UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DIVISION OF VIRGINIA (Charlottesville)

JANICE WOLK GRENADIER, (JWG) FEDERAL CASE No. 3:22-cv-00016

Pro Se PLAINTIFF, 1 ORANGE VA CASE NO. CL 22000241-00.
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
V.

ANDREW GEORGE MCCABE

JAMES BRIEN2 COMEY JR.

WILLIAM PELHAM BARR

DEFENDANTS

ETHICS AMENDED COMPLAINT FILED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF

VA CODE § 54.1-3915. RESTRICTIONS AS TO RULES AND REGULATIONS
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE ETHICS HANDBOOK FOR ON & OFF-DUTY CONDUCT
FBI ETHICS AND INTEGRITY PROGRAM POLICY GUIDE
“PUBLIC SERVICE IS A PUBLIC TRUST”

The Plaintiff, Janice Wolk Grenadier (JWG), a resident of Virginia filed an Ethics Complaint
under the provisions of VA Code§ 54.1-3915 In the Circuit Court of Orange Virginia. In this civil
Ethics Complaint, JWG alleges at the minimum, the Defendants (Defendants), named above,
jointly, and severally, have engaged in a pattern and practice of intentional, unethical conduct in the
Commonwealth of Virginia,

The Department of Justice has moved this case to the USDC for the Western Division of
Virginia in Charlottesville Division. That the case being fitted for the State of Virginia and not
including Federal Ethics requirements of Federal Employment, JWG adds the Federal Ethics for
the Department of Justice (DOJ) https://www.justice.gov/jmd/ethics-handbook

and the Federal Bureau of Investigation FBI

https://www.judicialwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/JW-v.-DOJ-Comey-memos
-00262-28-353.pdf

1
Addresses removed of Plaintiff and Defendants from Original Complaint
2
Error: James Allen Comey with Virginia Beach Address on Original Complaint correction here James Brien
Comey Jr.
1
In the conduct of their business as lawyers, United States Attorney General William Barr, Deputy
Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation Andrew McCabe and the 7th director of the Federal
Bureau of Investigation James Comey, JWG alleges the Defendants violated the Virginia Code of
Professional Conduct while violating also their Oaths of Office to protect the public while upholding
the United States Constitution of America Constitution the Supreme Law of the Land.

In conducting their business as lawyers Or when in their appointments with the Federal
Government the Defendants do not have any "Immunity Defenses" to assert in a Complaint
alleging unethical conduct.

Lawyers as leaders conducting business for the Federal Government in the Commonwealth
of Virginia (Virginia or VA) serve the people, Virginia taxpayers, and should have done so equally.
Instead covered up the crimes of the Rich and Powerful “Old Boys Network” of Virginia.

Throughout the Federal Government including the Department of Justice there appears to
be 14 General Principles of Ethical Conduct states:

The following general principles apply to every employee and may form the basis for the
standards contained in this part. Where a situation is not covered by the standards set forth in
this part, employees shall apply the principles set forth in this section in determining whether
their conduct is proper.

1. Public service is a public trust, requiring employees to place loyalty to the

Constitution, the laws and ethical principles above private gain.
2. Employees shall not hold financial interests that conflict with the conscientious
performance of duty.
3. Employees shall not engage in financial transactions using nonpublic Government
information or allow the improper use of such information to further any private
interest.
4. An employee shall not, except as permitted by [these standards of conduct], solicit or
accept any gift or other item of monetary value from any person or entity seeking
official action from, doing business with, or conducting activities regulated by the
employee’s agency, or whose interests may be substantially affected by the performance
or nonperformance of the employee’s duties.
5. Employees shall put forth honest effort in the performance of their duties.
6. Employees shall not knowingly make unauthorized commitments or promises of any
kind purporting to bind the Government.
7. Employees shall not use public office for private gain.

2
 8. Employees shall act impartially and not give preferential treatment to any private
organization or individual.
9. Employees shall protect and conserve Federal property and shall not use it for other
than authorized activities.
10. Employees shall not engage in outside employment or activities, including seeking or
negotiating for employment, that conflict with their official Government duties and
responsibilities.
11. Employees shall disclose waste, fraud, abuse, and corruption to the appropriate
authorities.
12. Employees shall satisfy in good faith their obligations as citizens, including all just
financial obligations, especially those—such as Federal, State, or local taxes—that are
imposed by law.
13. Employees shall adhere to all laws and regulations that provide equal opportunity for
all Americans regardless of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, or handicap.
14. Employees shall endeavor to avoid any actions creating the appearance that they are
violating the law or the ethical standards set forth in this part. Whether particular
circumstances create an appearance that the law or these standards have been violated
shall be determined from the perspective of a reasonable person with knowledge of the
relevant facts

Conduct An employee shall not engage in criminal, infamous, dishonest,

Prejudicial to immoral or disgraceful conduct, or other conduct prejudicial to the
the government. In connection with overseas service, the State
Government Department has defined notoriously disgraceful conduct as
conduct which, were it to become widely known, would embarrass,
discredit, or subject to opprobrium the perpetrator and the United
States. 5 C.F.R 2635.101 (b)

The Defendants Ignored the criminal activity brought to them directly through emails, phone
calls and or to their agents.

The public, various entities, and people globally, along with Virginia taxpayers pay the
salaries / bonuses et al to protect persons who live in Virginia et al or have any business interests
in Virginia.

In support of this Ethics Complaint, JWG states as follows:

3
 1. Any person or entity has the Standing to file an Ethics Complaint with a Virginia
court, including Virginia State Bar personnel and citizen JWG.
2. There is no Virginia statute of limitations for Ethics Complaints filed with the
Virginia State Bar for investigation and reporting. See VA Code § 54.1-3910, et
seq.; https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title54.1/chapter39/section54.1-3900/
3. There is no Virginia statute of limitations for Ethics Complaints filed with a
Virginia court requesting that the court discipline a lawyer practicing law in
Virginia or requesting that a Virginia court suspend or revoke a lawyer's license
to practice law in the Commonwealth of Virginia. See VA Code§ 54.1-3915;
See
https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title54.1/chapter39/section54.1-54.1-391/
4. There is no statute of limitations for misconduct, violating the ethics of
their public service required under their appointments and or
employment by the government .

JURISDICTION

JWG restates and incorporates herein all foregoing statements as if restated in full.

The Department of Justice moved the case from a Virginia Court and the fear of the Plaintiff is that
it is for Special Treatment by the court.

The Jurisdiction for Virginia State Court as follows:

VA Code § 54.1-3915 specifies "Virginia courts."

VA Code § 54.1-3915 prohibits the SCV from promulgating "any rule or regulation or
method of procedure which eliminates the jurisdiction of the courts to deal with the
discipline of attorneys. . ."

The SCV reiterated this restrictive prohibition found in VA Code § 54.1-3915 in Supreme Court
of Virginia's procedural Rule 13-2 for Virginia State Bar disciplinary procedure, which states as
follows:

Rule 13-2 Authority of the Courts

Nothing in this Paragraph shall be interpreted so as to eliminate, restrict or impair the

jurisdiction of the courts of this Commonwealth to deal with the disciplining of Lawyers
as provided by law.

4
 Every Judge shall have authority to take such action as may be necessary or
appropriate to protect the interests of clients of any Attorney whose license is subject
to a Suspension or Revocation.

Every Circuit Court shall have power to enforce any order, summons or subpoena
issued by the Board, a District Committee or Bar Counsel and to adjudge disobedience
thereof as contempt. Updated: November 25, 2019. [Emphasis added.]
https://www.vsb.org/pro-guidelines/index.php/bar-govt/procedure-for-disciplinin
g-suspending-and-disbarring-lawyers/13-2

The Virginia State Bar does not have jurisdiction to impose discipline on

Attorneys who are practicing law in Virginia.

See

VA Code VA Code § 54.1-3910 :

VA Code§ 54.1-3910 Organization and government of Virginia State Bar

states explicitly that the VSB "shall act as an administrative agency of the Court limited
to "' investigating and reporting violations of rules and regulations adopted by the Court
under this article.'" [Emphasis added.]; and

VA Code§ 54.1-3915 Restrictions as to rules and regulations, states strictly that:

Notwithstanding the foregoing provisions of this article, the Supreme Court shall not
promulgate rules or regulations prescribing a code of ethics governing the professional
conduct of attorneys which are inconsistent with any statute; "nor shall it promulgate
any rule or regulation or method of procedure which eliminates the jurisdiction of the
courts to deal with the discipline of attorneys". . . [Emphasis added.]

VA Code § 54.1-3915 authorizes Virginia State Bar lawyers, employees, or volunteers

to file civil Ethics Complaints in the Virginia Courts; and

VA Code § 54.1-3915 provides that a Virginia court, after a trial, shall discipline
attorneys practicing law in Virginia.

All Defendants are lawyers.

VENUE

JWG restates and incorporates herein all foregoing statements as if restated in full.

The Department of Justice moved the case from a Virginia Court and the fear of the Plaintiff is that
it is for Special Treatment by the court.
5
For Virginia Venue the Code was as follows:

The Virginia Code does not specify a particular venue for civil Ethics Complaints
except in VA Code § 54.1-3915. Orange Virginia has taken Venue of several Ethics
Complaints.

See
https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title54.1/chapter39/section54.1-3915

The provisions of VA Code § 54.1-3915 specify "Virginia courts" in general as the proper
venue.

Venue lies in all Virginia courts to process civil ethics Complaints filed by any person or entity,
including Complaints filed by the Virginia State Bar.

All Defendants violated Federal Ethics of “Public Service is Public Trust”.

All Defendants showed favoritism to those with the Powerful and Rich ignoring “Hate Crimes
Against JWG for being Catholic in the present by the FBI and DOJ.

PARTIES

JANICE WOLK GRENADIER Pro Se Plaintiff has 3 main issues in the State of Virginia
Courts. The State of Virginia Courts are an Enterprise of a two tier system where Justice is
for sale. JWG being the x-wife of the son of a Judge has sat at the table and seen cases
traded. Plaintiff has been a victim of the system since on or around July 7, 1990.

ANDREW GEORGE MCCABE Defendant Deputy Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation
(FBI) from February 2016 to March 2018. Attorney General Jeff Sessions fired McCabe on March 16,
2018, 26 hours before his scheduled retirement.

Is also a defendant in the UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
Case 2:22-cv-14102-DMM / Donald J. Trump, Plaintiff v. HILLARY R. CLINTON, HFACC, INC.,
DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE, DNC SERVICES CORPORATION, PERKINS COIE, LLC,
MICHAEL SUSSMANN, MARC ELIAS, DEBBIE WASSERMAN SCHULTZ, CHARLES HALLIDAY
DOLAN, JR., JAKE SULLIVAN, JOHN PODESTA, ROBERT E. MOOK, PHILLIPE REINES, FUSION
GPS, GLENN SIMPSON, PETER FRITSCH, NELLIE OHR, BRUCE OHR, ORBIS BUSINESS
INTELLIGENCE, LTD., CHRISTOPHER STEELE, IGOR DANCHENKO, NEUSTAR, INC., RODNEY
JOFFE, JAMES COMEY, PETER STRZOK, LISA PAGE, KEVIN CLINESMITH, ANDREW MCCABE,
JOHN DOES 1 THROUGH 10 (said names being fictitious and unknown persons), and ABC
CORPORATIONS 1 THROUGH 10 (said names being fictitious and unknown entities), Defendants.
Read more: https://judicialpedia.com/listing/donald-j-trump-vs-hillary-r-clinton-rico/

6
On or around January 2, 2020 Andrew McCabe said he lied to FBI about Wall Street Journal leak
New York Post, By Bob Fredericks:

Former FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe apologized for lying to agents who spent
weeks investigating the source of a leak to the Wall Street Journal that actually came
from him, new documents reveal.

See
https://nypost.com/2020/01/02/andrew-mccabe-said-he-lied-to-fbi-about-wall-street-jour
nal-leak/

That in a Run for office Terry McAuliffe aided the wife of Andrew McCabe in a Virginia Race
for the Legislature close to $700,000.

JAMES BRIEN3 COMEY JR. Defendant American lawyer who was the 7th director of the Federal
Bureau of Investigation (FBI) from 2013 until his dismissal in May 2017, United States deputy
attorney general from December 2003 to August 2005.

In September 2013, President Barack Obama appointed Comey to the position of Director of the FBI
In that capacity, he was responsible for overseeing the FBI's investigation of the Hillary Clinton email
controversy. His role in the 2016 U.S. presidential election was highly controversial

Is also a defendant in the UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
Case 2:22-cv-14102-DMM / Donald J. Trump, Plaintiff v. HILLARY R. CLINTON, HFACC, INC.,
DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE, DNC SERVICES CORPORATION, PERKINS COIE, LLC,
MICHAEL SUSSMANN, MARC ELIAS, DEBBIE WASSERMAN SCHULTZ, CHARLES HALLIDAY
DOLAN, JR., JAKE SULLIVAN, JOHN PODESTA, ROBERT E. MOOK, PHILLIPE REINES, FUSION
GPS, GLENN SIMPSON, PETER FRITSCH, NELLIE OHR, BRUCE OHR, ORBIS BUSINESS
INTELLIGENCE, LTD., CHRISTOPHER STEELE, IGOR DANCHENKO, NEUSTAR, INC., RODNEY
JOFFE, JAMES COMEY, PETER STRZOK, LISA PAGE, KEVIN CLINESMITH, ANDREW MCCABE,
JOHN DOES 1 THROUGH 10 (said names being fictitious and unknown persons), and ABC
CORPORATIONS 1 THROUGH 10 (said names being fictitious and unknown entities), Defendants.
Read more: https://judicialpedia.com/listing/donald-j-trump-vs-hillary-r-clinton-rico/

Both James Comey and Andrew McCabe were in high positions with the FBI when the
following took place:

1. JWG was illegally jailed to silence me in further exposing Senator Mark Warner trading a
Federal Judgeship to turn the Virginia Legislature to Democrats - No one was held
accountable

United States Senate elections in Virginia, 2014 - Ballotpedia

https://ballotpedia.org › United_States_Senate_elections...

3
Error: James Allen Comey with Virginia Beach Address on Original Complaint correction here James Brien
Comey Jr.
7
 Incumbent: Mark Warner (D) was the incumbent going into the 2014 election. ... including a
federal judgeship, for the senator's daughter in an effort to ...

Warner, Gillespie spar over Puckett scandal, energy, Ebola

https://www.washingtonpost.com › local › 2014/10/13
October 13, 2014. RICHMOND — Republican Ed Gillespie attacked U.S. Sen. Mark R. Warner
for discussing the possibility of a federal judgeship for the ...
​
​ Mark Warner denies offering job to senator's daughter - The ...
​ https://www.washingtonpost.com › local › 2014/10/13
​ Oct 13, 2014 — The U.S. senator from Virginia said he brainstormed job options for the
daughter of a long-time friend.

Sen. Mark Warner is not the nice guy some think he is - Times ...
http://www.timesvirginian.com › opinion › letters_to_editor
Oct 22, 2014 — Warner proved that he's just another Democrat, political, hack, one who was
willing to trade a federal judgeship for democrat control of the ...

2. Terry McAulliff: Chinese investors sue McAuliffe, Rodham over green-car investments
Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe and former Democratic presidential candidate
Hillary Clinton’s brother Anthony Rodham are facing a $17 million fraud lawsuit from
Chinese investors in Greentech Automotive, an electric car company that appears to be
struggling to survive.

A group of 32 Chinese citizens filed the suit last week in Fairfax County, Virginia court,
claiming that they were swindled out of about $560,000 apiece as a result of
misrepresentations made by McAuliffe and Rodham—two of the most prominent and
politically connected proponents of the venture aimed at manufacturing electric cars in
the U.S.
https://www.politico.com/story/2017/11/28/greentech-automotive-lawsuit-terry-mca
uliffe-262771

3. The 2014 Directive that NO VIRGINIA FBI AGENTS COULD INVESTIGATE PUBLIC
CORRUPTION
https://archives.fbi.gov/archives/washingtondc/press-releases/2014/fbi-announces-campaign-t
o-seek-public-assistance-identifying-acts-of-public-corruption

February 18, 2014 - FBI cautions residents of public corruption in Va. -

http://www.wusa9.com/story/news/local/2014/02/18/fbi-cautions-residents-of-public-corrupti
on-in-northern-virginia/5585877/ WASHINGTON (WUSA) -- The Federal Bureau of
Investigation's (FBI) Washington Field Office is looking to identify any public corruption
occurring in Northern Virginia. The FBI says public corruption can occur "when a public
official, at any level of government – local, state or federal – does any official act in exchange
for money, or other free goods or services, for private gain. Public corruption could also
include public employees who take something of value for their own personal gain, thereby
violating the public's trust." The FBI says many of their investigations into public corruption

8
 start once they receive a tip from someone. If you want to help identify potential criminal
activity, the Washington Field Office has set up a Northern Virginia Public Corruption Hotline
at 703-686-6225 and you can also e-mail them at NOVAPC@ic.fbi.gov.
Some of the examples of corruption include:

Government officials such as DMV employees, city inspectors, taxing or zoning

assessors or other regulatory agency employees, or even town councils or mayors;
Contracting officials at all levels, including those who manage government contracts or
regulatory permits; or, school resource officers who manage school accounts;
Local officials colluding with real estate investors to rig the bidding process at
foreclosure auctions;
A person representing the judicial branch - a judge, member of the jury or court
personnel; or,
A person representing law enforcement, who steals drugs from criminals, embezzles
government funds, falsifies records or smuggles contraband

4. GOP operative paid $140,000 for McAuliffe consulting By ALAN SUDERMAN; Feb 4, 2014

A longtime GOP operative who Democratic Gov. Terry McAuliffe recently appointed to
the state’s Alcoholic Beverage Control board was paid $140,000 for consulting on
McAuliffe’s campaign last year, records show.

Boyd Marcus shocked Virginia’s political class last year by endorsing McAuliffe. The
governor’s recent appointment of Marcus to a $130,000-a-year job has angered
Republican lawmakers, who view Marcus as a party traitor and have suggested the
appointment was a political payoff. The governor has denied those suggestions.
https://www.delmarvanow.com/story/news/2014/02/04/gop-operative-paid-140000-
for-mcauliffe-consulting/5207319/

5. The Washington Post: Donor to Clinton Foundation, McAuliffe caught up in

Chinese cash-for-votes scandal By Laura Vozzella & Simon Denyer September 16, 2016

Wang Wenliang, a Chinese billionaire and donor to the Clinton Foundation and
Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe, has been expelled from China’s top legislature
after being caught up in a widespread cash-for-votes scheme.

On Tuesday, China’s national legislature expelled 45 of its nearly 2,900

members, all from the northeastern province of Liaoning, in a huge vote-buying
scandal. The move was part of an investigation into corruption in Liaoning and
a much larger national anti-corruption campaign launched by President Xi
Jinping.

6. Fundraiser For Democrats and husband to Mayor of Falls Church Micheal Gardner
guilty of molesting young girls at sleepover. Hires Hitman to kill girls when the Virginia
Supreme Court lets him out of jail, for FAVOR.
9
WILLIAM PELHAM BARR Defendant American attorney who served as the 77th and 85th United
States Attorney General in the administrations of Presidents George H. W. Bush and Donald Trump.
From 1971 to 1977, Barr was employed by the Central Intelligence Agency. He then served as a law
clerk to judge Malcolm Richard Wilkey of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit. In the 1980s,

His Career outside the Government with Government high level connections has made him a wealthy
man.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND AND HISTORY OF

LAWYER DISCIPLINE OF LAWYERS / DEFENDANTS

5. JWG restates and incorporates herein all foregoing statements as if restated in

full.

6. All Defendants past government federal employees include the Public, Virginia
taxpayers, including JWG, who pay them specifically to protect the Public,
other entities, and people globally.

7. All Defendants past government federal employees, current lawyers, did not
protect the Public, and Virginia taxpayers who pay them to protect the Public,
other entities, or the people affected globally by the unethical conduct of
lawyers practicing law in Virginia.

8. JWG who is a member of the Public, Virginia resident, Virginia taxpayer, and
other entities in Virginia who paid the defendants through taxes to protect JWG
and all the Public from unethical lawyers, judges who all Judges in Virginia are
licensed lawyers in Virginia. They did not do it. They ignored it, and protected
their friends by staying silent, violating “Public Service is Public Trust” several
taped conversations reporting the “Hate Crime” and the Financial Crimes are
taped by JWG from Virginia a one party state.

9. The American Public is saying NO MORE. The United States of America was
created for all to be equal. The Rich and Powerful who have used their
Government insider information have to be held accountable.

10. The Justice system can’t be for only the Rich and Powerful. It must be fair and
just for all. Otherwise, we are no different than China and or Russia.

10
11. The Appearance is we are no different due to the acts and actions of the
Federal and State Governments toward JWG and the Public who have lost all
trust in there Government from the time frame of these Defendants.

12. JWG and the public globally, Virginia residents, and taxpayers do not pay for
the defendants to protect the Rich and Powerful, themselves, their influential
and big-firm lawyer friends, or the other Powerful Government Workers,
Bankers, Corporate Entities, and Leadership of Corporate Entities, Judges.

13. Complaint information in regard to a lawyer can come from many different
sources, Personal Experience, Radio, TV, Internet, and or another person that
was harmed.

14. Plaintiff, being naive, has been fighting for Justice since 1990, was unaware of
the way she was used by members of the Virginia Judiciary, Lawyers, Old Boys
Network till 2008 and the “TRUTH” of the scheme to harm her was exposed.

15. Plaintiff has two issues with a third that came with the desperate feeling that all
Americans get when targeted by the Government, the Powerful and Rich with
the Power and Government behind them including and not limited to the Full
Judiciary Power.

16. Plaintiff reported criminal activity of the State of Virginia to the FBI and wrote
letters and emails directly to defendants Comey and Barr and their agents.

17. The three issues:

a. The chance of Justice by Donald Kempf. I was desperate for Justice

when I met him and the deal was clear. I go back to his apartment and
he helps me get Justice. Exhibit A

b. Divorced in 2000 without a Property Settlement that includes Real

Estate - the collusion of the Executive Branch under McAuliffe, the
Supreme Court of Virginia and many others, including being illegally
jailed and held in Solitary Confinement till 5 pm on Election day so
Senator Mark Warner could be re-elected. Exhibits B

c. An illegal Foreclosure of 15 W. Spring St., Alexandria, VA 22301 with

Troutman Pepper Hamilton Sanders being the leader of the scheme.
Troutman Pepper Hamilton Sanders aka Mays and VAlentine swindled
$30,000.00 from Plaintiff in 1990 to Cover-up theft of funds from the

11
 Trust Account of Sonia Grenadier, the mother of the late Judge Albert
Grenadier. In May of 2008 Divorce lawyer Ilona Grenadier Heckman
admitted to stealing this money, as she stated my x-husband David
Grenadier did not steal it - only left here in her law firm to collude with
Mays & Valentine in the theft of monies and Real Estate. Exhibits C

Further the Insider Trading of Wells Fargo Bank and OCWEN show the
Federal Government is supporting, paying and looking the other way for
Banks and Servicers to loot the American Public

Information from Wallmine about Wells Fargo Bank:

https://wallmine.com/people/15787/charles-w-scharf 213,160 units of Insider stock -

Purchase Price of $6,514,350 = SOLD for $ $37,201,724
PROFIT OF $ 30,687,374

Information from Wallmine about OCWEN:

Leon Cooperman owned 10% of OCWENprior to being exposed according to FORBES IS

WORTH $2,5 BILLION4 - the appearance is and he has been found guilty in the past by the
SEC for Insider Trading. Read More at the SEC, OCWEN INSIDERS Bought 4,106,171
stocks for $12,114,662 = SOLD FOR $317,056,930 PROFIT $304,942,268 on
Insider Trading Ignored by SEC, FBI and DOJ / VA and DC Federal Courts
The Information is from
https://wallmine.com/people/1335/leon-g-cooperman#complete-history

STATEMENT OF FACTS ON DONALD KEMPF

14,. JWG restates and incorporates herein all foregoing statements as if restated in full.

15. That having lived through “HELL” being illegally jailed and ruined financially and as a
person - I still believed in me and my right to Justice and am still looking in every corner of the
World for it.

16. The Defendants ignore people like plaintiffs.

4
Forbes Leon Cooperman
https://www.sec.gov/news/public-statement/statement-leon-cooperman-settling-insider-trading-charge
s
12
17. That on the evening of Nov 16, 2017, after a full day at an event JWG stopped by a Bar to
mull over the day.

18. Deputy Assistant Attorney General Donald Kempf was standing behind me to get a drink and
started a conversation.

19. He shared he had just delivered the Remarks to the American Bar Association.

20. After drinks and me telling him my story we made a deal - I would go back to his apartment and he
would help me get Justice.

21. When I reached out to him - he had no intention of helping me - I had again been used.

22. The FBI and the DOJ instead of Justice stated I could come in and talk with them but, I could only
talk about Donald Kempf not the other injustice / hate crimes etc against me.

23. Again the Defendants were going to protect their own.

24. The Defendants Comey & McCabe as leaders in the FBI created in 2014 a directive that the FBI
was announced a Campaign to Seek Public Assistance Identifying acts of Public Corruption February
18, 2014,
https://archives.fbi.gov/archives/washingtondc/press-releases/2014/fbi-announces-campaign-t
o-seek-public-assistance-identifying-acts-of-public-corruption

25. When JWG asked about it - I believe James Comey was not honest about knowing about it:

May 11, 2018 FBI James Comey's involvement on FBI October 14th States he knows nothing about
the Public Corruption directive - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KlsSkkxYnTg

26. Attached is an affidavit of Truth filed with the defendant's Exhibit A

STATEMENT OF FACTS ON HATE CRIME / DIVORCE

27. JWG restates and incorporates herein all foregoing statements as if restated in full.

28. Full Outline of Divorce attached in Exhibit

29. JWG and David Mark Grenadier, the son of Judge Albert Grenadier, were married in
Switzerland.

30. In 1990 it was learned that monies in the Grenadier Law Firm had been stolen from Sonia
Grenadier and the Trust was then turned over to Mays & Valentine aka Troutman Pepper
Hamilton Sanders.

13
 a. JWG was lied to about the facts and $30,000. Was swindled from her in 1990 when
JWG learned the truth that it was most likely Ilona Grenadier Heckman who stole the
money and not her x-husband she went looking for Justice

31. The Divorce

a. David left JWG in or around 1997, with no Property Settlement, the Divorce in 2000
stated everything split 50 / 50.

b. JWG had sole custody of the girls.

c. The appearance of the accounting would show that when JWG was getting $345.00 a
month in child support Ilona and David would be collecting about $85,000. A month in
rental income on Real Estate I had a 24.5% interest in.

d. In 2008 JWG went after my money and they went after me.

e. The slippery slope of the “Old Boys Network” that the Defendant’s protected from
being held accountable would begin.

f. The criminal activity of the Judiciary, Executive Branch, the legislature in the Federal &
State of Virginia judiciary would begin.

g. That in 2008 May 2008: Divorce Lawyer Ilona would turn to me to state very clearly in
court:

1. That I could not win as Judge J. Howe Brown was her good friend she gave him free
legal advice all the time
2. That she and her family had nothing to do with me and my girls because I was
Catholic and the girls had gone to Catholic School
3. David did not steal the money from Sonia

This was to intimidate me, and to rub in my face how she had SCAMMED ME !!

h. Then that same day we would go into Judge’s Chambers where I would introduce myself
to Chief Judge Donald Haddock who would go on to confirm everything Ilona had stated You
will never win this “I / We LOVE LOVE LOVE Ilona” he had recused himself but would
choose all retired Judges who would rule by Bias, Friendship et al for the LOVE LOVE LOVE
of Judge Haddock et al. I wonder often how his wife feels about his STRONG LOVE to ignore
the law to rule to do whatever he had to for her?

● Ilona a DIVORCE Lawyer stole in the MILLIONS from Sonia Grenadier the last
property sold recently
● $30,000. Note she demanded to hold onto which was SCAMMED through Mays &
Valentine aka Troutman Sanders

14
 ● The Liquidation agreement without my signature done in November of 1997 by lawyer
not Licensed in VA
● The lying in court documents by her and her lawyers
● The lying in court documents and in court by David and his lawyers

i. March of 2011 – City of Alexandria police, Fire and Ambulance comes to the home of Janice
Wolk Grenadier while she is on travel – she is supposedly “DEAD” in the home? There is no
record of this in the City of Alexandria. Two neighbors have confirmed this with Janice and the
one who convinced the police to not hack down her door but to allow him to open it with the
key he had. It was not until June of 2011 when Janice’s neighbor shared this with her she
became aware of it. When researched there is no record yet two other neighbors have
confirmed this.

j. There had been other attempts on JWG Life

k. December 2011 / February 2012 – Deliberate tampering with knowledgeable intent of the
Grand Jury by Judge Potter and Commonwealth Attorney Randy Sengel

l. October 2012 – Janice’s documents submitted into the record, when she went to check that
they had been filed – she is told to take them or they would throw them out, Janice refused to
take them and then they are mailed back to her by Judge’s Kemler, Dawkins and Clark. The
box about 4” thick has been x-rayed and shows the documents but, never opened still In the
box

December / January time frame of 2012 & 2013 Lawyer Ilona in collusion with others as a
favor or hired a gentleman that goes by the name of Mark Stuart
who informs Janice he was to drug Janice and get sexual
inappropriate pictures of Janice, or to rape one of Janice’s
daughters, or to plant drugs on Janice’s daughter or in the home
to give Circuit Court Judge’s Kemler, Dawkins and Clark, information
to make JWG incompetent to file any other documents.

Mr. Stuart said that “Lawyer Ilona will go to any length to harm
Janice or Janice’s daughters”. That Lawyer Ilona will continue to do what she can to distract Janice
15
from becoming successful and moving on with Janice’s life. That Lawyer Ilona is a “Greedy Jew” that
all Lawyer Ilona’s actions are deliberate to cause harm to Janice. When the Alexandria Police were
called they informed Janice they were instructed by Commonwealth Attorney Randy Sengel to not
take any reports of issue. *****The FIRST Picture

m. November of 2013 the Murder of Ron Kirby – Opening his front door – Shot and Murdered.

n. December of 2013 – Ilona Grenadier Heckman and Presidential Candidate Loretta Lax Miller
do a “HATE OF CATHOLICS, CHRISTIANS et al” Blog – jwgrenadierisalair.blogspot.com
taken down while Janice is in jail.

o. February 18, 2014 - FBI cautions residents of public corruption in Va. -

http://www.wusa9.com/story/news/local/2014/02/18/fbi-cautions-residents-of-public-corruption-in-n
orthern-virginia/5585877/ WASHINGTON (WUSA) -- The Federal Bureau of Investigation's (FBI)
Washington Field Office is looking to identify any public corruption occurring in Northern Virginia.
The FBI says public corruption can occur "when a public official, at any level of government – local,
state or federal – does any official act in exchange for money, or other free goods or services, for
private gain. Public corruption could also include public employees who take something of value for
their own personal gain, thereby violating the public's trust." The FBI says many of their
investigations into public corruption start once they receive a tip from someone. If you want to help

16
 identify potential criminal activity, the Washington Field Office has set up a Northern Virginia Public
Corruption Hotline at 703-686-6225 and you can also e-mail them at NOVAPC@ic.fbi.gov.

Some of the examples of corruption include:

Government officials such as DMV employees, city inspectors, taxing or zoning assessors or other
regulatory agency employees, or even town councils or mayors;
Contracting officials at all levels, including those who manage government contracts or regulatory
permits; or, school resource officers who manage school accounts;
Local officials colluding with real estate investors to rig the bidding process at foreclosure auctions;
A person representing the judicial branch - a judge, member of the jury or court personnel; or,
A person representing law enforcement, who steals drugs from criminals, embezzles government funds,
falsifies records or smuggles contraband

p. February 2014 the Murder of Ruth Ann Lodato for opening her front door, daughter of Judge
Giammittorio & sister to Judge Bob Giammittorio

*****The FIRST Picture of the person who Murdered Ruth Ann Ladoto resembled Mark
Stuart - I immediately went to the Sheriff’s office not realizing the Sheriff was involved
in the Cover-up. The Sheriff Longhorne would not meet with me, he had me meet with
his brother - who is now retired - I have always wondered if it was because he had a
conscience something his brother “The Sheriff” didn’t have.

******On JUNE 14, 2017 at the shootings of the Congressman the following pictures
show him walking away from me – and then as I hid he came back and I got the
following pictures Secret Service, Capitol Police all are ignoring the threat this man
plays:

q. A Blog was then started on Janice Wolk Grenadier to ruin her:

§2071, Records and Reports – Concealment removal or mutilation generally, §2076. Whoever, being a
clerk of a district court of the United States, willfully refuses or neglects to make or forward any
report, corticated, statement or document as required by law, shall be fined under this title or
imprisoned not more than one year, or both.”

When Divorce Lawyer and or others hired or as a favor Mark / Michael Stuart to drug Plaintiff and
get inappropriate pictures, or rape one of Plaintiff’s daughters, or plant drugs on one of Plaintiff’s
Daughters or in the home of Plaintiff and her girls in the November / December 2012 time frame.
When Defendants in collusion or ignored the threat:
---------------------------------------------BLOG --------------------------------------------------

17
Through Ilona Grenadier Heckman and her best friend Loretta Lax Miller aka
Muggy Cat aka Billy Sullivan Presidential Candidate for 2016 – there blog -
jwgrenadierisalair.blogspot.com

We hope that you join us on Friday, January 10th, 2014

outside of Janice Wolk Grenadier's house to protest
her anti-American pro-Satan values. Email us at
muggycatscreams@aol.com for Janice Wolk
Grenadier's address. We are expecting at least 200
people so don't forget to bring Holy Water from your
church to purify and sactify the land of the supporter
of the Anti Christ and the mother of the vessel of
Satan. We will have a prayer session to pray for her
lack of soul but do not look her straight in the eyes or
you will be turned to stone.

JW Grenadier aka Janice Wolk Grenadier

Sunday, January 5, 2014

Janice Wolk Grenadier supports the Anti Christs Obama and Hillary Clinton
Not only is Janice Wolk Grenadier a traitor to the American people by being a card carrying Commie Pinko
but she is also supporting the Anti Christs Obama and Hillary Clinton. Yes we said it here, Anti Christs
meaning plural. Why is Janice doing this? Because they are not only going to let her keep her hairy vag but
they are going to give her the chance to grow a penis as well. Well penises. Yes, Janice Wolk Grenadier will
have 6 penises all over her body including one over her vagina. The other 5 will be as so: one in the palm of
each hand, one on the bootom of each foot and one right where a tramp stamp would be on her back. That

18
way when Janice Wolk Grenadier dies, she can go to Allah's heaven and have her 72 virgins. These 72 virgins
will be a mix of males and females that she can rape with all of her penises and then the next morning at sun
up they become virgins again. We have figured it out that the fetal body of little Joshua that Janice keeps in
the basement of her home is going to be the vessel for the Dark Lord Satan himself to resurrect in a human
body to carry out the apocolypse. That way, Janie Wolk Grenadier is guaranteed her 6 penises.

Proof she supports the Anti Christ is in her letters she has posted and her other posts of Hillary's and Obama's
support defending both on everything Loretta Lax Miller fought against including the ObamaCare and
Islamic Terrorism which Obama and Hillary support. Janice is for the destruction of the Catholic Church's
values of having Nuns despense birthcontroll pills. Janice supports this by supporting Hillary Rodham Clinton
and Barack Husein Obama. Everything Obama stands for is to destroy American Family Values and Janice has
no values and worships Satan.

We at Muggy Cat take the religious stand that Janice is the Anti Christ and does not beleive in God and the
wonders God has done on this Earth. Maybe Janice should move to sin city Las Vegas and sell her soul as well
as her fugly body on the strip since she is whoring for Satan.

We hope that you join us on Friday, January 10th, 2014 outside of

Janice Wolk Grenadier's house to protest her anti-American
pro-Satan values. Email us at muggycatscreams@aol.com for
Janice Wolk Grenadier's address. We are expecting at least 200
people so don't forget to bring Holy Water from your church to
purify and sactify the land of the supporter of the Anti Christ and
the mother of the vessel of Satan. We will have a prayer session to
pray for her lack of soul but do not look her straight in the eyes or
you will be turned to stone.
----------------End of Copy Paste excerpt from Blog ------------------------------------------------

THESE ARE THE THREATS OF Loretta Lax Miller aka Leah Lax aka Muggy Cat aka Billy
Sullivan That the Defendants allowed – MANY MORE CAN BE READ AND FOUND IN UNITED
STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA - Civil Action No. 14-0162 - That

19
the Judicial Community is desperate in the cover up of the collusion to protect Ilona Grenadier
Heckman is obvious to a lay man.

r. Who do you go to for HELP? Not the FBI

https://archives.fbi.gov/archives/washingtondc/press-releases/2014/fbi-announces-campaign-to-seek-
public-assistance-identifying-acts-of-public-corruption If you go to the site and then hit the link for the
transcripts you - get - nothing -

20
t. .October 11, 2014 – Breaking news Senator Mark Warner and aid to Governor Terry McAuliffe guilty
and admit to offering a Federal Judgeship to daughter of Phil Puckett

U. October 14, 2014 – Janice exposes on Blog VaLaw2010.blogspot.com information of corruption

by Senator Warner

V. October 22, 2014 – November 12, 2014 – 22 days Janice illegally jailed and tortured in the
City of Alexandria, Solitary Confinement till 5pm on Election day Tuesday, November 4, 2014.
Illegally Jailed to:
1. Silence her and stop exposure of emails between herself and Mark Warner’s
office on the corruption in the Judiciary. Janice went to Mark Warner for help instead he had
her jailed, at the same time it was exposed his “Pay to Play” with a Federal Judgeship for a
favor. Being ignored by the Senate Ethics Committee.
2. To Bully / scare her into either committing Suicide or to turning the other cheek of
the corruption and not holding Virginia and the Federal Judiciary, the Government and Elected
Officials accountable, as well as the criminal acts and actions of the Old Boys Network in
Virginia

That the law is very clear: That Judge Clarks actions have turned back time.

● Giving me less rights than a slave. Taking someone under Title 42 US Code 1994 and Title 18
US Code 1581(a):

● Whoever holds or returns any person to a condition of PEONAGE, shall be fined under this
title for imprisoned not more than 20 years or both.

● On October 22, 2014, I was placed in jail for failure to pay legal fees in 30 days which is a
violation of my Thirteenth Amendment "Neither Slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a
punishment for a crime whereof the party shall have duly convicted, shall exist within the
United States or any subject to their Jurisdiction".
21
 ● Furthermore the right by placing me "under" a state Peonage / Involuntary Servitude violating
the Fourth Amendment right by malicious prosecution, false imprisonment and unconstitutional
arrest.

● This violation of my Eighth Amendment Right as to Excessive Bail which in this case
constitutes "Restitution Bail" further shows the knowledgeable malicious intent to silence me till
the election was over on November 4th. 2014.

● Bias, Retaliation, and Retribution to further line the Lawyers pockets by Judge Clark.

Further: The system is one where the Lawyers and Judges have set it up to protect each other and
line each other's pockets with Cash.

W. December 2015 – Defendant Janice Wolk Grenadier Stands up and speaks out against the
Criminal Acts of Judge Nolan Dawkins in Regard to his re-appointment - In front of the Courts of
Justice in the Virginia Legislature – Several other Victims also stood up and spoke out about the
criminal actions of other Virginia Judges Courts of Justice A group of Elected Officials / Lawyers who
practice in front of these Judges

VOTED ALL JUDGE’S BACK INTO THEIR POSITIONS KNOWING THE CRIMINAL ACTS &
ACTIONS OF THE JUDGES

The Professional Code of Responsibility of the Lawyers on the Courts of Justice Rule 8.4 Misconduct
It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to:

(a) violate or attempt to violate the Rules of Professional Conduct, knowingly assist or induce
another to do so, or do so through the acts of another;

(b) commit a criminal or deliberately wrongful act that reflects adversely on the lawyer's
honesty, trustworthiness or fitness to practice law;

(c) engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation which reflects
adversely on the lawyer’s fitness to practice law;

The Courts of Justice further – GUARANTEES THE JUDGES against complaints being investigated
by HAND SELECTING THE JIRC ( The Judicial Inquiry and Review Committee where complaints are
filed against Judges – and never investigated – Read More at www.proseamerica.blogspot.com the
$602,000. SCAM on the Virginia Citizens Guaranteeing all Judge’s the ability to ignore the law and
rule to protect their own and as Judge Clark stated very clearly to his good friend Attorney Michael
Weiser

“I HAVE NO CHOICE BUT TO LET HER OUT OF JAIL, I AM SO SORRY I CANNOT COLLECT
YOUR LEGAL FEES FOR YOU” You will have to come back and get a judgement.

The Appearance and the collusion is that all Judges in the State of Virginia have a Secret
“Handshake” of “You Scratch my Back, I will line you pockets with WINS in the courtroom for your
Clients – Call me – Buy me Lunch or Dinner or whatever – but, we will not turn on our own”

22
So what about those young Men and Women who go off to war to fight for the Rights our Constitution
Gives Americans of Due Process?

X. December 19, 2014 Letter exposed that Michael Gardner ( Democratic fundraiser) was looking for
someone to hire to Murder young girls he had molested and found guilty with DNA – yet let out of jail
by Chief Justice Cynthia Kinser.

December 31, 2014

Chief Justice
Cynthia Kinser
with no
explanation to
retire early (January
31, 2022 –
expiration of her
appointment) The
Appeals Court of the
State of Virginia had
denied Michael
Gardner’s appeal /
release – Chief
Judge of the
Supreme Court of Virginia Cynthia Kinser let him out of jail by all appearance for the Old Boys
Network, to hire a hitman to kill the young woman he had molested prior to his retrial. Cynthia Kinser
will receive her pension and perks for cooperating and doing the bidding of the Old Boys Network for
all her years and has been re-hired as the ETHICS COUNCIL FOR THE SUPREME COURT

Y. January 23, 2015 - The Virginia Republican Party wants the U.S. Senate to investigate whether
Democratic Sen. Mark Warner violated federal law when he discussed possible job opportunities for a
former state senator’s daughter. GOP Party Chairman Pat Mullins sent a letter Friday to the U.S.
Senate Select Committee on Ethics asking it to investigate Warner. He was part of a group of
Democrats that tried unsuccessfully to prevent former state Sen. Phil Puckett from resigning last
summer. Puckett’s resignation gave Republicans control of the state Senate. Warner has
acknowledged he “brainstormed” with Puckett’s son about possible job opportunities for Puckett’s
daughter but did not make any explicit job offers. Federal prosecutors indicated in December their
investigation into Puckett’s resignation was closed, they would ignore the criminal actions. That Janice
has followed up with a complaint to the Ethics Committee by all appearance along with the Judiciary
are ignoring these facts, Murder / Suicides et al.

Z. August 31, 2015, Janice Intervenes in the Charles Severance Case

AA. September 2015 Judge Bellows “ORDER” Denies Janice Intervene with no hearing, and Orders
Clerks to take no other filings by Janice

BB. September 2015 Janice Intervenes in the Michael Gardner case – Michael Gardner takes a
plea. The Old Boys Network cannot afford two Murder for Hire case’s going at the same time. The
23
question should be for all – What is the backroom deal the Old Boys Network made with Michael
Gardner for the plea and his silence.

CC. On or around October 3, 2015, we come to full circle Charles Severance will be tried for the
Murders of Nancy Dunning, Ron Kirby and Ruth Ann Lodato with a police officer having told Janice
they had no real evidence that supports him doing it, that the City of Alexandria was in the process of
creating the needed evidence to support a conviction. That Judge Bellows who assisted Pete
Scamado’s Murder / Suicide of Chris Mackney will preside over the Charles Severance trial.
That Judge Bellows understands and will disallow evidence that may find Charles Severance innocent
is without question, he has shown this in his pre-trial Orders.

That Judge Bellows brings a Bias in support of Murder / Suicide into the courtroom cannot be
denied after reading “Bullied to Death”. That Judge Bellows is no different than the Judge’s
that have ruled in Bias, Retribution, Retaliation with the knowledgeable intend to ignore the law
and to protect the criminal acts of David Grenadier and Ilona Ely Grenadier Heckman are
obvious in all documents and Orders filed in the courts. What Chris Mackney, Charles
Severance and Janice Wolk Grenadier, and MANY OTHERS have in common is the Old
Boys Network has made it their mission to kill or ruin their lives to protect one of their
own criminal actions.

No doubt the Murderer needs to be stopped, yet the person who paid him to kill the above
should be held accountable – No one will out the Murderer for hire – because for free he will
take that person out. It is the belief of Janice he does not kill if he has met you – and talked to
you – He kills anonymous only, because if he didn’t Janice believes he would have killed her
by now, but that she has met him and he has spared her, as Mark Stuart did.

The “Old Boys Network” is an evil Gang of men and a few women with no soul. They consist of
the POWERFUL and WEALTHY of the Judiciary, the Government and Elected Officials in
Virginia and the District of Columbia. They believe they are above the law, and the truth
supposedly your best defense does not exist around them, that they are no more than a bunch
of low life bully’s with money, and no class.

The leaders in this “Gang” are Judge Donald Haddock and Judge Donald Kent at least in the
case of Janice Wolk Grenadier. In the case of Chris Mackney, it was Judge Bellows, who has
now overlapped into Janice’s with the cover-up of the hits and the trial of Charles Severance.
That the following law firms have dirty hands in collusion of these actors: Grenadier Anderson
Starace Duffett and Kieser, Keller Heckman, DiMuroGinsberg, Troutman Sanders aka Mays &
Valentine, BWW Law Group aka Bierman Geesing Ward and Wood, Parker Simon & Kokolis
LLC, and others that are known and unknown

DD. Virginia Rated 47th and 49th in Corruption - Daily Beast rated Virginia second most Corrupt
State -
http://www.loudountimes.com/index.php/news/article/region_survey_finds_virginia_second_most_corr
upt_state987/ - State Integrity Gave them an F - 47th most corrupt States -
http://www.stateintegrity.org/virginia That Janice is not alone the corruption and lack of oversite or Due
Process in the courts in Virginia, the Federal Courts of DC and Virginia is and are a disgrace.

24
EE. Yet to date October 3, 2015, Janice has not been interviewed by the FBI in regard to the
information in this article even with her many phone calls to them – for help to protect herself and her
girls.

FF. Update: Charles Severance was found guilty of the 3 killings with no real evidence.

Update as of October 30, 2016, which does go back and forth –

Divorce Lawyer Ilona Grenadier Heckman in Collusion with Judge James Clark filed a lawsuit
to foreclose on Janice’s home with illegally gotten legal fees by DiMuroGinsberg and Michael
Weiser. Ilona has hired Heba Carter a lawyer who went to the University of Richmond.

We have learned the University of Richmond is where in 1987 Judge Donald Kent best friend
to Judge Donald Haddock was President of the School and still today is on the Board. -
Judge Donald Kent dies in one car accident

James Comey and Senator Tim Kaine were both adjunct Professors at the same time by all
appearances at the University of Richmond.

That the corruption and the illegal acts and actions of Judge Clark can be found at
www.valaw2010.blogspot.com in the case filed against him in the City of Alexandria for
injunctive relief for his financial conflict along with other criminal activities.

GG. But this Email of January 28, 2016 may say it better than anything:

The lawyers did not show up in court. They did not have to file anything – Judge James Clark was on
their side as stated in the below links

JWG Links – Video Update October 28, 2016

HH. June 22, 2016 Janice Circuit Court of the City of Alexandria VA - exposing the corruption - Judge
James Clark states he and Carter Land were Trustee's on all of Burke and Herbert Loans for
Friendship as he did on June 8, 2016. That Judge Clark further stated no financial compensation from
25
Burke and Herbert band directly or indirectly. Which must mean the lawyer representing Burke &
Herbert from his law firm would have had to do it for free - "friendship" still illegal. Janice states this is
a "Shame Hearing" - Judge Clark States - "Not on this side" since when does Judge's take sides?
https://youtu.be/Lo5U4FrvdwI

In May of 2016 learned that Judge Clark had a financial relationship - I contacted the FBI and
here is the conversation with the FBI that has ignored it: https://youtu.be/DbdcVaZkItQ

These two videos show that I spoke with Gov. Terry McAuliffe and Brian Moran and showed
him my Box of evidence that - that I had been illegally jailed and tortured
https://youtu.be/kQ1hRnaxvRc
https://youtu.be/JevLlGOtQBE

II Janice Exposes the Corruption of the City of Alexandria - Nazi Virginia the place Terrorist's can Buy
$$$$ Justice https://youtube.com/watch?v=qhBZLmVynXc

JJ Janice Wolk Grenadier asking/exposing Mark Warner for the 3rd time having the discussion he
lied. DSCF0005 - Jailed so Senator Mark Warner could be Re-elected and
https://youtu.be/rRs7cBEYAjQ DSCF0039 Mark Warner Exposed as he Lies about what he knows -
YouTube https://youtu.be/O10opcNIqNA

STATEMENT OF FACTS ON ILLEGAL FORECLOSURE

32. JWG restates and incorporates herein all foregoing statements as if restated in
full.

33. The Illegal Foreclosure

1. The lender owes the borrower a legal duty, and when that duty is breached unjustly by the
lender, that breach results in an injury and DAMAGES to the borrower and the borrower has a
right to property, credit rating, and emotional damages.

2. That Real Estate Property 15 W. Spring St., Alexandria, VA was illegally Foreclosed on March
30 of 2018 and the title is tainted by the collusion and cover-up of defendants / mostly lawyers
who have knowledge of the facts and ignored them for personal and professional self-dealing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82tllotwvW0 Link to taped foreclosure with Wells Fargo
Bank buying the property back?

3. The Documents prior to the foreclosure will show that from 2009 - 2013 fraudulent/falsified
documents filed against the home put it on the Balance Sheet of Bank of America aka Lasalle
Bank and Wells Fargo Bank by Lorraine Brown of Dox who went to jail. Exhibit 1 & 2

4. That a letter from BWW Law Group shows it was still on the Bank of America et al and
included in a Federal Settlement - this turned out to be false Exhibit 3

5. That a Corrected Lost Assignment filed, was done by a Robo-Signer who I have interviewed,
and stated in several hours of disclosure the OCWEN corruption. The State of Virginia
26
 requires a review of such documents by a lawyer - the BAR NO. on the document belongs to a
Judge in Florida. No such number exists in Virginia. According to OCWEN/PHH employees,
this is a pattern and practice not to use lawyers and add “FAKE” Bar Numbers. Exhibit 5

6. Conversations with Wells Fargo Bank and OCWEN on home which shows it was known by all
the scheme to foreclose on falsified documents and that Wells Fargo Bank had no knowledge

August 10, 2017, Emily with Wells Fargo 8 10 2017 video 27m50s webcamera io
Wells Fargo https://youtu.be/ol0n-EDveLk

August 10, 2017, Emily with Wells Fargo OCWEN 8 9 2017 video 26m26s
webcamera io https://youtu.be/ZU_JP9w5sDQ

August 11, 2017 OCWEN 8 11 2017 video 10m15s webcamera io

https://youtu.be/EUenT0aKsHk

August 11, 2017 OCWEN 2 Video Fri 8011 2017 video 39m22s webcamera io
https://youtu.be/SKZtWosXiUk

August 11, 2017 OCWEN No 3 video 34m10s webcamera io

https://youtu.be/iwMIBXHWtj8

Friday, August 11, 2017, OCWEN No 4 Legal Brenda video 12m34s webcamera
io https://youtu.be/qXIy54bvCIo

7. Brook & Scott who foreclosed was told by OCWEN not to. It appears that Troutman Pepper
Hamilton Sanders demanded the foreclosure for personal financial gain.

8. Troutman Pepper Hamitlong Sanders aka Mays & Valentine has a conflict as they with others
swindled $30,000. From Plaintiff September of 1990 - to Cover-Up Trust monies stolen from
Sonia Grenadier. This court Case No. 1:93-cr-00302-CMH - You can Read More:
1https://judicialpedia.com/listing/criminal-trust-theft-by-lawyer-jim-arthur-of-troutman-
pepper-hamilton-sanders-aka-mays-valentine-cover-up-of-trust-theft-by-divorce-lawyer-il
ona-ely-freedman-grenadier-heckman-of-sonia-grenadier/

9. March 29, 2018 - Brock and Scott / OCWEN conversation admits OCWEN had told Brock &
Scott to not Foreclose conv starts at about 6 min and 40 sec
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00gWnLp11vI&t=1127s

10. The illegal Foreclosure took place on March 30, 2018, with the bank Wells Frago Bank
purchasing the home - Plaintiff is still in the property
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82tllotwvW0

27
11. On April 6, 2018, Brock and Scott filed a Deed that Wells Fargo Bank was the Owner of the
Loan. The lawyers have stated in several documents and in court that Wells Fargo Bank is the
lender. Exhibit 11

12. On or around April 4 2019 Troutman Pepper Hamilton Sanders Lawyer S. Mohsin Reza
exposes that he and his “Friend” want me to short sell my home to them. That his friend states
they can get Wells Fargo to do whatever they want - There are taped conversations Exhibit 17

13. On March 31, 2019, Plaintiff received 1098 stating the owner was OCWEN - the IRS finds
this to be a fraud and the complaint is being moved to the Tax Court in Washington DC Exhibit
13

14. On August 26, 2019, Plaintiff received a letter from OCWEN / PHH is transferred to new
servicer after the foreclosure NewRez Exhibit 20

15. On October 1, 2019 Exhibit 1 Copy of Computer - print out for NewRez loan

16. On or around February 10, 2020 Exhibits 22 - 24 Servicer for Loan No. 7143312465 Plaintiff
received a letter from New Rez they now had a loan on property 15 W. Spring St. The home
was foreclosed on March of 2018, and in 2020 JWG is getting a letter from a new Servicer?

17. That the documents from signing into accounts will show now after the foreclosure Plaintiff
still had a loan with Two Servicers. Exhibit 21

18. Bank of America has always taken a stand they had no ownership and or an interest in a loan
on 15 W. Spring St., but, never took the corrective steps to ensure Plaintiff was not harmed by
lawyers et al.

19. On April 4, 2020 Troutman Pepper Hamilton Sanders Reza Moushin asked Plaintiff to agree
to sell the property - knowing the Title of the property was tainted. He would then go on to
harass me and my daughters by giving out our phone numbers by all appearances to his friend
Micheal Martinez who several taped conversations will show the intent and the insider
relationship.

20. On or around Nov 18, 2018 Wells Fargo Bank answered discovery and stated they had no
loan on 15 W. Spring St. and filed it directly in the City of Alexandria court. They also
had no knowledge that Troutman Pepper Hamilton Sanders was representing them.

21. Wells Fargo Bank answered discovery on August 6, 2019 and August 7, 2019 with a Notarized
Letter that they had no loan or ownership of 15 W. Spring St., Alexandria, VA 22301. Again
Wells Fargo Bank had no knowledge of lawyers Troutman Pepper Hamilton Sanders Exhibits
18 & 19

22. That in or around 2021 the home without notification to Plaintiff was put on the market for Sale
by Altisource, Houbzu, REALHOME SERVICES AND SOLUTIONS, INC. aka Altisource,
and MLS BRIGHT the problem is nowhere on the listing did they disclose the tainted title.
Misleading the public of a home that was illegally foreclosed on.
28
 23. That the majority of those involved are Lawyers, Realtors and have an obligation under the
professional code of ethics and the law to report such corruption and collusion.

24. They have a responsibility to the public to protect it from such fraud and the very least to
disclose it in any listing to the public that they will pay over $1 million for a property that the
bank has tainted the title with the filing of their document in the court that they have no interest
in such property.

25. Information from Wallmine about Wells Fargo Bank:

https://wallmine.com/people/15787/charles-w-scharf 213,160 units of Insider stock -

Purchase Price of $6,514,350 = SOLD for $ $37,201,724
PROFIT OF $ 30,687,374

26. Information from Wallmine about OCWEN:

Leon Cooperman owned 10% of OCWENprior to being exposed according to FORBES IS

WORTH $2,5 BILLION5 - the appearance is and he has been found guilty in the past by the
SEC for Insider Trading. Read More at the SEC, OCWEN INSIDERS Bought 4,106,171
stocks for $12,114,662 = SOLD FOR $317,056,930 PROFIT $304,942,268 on
Insider Trading Ignored by SEC, FBI and DOJ / VA and DC Federal Courts See:
https://wallmine.com/people/1335/leon-g-cooperman#complete-history

STATEMENT OF ADDITIONAL FACTS

32. JWG restates and incorporates herein all foregoing statements as if restated in

32. The United States, and the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Virginia."

See Constitution of the Commonwealth of Virginia, Article II. Franchise and Officers:

Section 7. Oath or affirmation

All officers elected or appointed under or pursuant to this Constitution shall,

before they enter on the performance of their public duties, severally take and
subscribe the following oath or affirmation: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that
I will support the Constitution of the United States, and the Constitution of the

5
Forbes Leon Cooperman
https://www.sec.gov/news/public-statement/statement-leon-cooperman-settling-insider-trading-charge
s
29
 Commonwealth of Virginia, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge all
the duties incumbent upon me as ...................., according to the best of my
ability (so help me God)."

34. The Defendants allegedly violated their oaths as set out hereinabove.

35. The Defendants, lawyers retired from their jobs, allegedly did not uphold their oaths when
they ignored the criminal activity in Virginia by appearance for. Along with ignoring there
obligations under Federal Ethics “Public Trust”

36, For decades since 1976, the lawyer-legislators have directly harmed their clients,
client-constituents, Virginia taxpayers, entities,

and the Public globally through their inaction to correct the preferential treatment of some
lawyers and to correct the failure of the VSB to perform its mandatory responsibilities under VA
Code § 54.1-3910, et seq.

37. For more than 27 years, the Virginia State Bar Disciplinary panels, VSB District Committee
panels, and Three-Judge Circuit Court panels have imposed Public Discipline only on
minorities, women, solo practitioners, or small firms (5 members or less). Leaving no where in
Virginia for the public to go for fairness in the courts and justice.

38. On February 2, 2022, the current President of the Virginia State Bar (VSB), Jay Barry
Myerson, Esquire, (Myerson), testified that in 2021, the VSB Disciplinary System dismissed
"eighty-one percent (81%) of all Complaints" during 2021.

39. On February 2, 2022, VSB President Myerson continued to state to the Senate Judiciary
Committee that 81% of Complaints received annually by the VSB were "dismissed 'without
reaching the investigative stage' and often 'without the accused lawyers' knowledge.'"

40. VSB President Myerson's statements are "admissions against interest" to the Senate
Judiciary Committee that

(1) the VSB Disciplinary system attorneys and other personnel are disobeying
Virginia's statutory mandates; and

(2) on an annual basis, the VSB is not investigating 81% of the Complaints received
from the Public. See VA Code § 54.1-3910. "Organization and government of Virginia
State Bar" mandating the VSB to investigate and report [to the Virginia courts] the
results of all Complaints the VSB receives annually.

30
41. Instead, the VSB President Myerson admits publicly that the VSB covers up
approximately 81% of the Public's or entities' Complaints of alleged unethical conduct of
lawyers practicing law in Virginia.

See VA Code § 54.1-3910. "Organization and government of Virginia State

Bar" mandating the VSB to investigate and report [to the Virginia courts] the
results of all Complaints the VSB receives annually.

See VA Code § 54.1-3910 is not a "permissive" statute. VA Code § 54.1-3910

is a directive using the word "shall" and explicitly mandate the VSB to
investigate and report all Complaints the VSB receives annually.

See VA Code § 54.1-3915. "Restrictions as to rules and regulations" is not a

permissive statute based on the word "shall," which makes VA Code 54.1-3915
another mandatory Virginia statute prohibiting the SCV from establishing
private "quasi-judicial" bodies of any type ("private Virginia courts") and from
appointing "private judges" to man those illegal private, "quasi-judicial" VSB
bodies, the VSB DB and DC.

See Virginia Supreme Court case, Ross v. Craw, 231 Va. 206, 343 S.E.2d 312 (Va.
1986).

VA Code § 54.1-3915. Restrictions as to rules and regulations.

Notwithstanding the foregoing provisions of this article, the Supreme Court "shall not". .
. "promulgate any rule or regulation or method of procedure which eliminates the
jurisdiction of the courts to deal with the discipline of lawyers. . ."

42. VSB President Myerson's admissions and other statements to the Senate Judiciary
Committee illustrate that the VSB Disciplinary System is acting secretly with no transparency
to protect lawyers, not the Public.

43, VSB President Myerson's statements regarding a "Uniform Letter, from various private bar
associations, appears to have been false.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/5w8y35ou4lngnmb/2-2-22%20SEN%20JUDIC
%20COMM%20MTG_SB%20561-IN%20FAVOR%20%26%20OPPOSED.mp4
?dl=0

44. Despite multiple written requests, to the date of this filing, some 22 days, no member of
the Virginia Senate Judicial Committee has been able to locate any "Uniform Letter" in
opposition to SC 561.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/5w8y35ou4lngnmb/2-2-22%20SEN%20JUDIC
%20COMM%20MTG_SB%20561-IN%20FAVOR%20%26%20OPPOSED.mp4
?dl=0

31
45. The Virginia General Assembly did not intend the VSB to protect lawyers or act in secret
when the VGA enacted VA Code § 54.1-3910. Organization and government of Virginia State
Bar.

See VA Code § 54.1-3910. "Organization and government of Virginia State Bar" which
states:

The Virginia State Bar "shall act as an administrative agency of the Court for the 'purpose of
investigating and reporting violations of rules and regulations'" adopted by the Court under this
article. . . [which do not conflict with other Virginia statutes] [to the Virginia courts.] [Emphasis
added.] See VA Code § 54.1-3910 and SCV Rule 13-2 –

https://www.vsb.org/pro-guidelines/index.php/bar-govt/procedure-for-disciplining-suspending-a
nd-disbarring-attorneys/13-2

46. By dismissing 81% of the Complaints received each year without any investigation, the
VSB Disciplinary System is not performing its duties mandated by Title 54.1. Professions and
Occupations, Subtitle IV. Professions Regulated by the Supreme Court, Chapter 39.
Attorneys, Article 2. Bar Organization and Government VA Code § 54.1-3910. Organization
and government of Virginia State Bar or VA Code § 54.1-3915. Restrictions as to rules and
regulations.

47. The lawyer-Defendants-government employees have a specific obligation to know

Virginia law as "lawyers" licensed to practice in Virginia, and these lawyer-legislators must
know and understand that the following mandatory Virginia statutes state as follows:

VA Code § 54.1-3910. Organization and government of Virginia State Bar.

. . .The Virginia State Bar "'shall' act as an administrative agency of the Court for the
purpose of 'investigating and reporting violations of rules and regulations adopted by
the Court under this article'"[to the Virginia courts.]; and

48. VA Code § 54.1-3910. Organization and government of Virginia State Bar

and VA Code § 54.1-3915. Restrictions as to rules and regulations contain mandatory

statutory language by including the word "shall."

See Virginia Supreme Court case, Ross v. Craw, 231 Va. 206, 343
S.E.2d 312 (Va. 1986).

32
49. On February 2, 2022, in fact, during the same meeting of the Senate Judiciary
Committee, these same lawyer-legislator recognized the necessity to use "shall" in another
Bill they voted to "move forward."

50. Virginia lawyers must know the law and cannot rely on "ignorance of the law."

51. Significantly, all lawyer- cannot rely on "ignorance of the law" in Virginia legislative
proceedings when considering and voting on new Virginia laws or amendments to Virginia
laws.

1. could not assert that they were "ignorant of the law" or unaware of the
mandates of VA Code § 54.1-3910. Organization and government of
Virginia State Bar or VA Code § 54.1-3915. Restrictions as to rules and
regulations.
2. could not assert that they were unaware of the "mandates" of any other Virginia
statutes conferring jurisdiction of Virginia Circuit Courts to discipline lawyers
practicing law in Virginia.
3. could not assert that they were unaware of the Supreme Court of Virginia's
Rule 13-2, which states as follows:

Rule 13-2 Authority of the Courts:

Nothing in this Paragraph shall be interpreted so as to eliminate, restrict

or impair the jurisdiction of the courts of this Commonwealth to deal
with the disciplining of Lawyers as provided by law. Every Judge shall
have authority to take such action as may be necessary or appropriate to
protect the interests of clients of any Attorney whose license is subject to a
Suspension or Revocation. Every Circuit Court shall have power to enforce
any order, summons or subpoena issued by the Board, a District Committee or
Bar Counsel and to adjudge disobedience thereof as contempt. Updated:
November 25, 2019. [Emphasis added.]
https://www.vsb.org/pro-guidelines/index.php/bar-govt/procedure-for-dis
ciplining-suspending-and-disbarring-lawyers/13-2

52. VA Code § 54.1-3910. Organization and government of Virginia State Bar; VA Code §
54.1-3915. Restrictions as to rules and regulations; and Rule 13-2 Authority of the Courts are
straightforward and understandable as written.

33
53. The Defendants, and all other lawyers in Virginia, are bound as lawyers to understand the
plain Virginia Black Letter law contained in Virginia statutes and Supreme Court of Virginia
Rules of Procedure for disciplining lawyers and suspending or revoking the licenses of
lawyers practicing law in Virginia.

See VA Code § 54.1-3910. Organization and government of Virginia State Bar; VA Code
§ 54.1-3915. Restrictions as to rules and regulations, and Virginia Supreme Court
Rules for the VSB Disciplinary System, Paragraph 13.
https://www.vsb.org/pro-guidelines/index.php/bar-govt/procedure-for-disciplining-sus
pending-and-disbarring-attorneys.

57. The lawyer-legislator Defendants know only the Virginia General Assembly can establish
Virginia courts and appoint Virginia judges.

See Article VI. Judiciary, Section 1. Judicial power; jurisdiction.

The judicial power of the Commonwealth shall be vested in a Supreme

Court (SCV) and in such other courts of original or appellate jurisdiction
subordinate to the Supreme Court as the General Assembly may from
time to time establish. Trial courts of general jurisdiction, appellate
courts, and such other courts as shall be so designated by the General
Assembly shall be known as courts of record. [Emphasis added.]

58. For decades, the lawyer-legislators have known that the SCV had no authority to establish
any Virginia courts, of record or not of record.

59. Since 1976, the lawyer-legislators have known that the SCV had no authority to establish
any private confidential or semi-confidential courts of record or not of record, known as the
VSB DB panels and DC panels.

60. Since 1976, the lawyer-legislators have known that the SCV had no authority to appoint
private judges to sit on any VSB DB or DC panels, which consist primarily of lawyers
competing for business with all VSB Respondent-lawyers.

61. These VSB Disciplinary System DB and DC panels have no Virginia constitutional or
statutory authority to impose "discipline" on Virginia attorneys in violation of Virginia statutes.

62. Since 1976, the Virginia lawyer-legislators have known that the VSB-elected governing
body, "VSB Council," which consists primarily of lawyers competing with VSB Respondents,
had no authority to appoint private judges to impose discipline on attorneys practicing law in
Virginia in clear violation of Virginia law.

63. The VSB publishes the following mission statement:

34
 a. The mission of the Virginia State Bar is (1) to protect the Public, (2) to regulate
the legal profession of Virginia, (3) to advance access to legal services, and (4)
to assist in improving the legal profession and the judicial system. [Emphasis
added.] https://www.vsb.org/site/about

64.. Virginia lawyer-legislators know the VSB is not fulfilling its "mission" mandated by the
Virginia Code to protect the Public, and the Defendants when in a position to do something did
nothing, but now with the knowledge under the Professional Code of Ethics requires them to
report to the correct authorities and to use there POWER to have it reviewed.

65. On February 2, 2022, the VSB President, Jay Barry Myerson, Esquire, touted that the VSB
Disciplinary System "fails to perform its mandatory statutory duties annually" by admitting to
the Senate Judiciary Committee that the VSB System

dismisses 81% of the Complaints received with "no investigation."

See VSB President Jay Barry Myerson, Esquire's February 2, 2002, statements
to the Virginia Senate Judiciary Committee; and VA Code § 54.1-3910.

66. On February 2, 2022, VSB President Jay Barry Myerson, Esquire, stated

a. unequivocally to the lawyer-legislators and other members of the Senate Judiciary

Committee that, in 2021, 81% of the Complaints received by the VSB Disciplinary
System were "dismissed without reaching the investigative stage and often without the
accused lawyers' knowledge."

b. above-referenced statements and other statements made by VSB President Myerson

were descriptive of the failure of the VSB to carry out its statutory mandates in the
years before 2021.

c. had an immediate duty after VSB President Myerson spoke to them to request an
independent investigation by the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission.

d. had an immediate duty after VSB President Myerson spoke to them to file civil Ethics
Complaints in Virginia courts requesting investigation and the issuance of Rules to
Show Cause for all (a) VSB employee-lawyers and VSB lawyer-agents, (b)
lawyer-volunteers, (c) VSB Council lawyer-members, (d) VSB DB and DC panels
lawyer-members, and (e) VSB Committee on Lawyer Discipline lawyer-members to
appear and show cause why Virginia courts should not discipline them for their alleged
unethical conduct in violation of the (i) SCV Code of Professional Conduct, (ii) Virginia
Constitution, and (iii) Virginia Code
35
67. In 1987, Senator Babalas voted to "kill" a Senate Bill intended to protect the Public from
unethical, predatory second mortgage lenders, including Babalas' private client, Landbank
Equity Corporation.

68. On February 2, 2022, the Virginia Senate lawyer-legislators, ignored the mandates of the
Virginia Code and "willfully violated" the Virginia Code of Professional Conduct (VCPC) and
Virginia conflict of interest laws. That the VSB is a self dealing agency alson with the JIRC the
Judicial Inquiry and Review Commission.

69. The Virginia Constitution, Virginia Code, and VSB Code of Professional Conduct (VCPC)
mandate that all Virginia lawyers protect the public globally, including Virginia taxpayers and
entities doing business in Virginia.

70. The Virginia Constitution, Virginia Code, and United States Constitution contain
constitutional and statutory directives which mandate that lawyers cannot provide preferential
treatment to the public, employees of the VSB Disciplinary System, lawyer-legislators' clients,
constituents, Virginia's influential and large-law firm lawyers.

71, The 1995 JLARC Audit and Review Report of the VSB contained findings that revealed
severe issues concerning the VSB Disciplinary System's secret actions

1. against lawyers, procedural due process flaws, failures to protect the Public as
mandated by the Virginia General Assembly, various financial irregularities involving
the SCV and VSB, and acceptance of expensive gifts from wealthy, influential lawyers
and their families or organizations.

2. The 1995 JLARC Audit and Review Report of the VSB revealed that the name "VSB
Presidents' Collection" referred to expensive gifts from wealthy, influential lawyers and
their families or organizations received by the VSB.
a. See 1995 JLARC Audit and Review Report of the VSB found at
http://jlarc.virginia.gov/pdfs/reports/Rpt182.pdf

3. In 2022, the "VSB Presidents' Collection" continues to refer to an overwhelming

number of expensive gifts from wealthy, influential lawyers and their families or
organizations.
4. Many of these unusually costly gifts received by the VSB, a Virginia government
agency, are on public or private display in the luxurious VSB lobbies, offices, and
conference rooms, in its expensive office building not owned by the Virginia
government, or in storage away from the Public's eye.

36
 5. To the best of JWG's knowledge and belief, JLARC has never conducted an audit and
review of the SCV, even though the 1995 JLARC Report of the Audit and Review of
the VSB contains information about financial improprieties of the SCV and VSB and
issues with the confidential parts of the VSB Disciplinary System.
6. On February 2, 2022, the Senate Judicial Committee should have requested
immediately that the Virginia General Assembly have JLARC audit the VSB and SCV.

72. The allegations contained in this Complaint against the Defendants when complaints were
filed with them ignored the complaints leaving Plaintiff in more harm Ignoring the “HATE crime
and the illegal jailing et al but, the Plaintiff in physical harms way.

ALLEGED VIOLATIONS BY DEFENDANTS OF

THE SUPREME COURT OF VIRGINIA RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT

JWG restates and incorporates herein all foregoing statements as if restated in full.

JWG alleges that the Defendants named in this Ethics Complaint, who are Virginia
lawyers / FBI and DOJ leaders, violated the following SCV Rules of Professional
Conduct:

VCPC 1.1 Competence- DR 6-101 (A)(2).

A lawyer shall provide competent representation to a client. Competent

representation requires the legal knowledge, skill, thoroughness and
preparation reasonably necessary for the representation.

VCPC 1.7 (a) Conflict of interest.

(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b), a lawyer shall not represent a client if
the representation involves a concurrent conflict of interest. A concurrent
conflict of interest exists if:

(1) the representation of one client will be directly adverse to another

client; or

(2) there is significant risk that the representation of one or more

clients will be materially limited by the lawyer's responsibilities to
another client, a former client or a third person or by a personal interest
of the lawyer. [Emphasis added.]

VCPC RULE 3.1 Meritorious Claims And Contentions

37
 A lawyer shall not bring or defend a proceeding, or assert or controvert an
issue therein, unless there is a basis for doing so that is not frivolous, which
includes a good faith argument for an extension, modification or reversal of
existing law. . .

VCPC RULE 1.11 Special Conflicts Of Interest For Former And Current
Government Officers And Employees

(a) A lawyer who holds public office shall not:

(2) use the public position to influence, or attempt to influence, a tribunal to act
in favor of the lawyer or of a client; or

(f) As used in this Rule, the term "matter" includes:

(1) any judicial or other proceeding, application, request for a ruling or other
determination, contract, claim, controversy, investigation, charge, accusation,
arrest or other particular matter involving a specific party or parties; and

(2) any other matter covered by the conflict of interest rules of the appropriate
government agency.

See: General Assembly Conflicts of Interests Act

§ 30-100. Declaration of legislative policy; construction

The General Assembly, recognizing that our system of representative government is

dependent in part upon (i) citizen legislative members representing fully the Public in
the legislative process and (ii) its citizens maintaining the highest trust in their public
officers, finds and declares that the citizens are entitled to be assured that the
judgment of the members of the General Assembly will not be compromised or
affected by inappropriate conflicts.

The provisions of this chapter do not preclude prosecution for any violation of any
criminal law of the Commonwealth, including Articles 2 (Bribery and Related
Offenses, § 18.2-438 et seq.) and 3 (Bribery of Public Servants and Party Officials, §
18.2-446 et seq.) of Chapter 10 of Title 18.2, and do not constitute a defense to any
prosecution for such a violation.

This chapter shall apply to the members of the General Assembly.

This chapter shall be liberally construed to accomplish its purpose.

38
 1987, Sp. Sess., c.1, § 2.1-639.30; 2001, c. 844; 2014, cc. 792, 804.

https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacodepopularnames/general-as
sembly-conflicts-of-interests-act/

VCPC 1.10 Imputed Disqualification

Imputed Disqualification: General Rule

(a) While lawyers are associated in a firm, none of them shall represent a
client when the lawyer knows or reasonably should know that any one
of them practicing alone would be prohibited from doing so by Rules
1.6, 1.7, 1.9, or 2.10(e).

VCPC 8.4 (a), (b), & (c) Misconduct

It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to:

(a) violate or attempt to violate the Rules of Professional Conduct,

knowingly assist or induce another to do so, or do so through the acts
of another;

(b) commit a criminal or deliberately wrongful act that reflects

adversely on the lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness or fitness to practice
law;

(c) engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or

misrepresentation which reflects adversely on the lawyer's fitness

to practice law.

VCPC RULE 8.3 Reporting Misconduct

(a) A lawyer having reliable information that another lawyer has

committed a violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct that
raises a substantial question as to that lawyer's honesty,
trustworthiness or fitness to practice law shall inform the
appropriate professional authority.

(b) A lawyer having reliable information that a judge has committed

a violation of applicable rules of judicial conduct that raises a
substantial question as to the judge's fitness for office shall
inform the appropriate authority.

(c If a lawyer serving as a third party neutral receives reliable

information during the dispute resolution process that another lawyer
has engaged in misconduct which the lawyer would otherwise be
39
 required to report but for its confidential nature, the lawyer shall
attempt to obtain the parties' written agreement to waive confidentiality
and permit disclosure of such information to the appropriate
professional authority

INAPPLICABLE DEFENSES ASSERTED IN CIVIL ETHICS COMPLAINTS

JWG restates and incorporates herein all foregoing statements as if restated in full.

JWG avers that the following defenses do not apply in this Civil Ethics Complaint filed with this
Honorable Court:

PRIVATE CAUSES OF ACTION vs. PUBLIC CAUSES OF ACTION

JWG restates and incorporates herein all foregoing statements as if restated in full.

A Civil Ethics Complaint is a "public cause of action" filed to protect the Public.

Civil Ethics Complaints are not private, personal causes of action.

A Civil Ethics Complaint is a public cause of action which requests that a Virginia court
discipline a lawyer, lawyer-legislator, or lawyer/judge/Justice and does not request any
other relief;

Under VA Code § 54.1-3915, et seq., any person or entity can file an Ethics Complaint
with a Virginia court, including the Virginia State Bar personnel.

See https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title54.1/chapter39/section54.1- 3910/

https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title54.1/chapter39/section54.1-3915

https: //law.Iis.virginia.gov/v<tcode/title54.l/chapter.39/section54.l-3935

https: //law.Iis.virginia.gov/v<tcode/title54.l/chapter.39/section54.l-3937

VA Code§ 54.1-3910, § 54.1-3915 and§ 54.1-3935 do not require a Plaintiff to be a victim or

any other person involved directly in any underlying matter. But, in this matter Plaintiff is the
victim of Defendants not doing their job.

As with Complaints filed with the Virginia State Bar for investigation and reporting, a Plaintiff
may have mere knowledge from any source of the alleged unethical conduct; and

40
Any person or entity can file an Ethics Complaint with a Virginia court, including the Virginia
State Bar personnel.

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

ETHICS HANDBOOK FOR ON AND OFF DUTY CONDUCT

Besides the 14 General Principles of Ethical Conduct above the Defendants should:

SEE: https://www.justice.gov/jmd/ethics-handbook

Appearance of An employee shall endeavor to avoid any actions creating the appearance that
Impropriety the employee is violating the law or the ethical standards set forth in this part.

5 CFR 2635.101(b)(14)

Security As a reminder for employees for whom a security clearance is required for
Clearances performance of their official duties, any above - noted prohibited conduct, and
more, may be grounds for suspension or revocation of a clearance. This could
also result in adverse disciplinary action, including suspension or removal.

Consult your security program manager for more guidance.

Under Misuse of Official Position:

General Rule You may not use your public office for your own private gain or for the gain of
persons or organizations with which you are associated personally. Your position
or title shall not be used: to coerce or induce another person, including a
subordinate, to provide any benefit, financial or otherwise, to you or to friends,
relatives, or persons with whom you are affiliated in a nongovernmental capacity;
to endorse any product or service; or to give the appearance of governmental
sanction. For example, you may use your official title and stationery only in
response to a request for a reference or recommendation for someone you have
dealt with in Federal employment or someone you are recommending for Federal
employment.

5 CFR 2635.702

41
 Use of Generally, you should be mindful of your responsibilities to make an honest
Government effort to use government property and official time, including the time of a
Property and subordinate, for official business only, and to protect and conserve government
Time property. However, as a Justice Department employee, you are generally
authorized to make minimal personal use of most office equipment and library
facilities where the cost to the government is negligible and where it does not
interfere with official business, where permitted by security rules, and on your
own time. This limited personal use is a privilege, not a right, and employee use
must conform to all restrictions. Employees may not use government property
including computer systems and individual electronic devices for commercial
purposes; to send solicitations, lobby, or engage in prohibited political activity;
for activities that are illegal, inappropriate or offensive to fellow employees or the
public; or to create, download, view, or store, copy or transmit sexually explicit
or sexually oriented materials or materials related to illegal gambling, illegal
weapons, terrorist activities or other illegal activities; or any other prohibited
uses as set forth in Department and component orders or guidance. Employees
may not use Government equipment as a substitute for personally-owned
equipment.

Personal activities should be conducted on personal equipment, except to the

minimal degree that personal use on Government equipment is permitted by
Department policy.

You may not use your DOJ contact information including email address for
non-official matters except as emergency contact information and for persons
such as close family and friends, children’s school, and in similar limited
circumstances, where it is clear your communication is not on behalf of the
Department and you are not attempting to exert official influence.
5 CFR 2635.704, DOJ Order 2740.1A 28 CFR 45.4

Use of You may not engage in a financial transaction using nonpublic information or
Nonpublic allow the use of such information to further your private interests or those of
Information another. Nonpublic information is information you gain on the job, which has
not been made available to the general public, and is not authorized to be made
available on request such as through the FOIA. (There are also statutory
prohibitions on the misuse of information involving national security, trade
secrets, individuals and government procurement.)
5 CFR 2635.703, 5 USC 522 & 522a 18 USC 798, 50 USC 783 (a)
18 USC 1905, 41 USC 423 (a) & (b)

Political Activities:

42
 The Hatch Act All federal employees may vote, express opinions and make political
contributions. Under the Hatch Act, active participation in partisan political
activities by federal employees is restricted, and employees serving in certain
positions are more restricted than others. All federal employees are barred from
using their official authority or influence to interfere with an election, from
engaging in political activity while on duty, in a government office, wearing an
official uniform or using a government vehicle, and from soliciting or
discouraging the political activity of anyone who does business with the
Department. The rules are specific and may be complex. Any employee seeking
to actively engage in partisan political activity should consult the guidance
available on the Department’s website, and the guidance issued by his or her
component.
5 USC §§ 7321-21 5 CFR 733 & 734
Employees May Not:

- Use official authority or influence to interfere with or affect the result of an election.
- Participate in political activities (to include wearing political buttons) while on duty;
while wearing a uniform, badge or insignia of office; while in a government occupied
office or building; or while using a government owned or leased vehicle.
- Solicit, accept or receive a political contribution from a member of the public.
- Solicit political contributions in a speech given at a fundraiser.
- Sponsor a fundraiser.
- Allow official title to be used in fundraising or other political activities.
- Solicit, accept or receive uncompensated volunteer services from a subordinate.
- Be a candidate for partisan political office except as an independent candidate in certain
communities.
- Solicit or discourage the political activity of anyone who is a participant in any
matter before the Department.

Outside Employment and Activities:

General Rule You should not engage in any outside employment or other activity that conflicts
with your official duties and responsibilities. Employees are prohibited from
engaging in outside employment that involves criminal matters, the paid practice
of law or matters in which the Department is a party or represents a party. Only
the Deputy Attorney General may waive these prohibitions.
5 CFR 2635.802 5 CFR 3801.106

Conflicts of Interest:

Your non federal financial holdings and your outside activities and relationships can trigger the
applicability of the conflict of interest statutes and regulations. Below are summaries and examples
of how the conflict of interest rules may become applicable to you.

43
General Rule You should avoid situations where your official actions affect or appear to affect
your private interests, financial or non-financial.

Statutory You may not participate personally and substantially in a matter in which
Prohibition you, your spouse, minor child or general partner has a financial interest.
This prohibition also applies if an organization in which you serve as officer,
director, trustee, or employee has a financial interest or if a person or
organization with which you are negotiating for future employment has a
financial interest.
18 USC 208

Impartiality Generally, you should seek advice before participating in any matter in which
Standard your impartiality could be questioned. You may not participate without
authorization in a particular matter having specific parties that could affect
the financial interests of members of your household or where one of the
following is a party or represents a party: someone with whom you have or
are seeking employment, or a business, contractual or other financial
relationship; a member of your household or a relative with whom you have
a close relationship; a current or prospective employer of a spouse, parent or
child; or an organization which you now serve actively or have served, as an
employee or in another capacity, within the past year.
5 CFR 2635.502

Negotiating for Generally, you may not take official action on a matter affecting the
Future financial interests of an organization with which you are negotiating or
Employment have an arrangement for a job. Generally, you must disqualify yourself
from a matter in order to negotiate for a job, and employees participating
in a procurement have to report to certain officials in writing before
negotiating with a contractor competing for that procurement.

You may also have to disqualify yourself when you are merely seeking
employment, which includes sending a resume. You should get advice
from your Deputy DAEO about seeking and negotiating for employment
before you begin a job search.
18 USC 208
41 USC 423
5 CFR 2635.602

44
 Post There are restrictions on you receiving compensation, even after you leave, based
Employment on another’s representations before the Federal government that took place
Compensation while you were still a government employee.
18 USC 203

In certain circumstances, you may not be able to maintain a financial

relationship with a former employer or accept a severance payment or moving or
moving expenses from a private source. Consult your Deputy DAEO for advice.
If you are an attorney, you will have to disqualify yourself in cases you handled
before entering the Government, and from other matters involving your former
law firm or clients for a certain period, usually several years.

Generally, you will not be allowed to remain on leave of absence from a law firm
or another business entity while with the Department. See your Deputy DAEO
about any repayment of your capital contributions over time or about retaining
an interest in a contingent fee.
18 USC 203, 208, & 209 5CFR 2635.502 Professional Codes

THE FBI ETHICS and INTEGRITY PROGRAM POLICY

FBI Ethics Is 326 pages of Restrictions and Requirements, Ethics and Integrity Policy

That starts with:

Preamble: A Message from the Director

A Commitment to Institutional and Individual Integrity

Uncompromising institutional and individual integrity are core values of the FBI. In fact, integrity is
the value that binds together the very fabric of our institutional identity. It defines us and what
we stand for; it is how we operate and how we measure our success. In short, integrity is the
touchstone for everything we do.

It is our policy to comply fully with all laws, regulations, and rules governing our operations, programs
and activities. We cannot and do not countenance disregard for the law for the sake of expediency in
anything we do. The FBI expects its personnel to ascertain what laws and regulations govern the
activities in which they engage, to acquire sufficient knowledge of those laws to permit each employee
to understand what the law requires, and to conform their personal and professional conduct
accordingly. Further, the FBI requires its employees to report to proper authority any known or
suspected failures to adhere to the law by themselves or others.

Additionally, as individual FBI employees, it is our policy to adhere to the highest standards of ethical
conduct. In this regard, I believe that all FBI employees want to do the "right thing" but determining

45
what is "right" is sometimes difficult to discern. This Manual brings together relevant rules
from the Office of Government Ethics, the Department of Justice, and the FBI and organizes them
by subject to make it easier for FBI personnel and those who advise them to find and apply the
standards governing individual ethical conduct.

While some of these rules are complex, they all are based on one fundamental precept: Public
service-is a public trust. Those of us lucky enough to serve the public in and through this great
organization must adhere to that principle in everything we do. We have many extremely difficult
challenges ahead of us. We cannot meet those challenges without the trust and support of the
American people. We understand that their trust Is earned not given. We are committed to earning it.
Adherence to the standards and values set forth in this Manual is an important step in that direc_tion.
UNCLASSIFIED

James B. Corney

Director

A very much do as I say - Not as I do.

In the document some of what you will find in the 326 pages:

1. Scope ................................ : ............ .-...................................................................................... 1-1

I . I . Purpose ........................................................................................................................ 1-1

I .2. Applicability ................................................................................................................... 1-I

1.3. How to Use this Guide ................................................................................................... 1-2

t .4. Intended Audience .......................................................................................................... 1-2

2. Roles and Functional Responsibilities .............................................................................. 2-1

2.1. Authorities External to the FBI, the U.S. Office of Government Ethics ..... 2-I

2.1.1. 5 C.F.R. §2638. l 02 General policies ....................................................... 2-1

2.1.2. 5 C.F.R. §2638.203 Duties of the Designated Agency Ethics Official .... 2-1

2.2. FBI Agency Ethics Officials ....................................................................... 2-2

2.2. l. The FBI Deputy Designated Agency Ethics Official (DDAEO) ............. 2-2

2.2.2. The FBI Office of Integrity and Compliance ........................................... 2-2

46
2.2.3. Designation and Responsibilities of FBI Ethics Counselors ................... 2-3

2.2.4. Chief Division Counsel ............................................................................ 2-3

2.2.5. Ethics Points of Contact- No CDC in the Division ................................ 2-3

2.2.6. FBI ADICs, Assistant Directors, and SACs ............................................. 2-4

2.2.7. FBI Employees ......................................................................................... 2-4

2.3. Ethics Counseling and its Effect on Disciplinary Action .............................. 2-4

{a) The FBI expects its employees to behave in such a way that their activities
both on and off duty will not discredit either themselves or the Bureau. Failure by
an employee to follow the guidelines set forth in this Guide may result in appropriate
administrative or disciplinary action.

(b) Employees who have questions about the application of the Office of Government
Ethics (OGE) standards of conduct or any supplemental agency regulations to a
particular situation or circumstance should contact the ethics counselors identified for
their organizations. Those counselors will coordinate their response to the ethics issue
with the Office of Integrity and Compliance and the DDEAO, as required by the
circumstances.

(c) Disciplinary action for violating the OGE standards of conduct, or the Department's
supplemental regulation in 5 C.F.R. §3801, is generally not taken against an employee
who establishes that he or she engaged in such conduct in good faith relied upon the
advice of an agency ethics counselor, provided that the employee, in seeking such
advice, made full disclosure of all relevant facts and circumstances. However, reliance
on an agency ethics counselor's advice may not protect the employee from prosecution
if the employee's conduct violates a criminal statute. Good faith reliance on the informal
advice of an agency ethics counselor, however, may be taken into account by the
Department of Justice in the selection of cases for prosecution.

(d) An employee's disclosures to an agency ethics counselor are not protected

by an attorney client privilege. Title 28 U.S.C. §535 requires an agency ethics
counselor to report any information the official receives relating to a violation of
the criminal code, including the standards of conduct provisions in Title 18 of
the United States Code.

47
3. Code of Conduct ................................................................. : ............................................... 3-1

3.1. FBI Code of Conduct ............................................................................................. 3-1

The statement, "Public service is a public trust," underlies all aspects of Government
service. The many ethics statutes and regulations discussed in this Guide have one
fundamental purpose: to ensure that every U.S. citizen can be confident in the integrity
of the Federal Government and those in its employ. To this end, FBI employees have a
responsibility, both to the United States and to its citizens, to place loyalty to the
Constitution and public service above private gain. ·

The FBI enjoys a reputation as one of the fine~t law enforcement organizations in the
world. This reputation is largely dependent upon how each of us conducts ourselves,
both in our official and personal capacities. All FBI employees are expected, therefore,
to act in accordance with the highest standards of personal honor and integrity.
Although there are many aspects to this requirement, they may be distilled down to the
following "Code of Conduct." FBI .employees shall:

1. Ascertain and understand what laws, regulations, and rules govern their
official activities and conform their professional conduct accordingly.

2. Apply the Principles of Ethical Conduct, the FBI motto and the FBI Core
Values in the daily conduct of their personal and professional activities.

3. Obey the Standards of Ethical Conduct for the Executive Branch and
pertinent DOJ and FBI regulations and policies.

° For example, DOJ/FBI employees are prohibited from soliciting,

procuring or accepting commercial sex, even if legal. (See Ethics Guide
Reference Library) for the DOJ Memo titled Prohibition on the
Solicitation of Prostitution, dated April 10, 2015)

4. Conduct their personal activities in a manner that does not impede their professional
performance or tarnish the reputation of the FBI.

5. Report to proper authority any violations of law and regulation by themselves or

others.

6. Refrain from retaliating against employees who, reasonably believing them to be

true, report the violation of laws and regulations.

7. Tell the truth in all matters.

The bedrock principles from which this Code of Conduct is derived are set forth below.

48
3.2. Executive Order I2674 "Principles of Ethical Conduct for Government Officers and
Employees" ..................................................................................................................... 3-2

"By virtue of the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of
the United States of America, and in order to establish fair and exacting standards of
ethical conduct for all executive branch employees, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Part I - Principles of Ethical Conduct:

To ensure that every citizen can have complete.confidence in the integrity of the
Federal Government, each Federal employee shall respect and adhere to the
fundamental principles of ethical service as implemented in regulations promulgated
under sections 201 and 301 of this order:

(a) Public service is a public trust requiring employees to place loyalty to the
Constitution, the laws, and ethical principles above private gain.

(b) Employees shall not hold financial interests that conflict with the
conscientious performance of duty.

(c) Employees shall not engage in financial transactions using nonpublic

Government information or allow the improper use of such information to further
any private interest.

(d) An employee shall not, except pursuant to such reasonable exceptions as

are provided by regulation, solicit or accept any gift or other item of monetary
value from any person or entity seeking official action from doing business with,
or conducting activities regulated by the employee's agency, or whose interests
may be substantially affected by the performance or nonperformance of the
employee's duties.

(e) Employees shall put forth honest effort in the performance of their duties.

(f) Employees shall make no unauthorized commitments or promises of any

kind purporting to bind the Government.

(g) Employees shall not use public office for private gain.

(h) Employees shall act impartially and not give preferential treatment to any
private organization or individual.

(i) Employees shall protect and conserve Federal property and shall not use it
for other than authorized activities.

(j) Employees shall not engage in outside employment or activities, including

seeking or negotiating for employment, that conflict with official Government
duties and responsibilities.

(k) Employees shall disclose waste, fraud, abuse, and corruption to appropriate
authorities.
49
 (I) Employees shall satisfy in good faith their obligations as citizens, including all
just financial obligations, especially those such as Federal, State, or local
taxes-that are imposed by law. ·

(m) Employees shall adhere to all laws and regulations that provide equal
opportunity for all Americans regardless of race, color, religion, sex, national
origin, age, or handicap.

3.3. 28 C.F.R. § 45 Employee responsibilities (DOJ Employee Conduct Regulations) ....... 3-3

§ 45.1 Cross-reference to ethical standards and financial disclosure regulations.

Employees of the Department of Justice are subject to the executive branch-wide
Standards of Ethical Conduct at 5 C.F.R. part 2635, the Department of Justice
regulations at 5 C.F.R. part 3801 which supplement the executive branch-wide
standards, the executive branch-wide financial disclosure regulations at 5 C.F.R. part
2634 and the executive branch-wide employee responsibilities and conduct regulations
at 5 C.F.R. part 735.

§ 45.2 Disqualification arising from personal or political relationship.

(a) Unless authorized under paragraph (b) of this section, no employee shall participate
in a criminal investigation or prosecution if he has a personal or political relationship
with:

(1) Any person or organization substantially involved in the conduct that is the
subject of the investigation or prosecution; or

(2) Any person or organization which he knows has a specific and substantial
interest that would be directly affected by the outcome of the investigation or
prosecution.

(b) An employee assigned to or otherwise participating in a criminal investigation or

prosecution who believes that his participation may be prohibited by paragraph (a) of
this section shall report the matter and all attendant facts and circumstances to his
supervisor at the level of section chief or the equivalent or higher. If the supervisor
determines that a personal or political relationship exists between the employee and a
person or organization described in paragraph (a) of this section, he shall relieve the
employee from participation unless he determines further, in writing, after full
consideration of all the facts and circumstances, that:

(1) The relationship will not have the effect of rendering the employee's service
less than fully impartial and professional; and

(2) The employee's participation would not create an appearance of a conflict of

interest likely to affect the public perception of the integrity of the investigation
or prosecution.

50
 (c) For the purposes of this section:

(1) Political rel~tionship means a close identification with an elected official, a

candidate (whether or not successful) for elective, public office, a political party,
or a campaign organization, arising from service as a principal adviser thereto
or a principal official thereof; and

(2) Personal relationship means a close and substantial connection of the type
normally viewed as likely to induce partiality. An employee is presumed to have
a personal relationship with his father, mother, brother, sister, child and spouse.
Whether relationships (including friendships) of an employee to other persons
or organizations are "personal" must be judged on an individual basis with due
regard given to the subjective opinion of the employee.

§ 45.10 Procedures to promote compliance with crime victims' rights obligations. {Editor's
Note: This section implements the provisions of the Justice for All Act that relate to protection
of the rights of crime victims. See 18 U.S.C. 3771 and is not included in this section.]

§ 45.11 Reporting to the Office of the Inspector General. Department of Justice employees
have a duty to, and shall, report to the Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General,
or to their supervisor or their component's internal affairs office for referral to the Office of the
Inspector General:

(a) Any allegation of waste, fraud, or abuse in a Department program or activity;

(b) Any allegation of criminal or serious administrative misconduct on the part of a

Department employee (except those allegations of misconduct that are required to be
reported to the Department of Justice Office of Professional Responsibility pursuant to
§ 45.12); and

(c) Any investigation of allegations of criminal misconduct against any Department

employee. [For additional information, FBI employees can go to www.justice.gov/oig/]

§ 45.12 Reporting to the Department of Justice Office of Professional Responsibility.

Department employees have a duty to, and shall, report to the Department of Justice
Office of Professional Responsibility (DOJ-OPR), or to their supervisor, or their
component's internal affairs office for referral to DOJ-OPR, any allegations of
misconduct by a Department attorney that relate to the exercise of the attorney's
authority to investigate, litigate or provide legal advice, as well as allegations of
misconduct by law enforcement personnel when such allegations are related to
allegations of attorney misconduct within the jurisdiction of DOJ-OPR.

§ 45.13 Duty to cooperate in an official investigation. Department employees have a

duty to, and shall, cooperate fully with the Office of the Inspector General and Office of
Profession.al Responsibility, and shall respond to questions posed during the course of
an investigation upon being informed that their statement will not be used to incriminate
them in a criminal proceeding. Refusal to cooperate could lead to disciplinary action.

51
3.4. FBI Core Values ............................................................................................................. 3-5

(a) The FBl's Core values are: - Rigorous obedience to the Constitution of the United
Stat~s; - Respect for the dignity of all those we protect; -.Compassion; - Fairness; -
Uncompromising personal and institutional integrity; and - Accountability by accepting
responsibility for our actions and decisions and their consequences; - Leadership, by
example, both personal and professional; and - Diversity.

(b) The FBI Core values have been promulgated by the Director, upon the
recommendation of a representative group of FBI personnel, as follows:

The strategic plan for accomplishing the FBl's mission must begin by identifying the
core values which need to be preserved and defended by the FBI in performing its
statutory mission. Those values are: rigorous obedience to the Constitution of the
United States; respect for the dignity of all those we protect; compassion; fairness;
uncompromising personal and institutional integrity; accountability by accepting
responsibility for our actions and decisions and their consequences; and leadership, by
example, both personal and professional. These values do not exhaust the many goals
which we wish to achieve, but they capsulate them as well as can be done in a few
words. Our values must be fully understood, practiced, shared, vigorously defended
and preserved. Observance of these core values is our guarantee of excellence and
prosperity in performing the FBl's national security and criminal investigative functions.
Rigorous obedience to constitutional principles ensures that individually and
institutionally we always remember that constitutional guarantees are more important
than the outcome of any single interview, search for evidence, or investigation. Respect
for the dignity of all whom we protect reminds us to wield law enforcement powers with
restraints and to recognize the natural human tendency to be corrupted by power and
to become callous in its exercise. Fairness and compassion ensure that we treat
everyone with the highest regard for constitutional, civil and human rights. Personal
and institutional integrity reinforce each other and are owed to the Nation in exchange
for the sacred trust and great authority conferred upon us.

We who enforce the law must not merely obey it. We have an obligation to set a moral
example which those whom we protect can follow. Because the FBl's success in
accomplishing its mission is directly related to the support and cooperation of those we
protect, these core values are the fiber which holds together the vitality of the
institution.
52
 3.5. FBI Motto ....................................................................................................................... 3-6

The FBl's Code of Conduct and Core Values are reflected in our Motto:

"Fidelity, Bravery and Integrity."

These terms are defined in Merriam-Webster Dictionary, © 2006-7 by

Merriam-Webster, Inc., as follows:

(a) Fidelity: "The quality or state of being faithful" and "strict and continuing faithfulness
to an obligation, trust, or duty."

(b) Bravery: "The quality or state of being brave; courage." The term "brave" is defined
as "having or showing courage." "Courage" is defined as "mental or moral strength to
venture, persevere, and withstand danger, fear, or difficulty." (

c) Integrity: "Firm adherence to a code of especially moral and artistic values" and
"trustworthiness and incorruptibility to a degree that one is incapable of being false to a
trust, responsibility, or pledge."

4. Standards of Conduct ...................................................................................................... :. 4-1

4. I. Standards of Conduct General Provisions ............................................................ 4-I

4.I.I. Office of Government Ethics Regulations ............................................... 4-1

4.1.1.1. 5 C.F.R. §2635.IOI Basic obligation of public service ........................ 4-1

(a) Public service is a public trust. Each employee has a responsibility to the United
States Government and its citizens to place loyalty to the Constitution, laws and ethical
principles above private gain. To ensure that eve.ry citizen can have complete
confidence in the integrity of the Federal Government, each employee shall respect
and adhere to the principles of ethical conduct set forth in this section, as well as the
implementing standards contained in this part and in supplemental agency regulations.

(b) General principles. The following general principles apply to every employee and
may form the basis for the standards contained in this part. Where a situation is not
covered by the standards set forth in this part, employees shall apply the principles set
forth in this section in determining whether their conduct is proper.

(1) Public service is a public trust, requiring employees to place loyalty to the
Constitution, the laws and ethical principles above private gain.

(2) Employees shall not hold financial interests that conflict with the
conscientious performance of duty.

53
 (3) Employees shall not engage in financial transactions using nonpublic
Government information or allow the improper use of such information to further
any private interest.

(4) An employee shall not, except as permitted by subpart B of this part, solicit
or accept any gift or other item of monetary value from any person or entity
seeking official action from, doing business with, or conducting activities
regulated by the employee's agency, or whose interests may be substantially
affected by the performance or nonperformance of the employee's duties.

(5) Employees shall put forth honest effort in the performance of their duties.

(6) Employees shall not knowingly make unauthorized commitments or

promises of any kind purporting to bind the Government.

(7) Employees shall not use public office for private gain.

(8) Employees shall act impartially and not give preferential treatment to any
private organization or individual.

(9) Employees shall protect and conserve Federal property and shall not use it
for other than authorized activities.

(IO) Employees shall not engage in outside employment or activities, including

seeking or negotiating for employment, that conflict with official Government
duties and responsibilities.

(I I) Employees shall disclose waste, fraud, abuse, and corruption to

appropriate authorities.

(12) Employees shall satisfy in good faith their obligations as citizens,

incl1.1ding all just financial obligations, especially those--such as Federal,
State, or local taxes--that are imposed bylaw.

(13) Employees shall adhere to all laws and regulations that provide equal
opportunity for all Americans regardless of race, color, religion, sex, national
origin, age, or handicap.

(14) Employees shall endeavor to avoid any actions creating the appearance
that they are violating the law or the ethical standards set forth in this part.
Whether particular circumstances create an appearance that the law or these
standards have been violated shall be determined from the perspective of a
reasonable person with knowledge of the relevant facts.

(See also Section 3.2., Executive Order 12674 "Principles of Ethical Conduct
for Government Officers and Employees.")

( c) Related statutes. In addition to the standards of ethical conduct set forth in this
part, there are conflict of interest statutes that prohibit certain conduct. Criminal conflict
of interest statutes of general applicability to all employees, 18 U.S.C. 201, 203; 205,
54
 208, and 209, are summarized in the appropriate subparts of this part and must be
taken into consideration in determining whether conduct is proper. Citations to other
generally applicable statutes relating to employee conduct are set forth in subpart I and
employees are further cautioned that there may be additional statutory and regulatory
restrictions applicable to them generally or as employees of their specific agencies.
Because an employee is considered to be on notice of the requirements of· any
statute, an employee should not rely upon any description or synopsis of a statutory
restriction, but should refer to the statute itself and obtain the advice of an agency
ethics official as needed.

4.I.I.2. 5 C.F.R. §2635.I02. Definitions ........................................................... 4-2

4. I. I .3. 5 C.F.R. §2635. I 03 Applicability to members of the uniformed services ............... 4-4

4.1.1.4. 5 C.F.R. §2635.l 04 Applicability to employees on detail/ assignment. ......... .........

4-4

4.1.1.5. 5 C.F.R. §2635.105 Supplemental agency regulations ........................ .4-5

The above ethical violations are just a few of the ones from the FBI Handbook that show the FBI is not
working for the Public and ignored the “HATE CRIMES” against Plaintiff and other crimes. .

SEE
https://www.judicialwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/JW-v.-DOJ-Comey-memos-00
262-28-353.pdf

STANDING

JWG restates and incorporates herein all foregoing statements as if restated in full.

Any person or entity globally can file a civil Ethics Complaint in Virginia courts against lawyers
practicing law in Virginia.

See VA Code § 54.1-3915. Restrictions as to rules and regulations.; VA Code §

54.1-3935. Procedure for disciplining attorneys by three-judge circuit court; and
VA Code § 54.1-3937. Procedure for revocation of certificate of registration of
professional law corporations or professional limited liability companies.

JWG has "Standing" to bring this Complaint based on her witnessing the alleged public
unethical conduct of the Defendants for years.

55
The Virginia Constitution and Virginia Code do not mandate that a person or entity file Ethics
Complaints with the Virginia State Bar against lawyers practicing law in Virginia.

The Virginia Constitution and Virginia Code do not authorize the Virginia State Bar District
Committee members to act as Virginia judges, judicial officials, or quasi-judicial officials with
authority to impose any discipline or issue any judicial Certifications to the Virginia State Bar
Disciplinary Board.

The Virginia Constitution and Virginia Code authorize the Virginia State Bar District
Committee and Disciplinary Board members only to investigate and report the results of their
respective investigations [to the Complainants, the Respondents, subject attorneys, and the
Virginia Courts].

See

https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title54.1/chapter39/section54.1-3910
https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title54.1/chapter39/section54.1-3915
https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title54.1/chapter39/section54. l-3935

https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title54.1/chapter39/section54. l-3937

In support of these assertions, JWG relies on the Virginia Constitution and Virginia
Code which authorize the following public causes of action:

a. The Virginia State Bar lawyer employees can file civil Ethics Complaints with the Virginia
Circuit Courts under the provisions of VA Code§ 54.1-3915, et seq.;
b. Virginia State Bar Disciplinary Board members are authorized to file civil Ethics Complaints
under the provisions of VA Code§ 54.1-3915, et seq.; and
c. The Virginia State Bar District Committees are authorized to file civil Ethics Complaints with
the Virginia Circuit Courts under VA Code § 54.1-3915, et seq.
d. Every person or entity globally is authorized to file civil Ethics Complaints with the Virginia
Circuit Court under VA Code § 54.1-3915, et seq.

See:

https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title54.1/chapter39/section54.1-3910
https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title54.1/chapter39/section54.1-3915
https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title54.1/chapter39/section54. l-3935

https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title54.1/chapter39/section54. l-3937

STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS

56
JWG restates and incorporates herein all foregoing statements as if restated in full.

There is no Statute of Limitations for filing Virginia Ethics Complaints with Virginia courts
based on the following Virginia Statutes.

There is no Virginia statute of limitations for Ethics Complaints filed with the Virginia State Bar
for investigation and reporting.

See VA Code§ 54.1-3910

https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title54.1/chapter39/section54.1-3910/

There is no Virginia statute of limitations for Ethics Complaints filed with a Virginia court
requesting that the court discipline a lawyer practicing law in Virginia or suspend or revoke a
lawyer's license to practice law in Virginia.

See VA Code § 54.1-3910 and VA Code § 54.1-3915

https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title54. l /chapter39/section54.1-3915; and

https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title54.1/chapter39/section54.1-3935.

In JWG's experience of over thirty (30) years, of being scammed by lawyers, the Old Boys
Network - the FBI and DOJ the ethics complaint against the defendants for not doing there
job - instead setting up a system where they can control what is investigated makes this
complaint appropriate.

RES JUDICATA

JWG restates and incorporates herein all foregoing statements as if restated in full.

Res Judicata does not apply to this civil Ethics Complaint because no Virginia court or other
judicial entity has disciplined the Defendants in this case.

COLLATERAL ESTOPPEL

JWG restates and incorporates herein all foregoing statements as if restated in full.

Collateral Estoppel does not apply to this matter because no parallel Virginia state entity,
Virginia court, or other judicial entity has disciplined the Defendants in this case or issued an
opinion ruling that collateral estoppel applies in this Ethics Complaint.

DEMURRER DEFENSES

JWG restates and incorporates herein all foregoing statements as if restated in full.
57
This civil Ethics Complaint, filed in the Orange Circuit Court, contains more than sufficient
facts in the body of the civil Ethics Complaint and the attached Exhibits A, B & C to survive a
Demurrer based on the following points:

Based on the facts and law contained in this civil Ethics Complaint, the court can or should be
able to see that Plaintiff contacted and met with the FBI who stated to her they could not
investigate it had to go to DC - McCabe and Comey.

That the FBI would hang up on Plaintiff and the DOJ never did anything. That you should not
have to have sex to get Justice in the DOJ, you should not have to spend 14 days in solitary
when you are illegally jailed and have NO ONE CARE and NO were to go for redress as the
Judges are all protecting each other.

Based on the facts and law contained in this civil Ethics Complaint, the court can grant the relief and
discipline the Defendants based on the facts alleged in this Complaint and included in Plaintiff's
Exhibits A, B & C, hereto, and incorporated herein by reference, and based on the Virginia law cited in
this Complaint.

The alleged facts as specified in this civil Ethics Complaint apply to all individually named
Defendants.

The Defendants' acts and omissions, jointly and severally, caused injury to the Public, which
relies on the integrity and strict adherence of lawyers' legislative and judicial bodies to Virginia
state law and federal law.

As stated by Chief Justice John G, Roberts, Jr. (Justice Roberts), United States Supreme
Court in the Chief Justice's 2021 Year-End Report on the Federal Judiciary:

We are duty-bound to strive for 100% compliance because public trust is

essential, not incidental to our function.

See www.supremecourt.gov/publicinfo/year-end/2021year-endreport.pdf;

Just as Justice Roberts stated about the Federal Judiciary, the Defendants are duty-bound
as officers of the court and to abide by the United States Constitution [and the Virginia
Constitution, Virginia Code, and SCV Rules of Court.] See Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr.
2021-Year-End Report to the Federal Judiciary, dated December 31,

2021: https://www.supremecourt.gov/publicinfo/year-end/2021year-endreport.pdf, and

incorporated herein as if restated

58
The Defendants must respect their authority granted by the Virginia General Assembly to
establish and oversee the Supreme Court of Virginia, other Virginia courts, and Virginia State
Bar.

Based on the separation of powers between the Virginia Legislative and Judicial Branches of
government, the Defendants must respect that the Virginia Legislature has the sole authority
to establish all Virginia courts and appoint all Virginia judges, Justices, or officials acting in
judicial capacities.

The Virginia Legislative and Judicial Branches cannot trespass on the exclusive authority
granted to these two Branches or on the Virginia Executive Branch's authority.

See: Constitution of Virginia https://law.lis.virginia.gov/constitution

The Judicial Branch has no authority to create any Virginia courts or judicial bodies or to
appoint judges or persons to act as judges governed by the Virginia Supreme Court Judicial
Canons.

Only the Virginia General Assembly can establish Virginia courts and appoint judges or
officials who serve in judicial-type capacities.

IMMUNITY DEFENSES ARE INAPPLICABLE

JWG restates and incorporates herein all foregoing statements as if restated in full.

"Immunities" defenses do not apply in alleged lawyer misconduct cases, alleged lawyer
unethical conduct cases filed with Virginia courts, or to any Justices/judges/lawyers
misconduct Complaints filed with the Judicial Inquiry and Review Commission or in any
Virginia courts.

No Virginia governmental immunity or Federal applies to the Defendants in this Civil Ethics
Complaint case.

Virginia and the Federal Government does not allow immunities as a defense to any
Complaints alleging lawyers' unethical conduct, even if the Defendants are legislators, holders
of other public offices, judges or Justices, employed in federal, state, or local or occupy
elected positions in Virginia government.

Under the provisions of VA Code § 54.1-3915 and § 54.1-3935, et seq., only Virginia courts
are authorized to try lawyers practicing law and serving in other capacities in Virginia for
ALLEGED unethical conduct or violations of the Virginia Code of Professional Conduct.

59
 INAPPLICABLE IMMUNITY DEFENSES

JWG restates and incorporates herein all foregoing statements as if restated in full.

All following are inapplicable immunity defenses:

Sovereign; Commonwealth; Employees and Agents; Judicial; Absolute; Qualified;

Prosecutorial; Legislative; City and Town immunity; County immunity;

Ministerial/Discretionary Acts; Intra-family; Spousal; Charitable; Hybrids; Fugitive from
justice; and All other currents possible or unknown immunity defenses.

We cannot forget or intentionally overlook that we are "a government of laws and not of men."

See John Adams; Massachusetts Constitution; Constitution of Virginia, Article I.

Bill of Rights, Sections 5 and 7; and the January 26, 2022-Official Advisory
Opinion issued by Attorney General Jason Miyares, in accordance with § 2.2-505
of the Code of Virginia.

A PRO SE LITIGANT

The law is very clear a pro se litigant is to be given equal treatment if not special treatment, especially in a case
where the intervening Person is a lawyer and has the financial ability to bring in as many powerful unscrupulous
lawyers to defend her criminal actions.

"Pro se plaintiffs are often unfamiliar with the formalities of pleading requirements. Recognizing this, the
Supreme Court has instructed the district courts to construe pro se complaints liberally and to apply a more
flexible standard in determining the sufficiency of a pro se complaint than they would in reviewing a pleading
submitted by counsel. See e.g., Hughes v. Rowe, 449 U.S. 5, 9-10, 101 S.Ct. 173, 175-76, 66 L.Ed.2d 163 (1980)
(per curiam); Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520-21, 92 S.Ct. 594, 595-96, 30 L.Ed.2d 652 (1972) (per
curiam); see also Elliott v. Bronson, 872 F.2d 20, 21 (2d Cir.1989) (per curiam). In order to justify the dismissal
of a pro se complaint, it must be " 'beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his
claim which would entitle him to relief.' " Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. at 521, 92 S.Ct. at 594 (quoting Conley v.
Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 45-46, 78 S.Ct. 99, 102, 2 L.Ed.2d 80 (1957)).

“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. “In re Murchinson, 349 U.S. 133, 136 (1955)”

No officer of the law may set that law at defiance with impunity. All the officers of the government from the
highest to the lowest, are creatures of the law, and are bound to obey it.” Butz v. Economou, 98 S.Ct. 2894
(1978); United States v. Lee, 106 U.S. at 220, 1 S.Ct. at 261 (1882)” “Further it is the obligation of every Judge
to honor, abide by, and uphold not only the Constitution and laws of the State, but they are bound by the laws
and Constitution of the United States as well.” State courts, like federal courts, have a constitutional obligation
60
to safeguard personal liberties and to uphold federal law.” Stone v Powell, 428 US 465, 483 n 35, 96 S. Ct 3037,
49 L Ed. 2d 1067 (1976)”

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Janice Wolk Grenadier prays that, based on the facts and law

contained herein and on admissible facts and law presented at trial in support of the alleged
unethical conduct of Defendants, this Honorable Court discipline the Defendants to protect the
Public by

A. Imposing discipline on them, jointly or severally; or

B. In the alternative, suspending or revoking their licenses to practice law in the
Commonwealth of Virginia.
C. Imposing ALL discipline available including and not limited to revoking financial
gain from their employment with the Federal Government to send a strong
message to the People of the United States of America that all people are EQUAL
and have a right to all services the Government has to offer to protect them.

PLAINTIFF DEMANDS A JURY TRIAL.

April 18, , 2022,

Respectfully Submitted,
Janice Wolk Grenadier
Pro Se
15 W. Spring St.
Alexandria, VA 22301
202-368-7178
jwgrenadier@gmail.com

CERTIFICATION: I declare under penalty and perjury; that NO attorney has prepared or assisted in the
preparation of this document. Janice Wolk Grenadier - Name of Pro Se Party

Janice Wolk Grenadier

April 18, 2022

61