The NEW, REFORMED, Wash. State Bar Association – “same as the old boss”

By John Scannell

I am an attorney that has represented several clients in Sherman Anti-Trust, Rico and Civil Rights lawsuits in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals that have been filed against the WSBA.

This work group is typical of the nonsense the WSBA has been involved in for the last few years.

First, you publicly announce on your web site, inviting the public to show up at the work group for their input. Subsequently we are forced to listen to Judge Fairhurst first give us a presentation by an “expert” who lectures us on how the Sherman Anti-Trust Act supposedly applies to the WSBA. We listen for another hour while the work group discusses among themselves what they think they should be doing, which is basically waiting around until the United States Supreme Court decides how to apply Janus, No. 16-1466, 585 US___ to bar associations. At no time was the public invited for input. Some of us finally gave up and left in disgust.

Why am I not surprised by this subterfuge? First, Judge Fairhurst is part of the old guard, a former WSBA president, on the Washington State Supreme Court that appears more than willing to sacrifice the United States Constitution so that the WSBA\Snohomish County RICO enterprise can weaponize the disciplinary process, for the purpose of targeting minorities, sole practitioners, and its political enemies for discipline instead of carrying out its delegated mission of disciplining unethical attorneys. In the process, the Washington State Supreme Court has allowed large firms, government attorneys, and friends of the RICO enterprise to violate the Rules of Professional Conduct with impunity with acts of extortion, bribery, forgery and honest services fraud.

For those of you who doubt this, check out our RICO statement in the latest Anne Block suit where we document hundreds of predicate acts conducted by ODC and others over a ten year period. If you are truly interested on how the Sherman Anti- Trust Act applies to the WSBA, you should read our briefing on the subject in Anne Block’s latest case, which was filed over her illegal disbarment in Washington. For those of you not familiar with the case, Anne Block was disbarred, not for misconduct as an attorney, but because the WSBA/Snohomish County RICO enterprise was displeased with her articles in the Gold Bar Reporter, for which she was named third best reporter in Washington State by the Open Government Coalition for exposing corruption in government. Unethical judges like Fairhurst were all to willing to throw the First Amendment into the trash can in order to disbar her.

Which brings me to the point of this letter and my attempted input into this farce.

This work group makes no sense. Why should it be spending months and maybe years supposedly brainstorming while the United States Supreme Court decides how Janus applies? If Janus applies, as we advocate, then the entire WSBA must be made voluntary. There can be no bifurcating of the WSBA’s functions, because, as noted in Janus, all of its functions are political, including its so-called disciplinary system. If Janus does not apply, then its back to business as usual, with Washington attorneys being forced to subsidize a RICO enterprise in order to practice law.  

The real reason for this charade, can be seen simply by looking at the September 18, 2018 letter that established the group. Since a reform group had apparently gained a majority on the Board of Governors, the Washington State Supreme Court suddenly became “concerned” about Janus and recent antitrust developments concerning organizations like the WSBA. They ordered the WSBA not to engage in any reforms at all and do nothing about it’s RICO controlled disciplinary system, while they “studied” these developments.

If the Washington State Supreme Court gave one whit about Janus, they would have advocated allowing me to run for Washington  Supreme Court last year. Instead, they wanted the ruling of a Thurston County Superior Court Judge upheld, who ordered me off the ballot because I was not a member of the Washington State Bar Association.

If they were concerned at all about North Carolina’s Dental Examiner’s decision which indicates bar associations may be subject to Sherman Anti-Trust Act, they would not have spent years advocating that the WSBA was immune from such suits, when the issue was raised several times in the ninth circuit following North Carolina Dental Examiners.

At first, the reform group appeared unfazed by the threats from the Washington State Supreme Court. They held an emergency meeting to gain control over their own litigations, to end the Sherman Anti-Trust activity and corruption which was causing them endless litigation. They sacked the head of ODC, Paula Littlewood, who had been instrumental organizing its RICO activities.

But then the Washington State legislature started getting involved. The house voted 96-1 to get rid of the WSBA altogether by repealing the Washington State Bar Act. The Senate threatened to do similarly. Suddenly, the reform group sprang into action. They admitted to the legislature there had been problems in the past. They claimed they were going to reform. They pleaded for mercy. The Senate relented, kicking the can down the road, basically letting the Washington State Supreme Court make the call.

There is a lesson to be learned here. If the WSBA becomes subject to Janus, as it invariably will, then it has to look at the situation of the public unions. Sure, you are going to take some hits. Those who took the Keller deduction will opt out. In the case of the unions they lost a several million as a result. However, the vast majority of regular union members stayed in, less than 1/10 of 1% dropped out. That’s because most members want to belong to unions because there is strength in numbers.

You will be in a similar situation. You are not engaged in collective bargaining, so you will have change your practices so that you truly “champion justice.” You have to reform in a way where members are not disciplined by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character. You will have to stop disciplining attorneys like Anne Block because they do not conform to your brand of political correctness. You will have to punish unethical activity no matter where it occurs even it means sanctioning popular government figures. You will have to stop your current practice of going after the low hanging fruit by picking on sole practitioners while letting the friends of the Snohomish County RICO enterprise skate.

In short, you will have to root out corruption.

If you start to do so I will probably do as in the immortal words of Peter Townsend:

I’ll tip my hat to the new constitution

Take a bow for the new revolution

Smile and grin at the change all around

Pick up my guitar and play

Just like yesterday

Then I’ll get on my knees and pray

We don’t get fooled again

Don’t get fooled again, no no


Meet the new boss

Same as the old boss

1 Comment

  1. The emptying of Offices at the WSBA , who’s first and how they accomplished this ; Am I the only person who seriously doubts that Paul Littlewood stole any money at all? Paul Littlewood was just about to become the center of attention concerning a Federal investigation is what I had heard. So how do they suddenly empty her Office? Accuse her of stealing an undisclosed amount of money from the WSBA, do not attempt to get any outside help, or charges filed against her. Just have her empty her office and make the Bar appear to the Public as running a straight ship no matter who the pirate. This is nothing new, because it has been done elsewhere before. Defraud the public one more time, comply with Fed. pressure by emptying Littlewood’s office , therefore you can’t complain about someone who is no longer the director of the association, nor can you find it necessary to investigate and empty Office. Then to further comply with the “No Federal Investigation Deal” the Senate Law & Justice Board agrees to participate in a make believe skit play hearing that is pre-designed to be the only reason why the WSBA must be dissolved, and it is even Televised! So how does it go down? They simply accuse the WSBA of “FAILING HORRIBLY”, WITH NO SPECIFIC RULES VIOLATED, NO SPECIFIC VICTIMS, NO SPECIFIC CASE NUMBERS, NO SPECIFIC ACTORS, NO SPECIFIC VIOLATION OF ANY SPECIFIC LAW, CODE OF ETHICS VIOLATIONS PERTAINING TO NO SPECIFIC CASE OR INSTANCE. So we the mush minded public are suppose to believe that all it requires for the BOG to agree to dismantle the entire WSBA with out one hell of a legal battle let alone any real objection to it, is merely make a non specific open ended accusation against them that packs with it , a tone of finality, it’s over, you blew it, no second chance kids! Yep,”YOU FAILED HORRIBLY” so that’s it, game over. So they calmly agree to do this , and the sham skit play is over and now we are suppose to be surprised that nothing has changed? It was all prearranged and sure as hell not done to appease the wishes of anyone here in Wa. State Gov. or one of it’s RICO Victims either. That was just the deal they made that included Littlewood, concocted by devious little twitter mind set corrupt Officials who have clearly become so accustomed to defrauding the public with practically any line of total BS, that these overconfident bird brains must have figured that this scheme would also suffice for S.F.B. Public, plus comply with the deal with the Feds. So the plan was to make it appear as if it was all Wa. State government doings , plus make the WSBA appear to be the walking pillar of justice, Ethics etc. and willfully agreeing to clean their own ship, so eager , practically like thirsty dogs at the big freshly filled water bowl.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.