Parte motion to be heard on the SAME DATE as litigation previously scheduled, yet the requests were IGNORED/DENIED, and one resulted in the issuing of a default against al-Hakim by scheduling dates that the defendants and the court were aware al-Hakim was unavailable to attend.
The court has failed and refused to respond with their scheduling seeking an uncontested order, thereby making their agenda of hate apparent to all! 
The judges and court administration’s continuing criminal harassment, obstruction of justice, denial of due process and corruption in his uniquely applied and enforced court rules summarily denies al-Hakim’s rights to a fair hearing without any statutory or contractual basis authorizing such a ruling and places an intolerable burden on him, denying his legitimate and undeniable rights and strikes at the heart of his fundamental civil rights and due process under the law, guaranteed by the United States Constitution and California Constitution. No statute in California authorizes the court to deny a right that is uncontroverted while in the process denying such precious fundamental rights of due process and justice. The use of judicial power to permit such injustice raises significant legal questions, and an order is necessary to prevent this abuse.
The judges mindless denials further expose and demonstrate the courts agenda of judicial, law enforcement, governmental and legal entities criminal corruption and persecution, fixing cases against al-Hakim because he is Muslim  and Black, a Whistleblower; appointing themselves a Real Primary Party of Interest to the litigation with their OWN agenda; weaponizing vindictive rulings in furtherance of their agenda; engaging in the defense of opposing parties; the denial of due process, obstruction of justice, the harassment, provocation, and government sponsored terror, the gross examples of white class and privileged bias, prejudice, Islamophobia, Xenophobia, hate induced, vindictive, retaliatory agenda, favoritism, bigotry and racism, al-Hakim continues to experience with the courts retaliation against plaintiff by taking adverse judicial and legal actions against him as punishment of al-Hakim, his family, businesses, and communities they serve continue.
JudicialTyrannyBrand has begun this specious vexatious litigant action to foreclose on al-Hakim’s civil rights to eliminate any further threat he poses to their “honor” and position, while denying al-Hakim any opportunity for truth, fair relief, and justice against them in the “legal system”! The court has heeded al-Hakim’s intentions to not only litigate his cases but some directly involve the corruption naming judges dating back nearly 40 years and the courts can not afford nor will they allow this to happen! They will shut down al-Hakim at ALL COST!
The cases and hearings, which involves contested issues of law or fact, and which had been assigned to Judge Brand, should NEVER have been assigned and no matters hereinafter arising should be heard or assigned to Judge Brand, on the ground that he is irreparably conflicted, tainted, biased, and prejudiced against the plaintiff.
Brand does not provide any answers to the Challenges served on him because he can’t afford to incriminate himself until finally he decided NOT to answer a Green Key challenge until over a month after the Challenge was served, thereby consenting to the Challenge. al-Hakim incorporated those entire challenges therein until such time as he answers the challenges!
Respectfully,

Abdul-Jalil

VENDETTA- TARGETED al-HAKIM “CAMPAIGN OF CALUMNY DECEIT”

Rise of Fear Politics

MEDIA ADVISORY

Judicial challenges themselves are not, however, evidence a want or delay of prosecution. A party is entitled to challenge a judicial officer for cause or bias.” “The challenges appear to be filed in an earnest belief that the judges of this Court ought to be disqualified from deciding this case and that each successive challenge will overcome the prior’s shortcomings.””the Court hopes and encourages both parties to take this new judicial assignment as a good time to wipe the slate clean, forgive any earlier acrimony, and proceed to resolve and adjudicate the claims raised by the Complaint in normal order and good faith. Al-Hakim deserves a chance to have his claims adjudicated.” “Both parties deserve the rights to fair procedure and due process guaranteed to them by law. In short, this case deserves a chance to proceed on its merits, and now is an opportune time as any to do so.”
Judge Stephen Kaus, Tentative Ruling made September 11, 2018.
Judge Kaus admits to the courts acrimony and animus toward al-Hakim, and asks to wipe the slate clean and move forward in good faith as al-Hakim deserves a chance to have his claims adjudicated with the rights to fair procedure and due process guaranteed to them by law!
al-Hakim’s Declaration to Bigoted Judge Brand Order to Show Cause to DECLARE ABDUL- JALIL AL-HAKIM a Vexatious Litigant: Brand OSC Vex Litg Decl copy
al-Hakim’s Opposition to Bigoted Judge Brand Order to Show Cause to Declare ABDUL- JALIL AL-HAKIM a Vexatious Litigant: Brand OSC Opposition to Vexatious Litigant copy
VENDETTA- TARGETED al-HAKIM “CAMPAIGN OF CALUMNY DECEIT”

al-Hakim has long been targeted by United States Attorney General’s Office- Department of Justice; Federal and California State Judges, their ruling bodies and Associations; the Alameda County Superior Court of California, United States Attorney’s Office- Northern District; United States District Court- Northern Division, Attorney General of California, Alameda County District Attorney; City of Oakland and Oakland City Attorney; Federal, State and local law enforcement; Federal, State and local politicians.
The targeting by Brand, the judges, Alameda County Superior Court Administration, Alameda County District Attorney, City of Oakland and their City Attorney, California Attorney General, Governor Jerry Brown, Senator Kamala Harris, CSAA, Wellpoint, EBMUD, AT&T, Equinix, Interserver, and others, their contractors and agents (including its attorneys), with unscrupulous judicial, law enforcement, governmental and legal entities in their VENDETTA- TARGETED AL-HAKIM PERSECUTION, “MUSLIM BAN” by ”FIXING CASES” in Furtherance of their Corruption Agenda, IS PURE RETALIATION, with an aggressive campaign of calumny deceit, encouraged opposing parties to do all that they can to cause the ruin of al-Hakim, his family, their businesses, their business, real and personal property, his community and the clients they serve. In the legal context, Brand, the judges and court administration, CSAA, their contractors and agents (including its attorneys), with unscrupulous judicial, law enforcement, governmental and legal entities are encouraged to use the process of litigation to “harass and discourage rather than to win.””The Law can be used very easily to harass and enough harassment on somebody who will be simply pushed to the thin edge, well knowing that he is not privileged, will generally be sufficient to cause his professional if not physical death. If possible. of course, ruin him utterly. 
Their tactics are more extreme than muckraking or character assassination, wherein the court and opposing parties fabricate and gathered negative, embarrassing or compromising information about al-Hakim, publish and disperse that information as widely as possible to annihilate him by destroying his credibility or moral character in any and all contexts leaving him a social and legal “pariah” in society incapable of being associated with or represented. 
Pursuant to the practices described herein, Brand, the judges and court administration, CSAA, their contractors and agents (including its attorneys), with unscrupulous judicial, law enforcement, governmental and legal entities set about to destroy Mr. al-Hakim. One of the many things they did to al-Hakim was to offer compensation to bribe members of his family in an effort to take his real, personal and business property from him and to cause him great pain and suffering in hopes that he would perish. Ultimately, the court and CSAA proceeded to bludgeon Mr. al-Hakim with over-burdensome litigation tactics, as well as communicating with and intimidating his partners into abandoning him, leaving al-Hakim standing alone. 
The court and CSAA intimidated, coerced, bribed, and otherwise elicited perjurious, slanderous, libelous and false statements from various people about al-Hakim and implied prurient activities. What al-Hakim did not know at that time, however, was the fact that agents, informants, and contractors acted for and on behalf of Brand, the judges and court administration, CSAA, their contractors and agents (including its attorneys), with unscrupulous judicial, law enforcement, governmental and legal entities by unethical and criminal means, instigated the acts, which gave, rise to the fraudulent, corrupt orders in underlying cases. 
In doing so, Brand, the judges and court administration, CSAA, their contractors and agents (including its attorneys), with unscrupulous judicial, law enforcement, governmental and legal entities actions precluded Mr. al-Hakim from ever having a fair opportunity in any of his cases, and makes it explicitly clear that he is anything but a vexatious litigant in that the unanswered challenges and orders replete with perjurious, incriminating statements were not only false but obtained through criminal conduct. In short the court instigated and committed criminal acts with these entire “illegal proceedings” solely for the purpose of the unscrupulous judicial, law enforcement, governmental and legal entities illegally utilizing the full force and resources of the government in a covert criminal undercover sting operation by fostering, fabricating and manipulating any filing, pleading, argument, facts, truth, faxes, emails, phone calls, voicemail messages, letters, hearings, request, reservation numbers, motion practice, motion titles, ex-parte applications, hearings, parties, appearances, continuances, schedules, proceedings, register of actions, Court Domainweb, statements, evidence, testimony, documents, word, inference, vague reference, or gesture that they can remotely interpret as evidence of any remote action they seek to advocate to incriminate, charge, try, convict, incarcerate and eliminate al-Hakim, that DESTROYED his legitimate suits and then sought to have Mr. al-Hakim declared a vexatious litigant for seeking relief based on those criminal and civil violations of the law!
Respectfully,
Abdul-Jalil

VENDETTA- TARGETED al-HAKIM with “Muslim Ban”

stop-corruption

MEDIA ADVISORY

Judicial challenges themselves are not, however, evidence a want or delay of prosecution. A party is entitled to challenge a judicial officer for cause or bias.” “The challenges appear to be filed in an earnest belief that the judges of this Court ought to be disqualified from deciding this case and that each successive challenge will overcome the prior’s shortcomings.””the Court hopes and encourages both parties to take this new judicial assignment as a good time to wipe the slate clean, forgive any earlier acrimony, and proceed to resolve and adjudicate the claims raised by the Complaint in normal order and good faith. Al-Hakim deserves a chance to have his claims adjudicated.” “Both parties deserve the rights to fair procedure and due process guaranteed to them by law. In short, this case deserves a chance to proceed on its merits, and now is an opportune time as any to do so.”
Judge Stephen Kaus, Tentative Ruling made September 11, 2018.
Judge Kaus admits to the courts acrimony and animus toward al-Hakim, and asks to wipe the slate clean and move forward in good faith as al-Hakim deserves a chance to have his claims adjudicated with the rights to fair procedure and due process guaranteed to them by law!
al-Hakim’s Declaration to Bigoted Judge Brand Order to Show Cause to DECLARE ABDUL- JALIL AL-HAKIM a Vexatious Litigant: Brand OSC Vex Litg Decl copy
al-Hakim’s Opposition to Bigoted Judge Brand Order to Show Cause to DECLARE ABDUL- JALIL AL-HAKIM a Vexatious Litigant: Brand OSC Opposition to Vexatious Litigant copy
VENDETTA- TARGETED al-HAKIM with “Muslim Ban”

Court Scheduled Proceedings to Take Default against al-Hakim in VENDETTA Targeting al-Hakim with their “Muslim Ban”
Brand even had the hearing set for Thursday, April 18, 2019 and then changed it to Friday, April 19, 2019, both dates that Brand knows al-Hakim will NOT be able to attend due to a 40 year religious commitments know to Brand, defendants and the court, in another effort to take a default against al-Hakim. On April 3, April 15, and today, April 17, 2019, al-Hakim sent two faxes and emails each time to the court and opposing parties announcing the fact the court has scheduled these proceedings in furtherance of their VENDETTA Targeting al-Hakim with their Muslim Ban and requesting the hearing date be changed to a Monday or Wednesday. Thats TEN REQUESTED NOTICES FOR A CONTINUANCE and they were NOT answered. Finally, later on April 17, 2019, al-Hakim received an email from the department 511 clerk stating “Abdul-Jalil – Emailing the department is not sufficient notice for a continuance. If you need help obtaining a continuance please feel free to seek counsel or contact the self help center. This email address is only for people seeking reservations.”. (see April 17, 2019 email from Dept 511 under Exhibits)
This response clearly establishes their intent to take a default by design! The court can not complain about the cost of litigation in al-Hakim cases when they are responsible for the constant motions to continue, when they would not address the fact THEY chose the date without any input from al-Hakim knowing that he could NOT attend and rather than make a mutual accommodation, they suggest that he seek legal aid in filing a motion to continue! A COMPLETE WASTE OF TIME AND MONEY SOLELY TO PERSECUTE AL-HAKIM AND REWARD THE COURT AND DEFENDANTS!
Brand, the judges, the court administrations, and opposing parties actions have altered the course of litigation in scheduling proceedings on dates they know plaintiff can not attend and refusing to schedule proceedings on dates that he can attend, delaying and denying reservation numbers to file motions, failing to file or respond to plaintiff’s filing of oppositions and contesting to rulings and orders, demanding documents they already have or have better access to than al-Hakim, adding and removing proceedings from the docket and register of actions without any proceedings or authority, continuing the atmosphere of intolerable TERROR in furtherance of their corruption and agenda of hate induced persecution and entrapment, with their version of the targeted “al-Hakim Muslim Ban” (see 2/25/19 Brand Challenge at ¶¶ 20, Page 36-38) compounded with the Grand, Systemic and Endemic Corruption (see 2/25/19 Brand Challenge at ¶¶ 3, Page 23-25) has irreparably and irretrievably altered the legal outcome of the proceedings herein questioned!
Respectfully,
Abdul-Jalil

Order to Declare al-HAKIM Vexatious Litigant is PURELY RETALIATORY

MEDIA ADVISORY

Judicial challenges themselves are not, however, evidence a want or delay of prosecution. A party is entitled to challenge a judicial officer for cause or bias.” “The challenges appear to be filed in an earnest belief that the judges of this Court ought to be disqualified from deciding this case and that each successive challenge will overcome the prior’s shortcomings.””the Court hopes and encourages both parties to take this new judicial assignment as a good time to wipe the slate clean, forgive any earlier acrimony, and proceed to resolve and adjudicate the claims raised by the Complaint in normal order and good faith. Al-Hakim deserves a chance to have his claims adjudicated.” “Both parties deserve the rights to fair procedure and due process guaranteed to them by law. In short, this case deserves a chance to proceed on its merits, and now is an opportune time as any to do so.”
Judge Stephen Kaus, Tentative Ruling made September 11, 2018.
Judge Kaus admits to the courts acrimony and animus toward al-Hakim, and asks to wipe the slate clean and move forward in good faith as al-Hakim deserves a chance to have his claims adjudicated with the rights to fair procedure and due process guaranteed to them by law!
al-Hakim’s Declaration to Bigoted Judge Brand Order to Show Cause to DECLARE ABDUL- JALIL AL-HAKIM a Vexatious Litigant: Brand OSC Vex Litg Decl copy
al-Hakim’s Opposition to Bigoted Judge Brand Order to Show Cause to Declare ABDUL- JALIL AL-HAKIM a Vexatious Litigant: Brand OSC Opposition to Vexatious Litigant copy
Order to Declare al-HAKIM Vexatious Litigant is PURELY RETALIATORY
Judge Tigar’s Mental Meltdown

 
Judge Jeff Brand, other judges listed herein, court clerks and superior court administration, in concert with unscrupulous Federal, Sate County and local judicial, law enforcement, governmental and legal entities and agencies (“entities”) have committed over 150 violations under United States and California State Constitutions against Plaintiff Abdul-Jalil al-Hakim that have been graphically detailed and documented over 40 years! (United States Constitution Amendments I, V, VI, VIII, XIV, For Violations of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment Under Color Of State Law; Section 1983).
This action is PURELY RETALIATORY, calculated to foreclose on al-Hakim’s civil rights as promised to protect those judges known and documented to have repeatedly violated the law for years and just like Brand, they have been, are and will be a defendant and witness in those expected proceedings!! This is their collective legal defense effort to eliminate any possibility of that ever happening!
Brand has a challenge matter still pending, has NOT issued a ruling in Green Key default after their failing and refusing to file an opposition to the motion to vacate the writ of execution awarded to them by default taken against al-Hakim and THREE (3) failures to appear to oppose that motion, unlawfully evicting al-Hakim from his 40 year home, thereby strategically delaying the order to avoid further evidence of fraud on court and to defeat this alleged vexatious litigant action wherein the judges and courts have acted as defendants CSAA co-counsel and CSAA has acted as judges counsel and government agent/informant for 20 years! BRANDS ACTIONS IN THIS CASE ARE INDEFENSIBLE! THUS THIS VEXATIOUS ACTION
JudicialTyrannyHe installed the motion practice schedule to evade evidence of fraud on the court with the long pending six (6) CSAA orders so they could not be presented. 
This vexatious motion was filed on February 28, 2019, with opening brief due March 22, 2019, and reply brief due April 5, 2019, and the hearing set for April 19, 2019. Brand finally issued the long pending six (6) orders on March 24, 2019; three days AFTER the submission due date for the opening brief.
al-Hakim waited to receive the orders BEFORE filing the opposition/reply brief to include the orders as further evidence of Brands fraud on the court and exposing THIS frivolous motion as his sole defense for his, the judges, and court administration continuing fraud, corruption and conspiracy.
Respectfully,

Abdul-Jalil