evidence of Romney corruption and incompetence continues to build; GOP needs to start thinking post-Romney

August 30, 2007 in 2008, election, election 2008, GOP, incompetence, mitt romney, republicans, romney, the dark soul of Mitt Romney
Tags: , , ,

“A class action lawsuit filed last week in Houston federal court accuses officers of Stage Stores Inc. and a pair of venture capital groups with long ties to the company of manipulating its stock price to benefit from insider trading,” writes the estimable Monica Perin in a Houston Business Journal story titled Clothing retailer slapped with shareholder suit.

“Named in the shareholder suit are a collection of current and former Stage Stores officers and directors as well as Bain Capital Inc. and Acadia Partners, which have long been significant shareholders in Stage Stores and have had representatives on the company’s board of directors for years. Houston-based Stage Stores is the parent company of the Palais Royal, Bealls and Stage retail clothing stores” … more

We have but one theme here:

Willard Milton Romney.

We have but one message here:

Willard Milton Romney is not who he says he is; he is not what he says he is.

That’s it. Nothing follows. Nothing further.

So why do we care about class action suits against clothing retailers?

… Through his seven investment funds, Bain founder Mitt Romney had acquired 10.29 percent of Stage Store’s stock by January, according to filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. And since that filing was made, both Bain and Acadia have acquired more stock, says Bob Aronson, Stage Stores’ director of investor relations … more

“Hundreds of millions in fraud, and who owned and Controlled BAIN when it occurred? Dear old Mitt [Romney],” writes Laser Haas of sunny Burbank CA in a topix news forum post—that he wrote poolside on his iPhone with but one thumb—titled Romney owned BAIN Stage Stores SanKaty when fraud was committed.

We blew the whistle of Fraud upon the Court by Officers of the Court and the the Dept of Justice employees responded by assisting the fraudulent parties while aggressively seeking to punish and deny the whistleblower standing under Article III refusals.

We endeavored strongly against the Motions Attorney of the 3rd Circuit stating to us that the Circuit refused to place the En Banc rehearing brief into the record. After a 3 week campaign to halt such injustice we are now to be lead to believe that 11 separate justices read the En Banc rehearing “pro se” brief and decided there is not merits. The corruption of the System is both rampant and propogative. We have proof the Dept of Justice management has lost its sense of honor and duty. In the Bankruptcy case of eToys 01-706 (DE 2001) we proved over 100 felony violations by the firm of Traub Bonacquist & Fox and Morris Nichols Arsht & Tunnel. The US Trustee is charged by the Janet Reno Reform Act of 1994 to be the “policing” “watchdog” of public entity bankrupt estates to protect equity holders … more

What does any of this mean? How should we know?

Here is what we do know: Romney is in a free-fall, and not just personally or morally, but politically, financially, and perhaps even legally.

It is time to begin thinking post-Romney.

Meanwhile, Romney hirelings! Update your resumes. Then: Help yourselves to whatever computers, monitors, keyboards, printers, copiers, computer projectors, cell phones, iPhones, palm pilots, Blackberries, pagers, laptops, ergonomically correct desk chairs, memory sticks, cameras, label makers, flip charts, folding tables, coffee urns,—not everyone who labours for the Romney dynasty is a Mormon—coffee mugs and other coffee supplies, servers, routers, flat panel displays, audio bridges, DVD players and recorders, cables, hats, t-shirts, pamphlets, stickers, signs, and other Romney swag, pens, bottled water, laser pointers, envelops, stationary, file folders, hanging file folders, clip boards, paper clips, copy paper, legal pads, white board markers, etc., etc. that you want on your way out. Take it all, all that you can carry. Leave nothing.

Romney’s spectacularly expensive yet low-performance campaign began in random acts of fraud, waste, and abuse, so please do your part to allow it to end in one.

Let symmetry, at least, be Romney’s legacy.

Kevin Madden! Call your office. Justin Hart! Go pack sand, sir. Or: take an English class.

yours &c.
dr. g.d.

Advertisement

13 Comments

  1. Denny

    August 30, 2007 at 10:49 am

    Give it up.

    Romney is the one candidate that can not only unify the Conservative Movement and the Republican Party, but can ultimately defeat Billary Clinton AND serve out 8 scandal-free years of true, effective leadership that actually SOLVES our most pressing problems and challenges.

    He is the best qualified, most knowledgeable, most charismatic candidate in the GOP field that can actually become the GOP nominee, go on to beat Hillary and actually, tangibly change Washington with his brilliant vision of innovation and reform strategies and ideas for government.

    Mitt Romney has a stable family, is healthy and young, and has high personal ambition to succeed that is second to none. In fact, virtuously everything he has touched has turned to gold – sometimes literally.

    You are superior to me in many ways, but why do you hold such a grudge against Mr. Romney?

    Reply
  2. dotan

    August 30, 2007 at 3:16 pm

    We are not superior to anyone, Denny. “Consider our soul as dust,” reads a prayer in the Siddur.

    Thank you for your thoughts and views.

    Reply
  3. laserhaas

    October 6, 2007 at 10:37 pm

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT COURT ROBERT A. ALBER “pro se” Appellant V. MORRIS NICHOLS ARSHT & TUNNEL, POST EFFECTIVE DATE COMMITTEE TRAUB BONACQUIST & FOX, BARRY GOLD & ETOYS, et, al; Appellees V UNITED STATES TRUSTEE Appellee V Steven Haas (a/k/a Laser Haas) “pro se” Appellee COMBINED MOTIONS OF EMERGENCY ISSUES AS STEVEN HAAS WAS NOT NOTICED BY APPELLEES INCLUDING PROPER NOTICE OF UNITED STATES TRUSTEE AND REBUTTAL TO ERRONEOUS STATEMENTS OF UNITED STATES TRUSTEE OFFICE AND PLEA FOR THE CIRCUIT COURT TO OFFICIALLY NOTICE THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY OFFICE OF COLLUSION FOR REQUEST THE COURT HALT COLLABORATIVE EFFORTS OF WILLFUL CIRCUMVENTION OF THE COURT AND CODE 327(a) BY UNITED STATES TRUSTEE PROTECTION OF FRAUD ON THE COURT BY OFFICERS OF COURT A. OPENING REMARKS of Fraud Upon the Court issues This movant, Steven Haas (a/k/a Laser Haas) (HAAS) the owner of Collateral Logistics, Inc the Court approved liquidation consultant of the eToys debtor estate; and being that HAAS was also one of the Court approved contractual employee’s of the Debtor eToys, comes before the Honorable body today, due, “inter alia” to the failure of being served notice of the appellee’s and United States Trustee responses to the Robert Alber (ALBER) brief of August 22, 2007. The briefs not served upon HAAS were submitted on Sept 19, 2007 and September 21, 2007 respectively. HAAS responded on September 20, 2007 to ALBER’s initial brief and did service appellant, the appellee’s & the United States Trustee. The Clerk entered the HAAS response into the record as being as a request by HAAS to be “pro se”. The United States Trustee refers to HAAS incorrectly as a non party even though the Debtor’s contracts state that HAAS is a direct party of the estate. This eToys Debtor case and the multiple appeals are really regarding the efforts of ALBER and HAAS to address Fraud on the Court by Officers of the Court while the appellee’s seek to prevent adjudication upon merits that will mandate the Court address the overwhelming documented issues of multiple, intentional, statutory violations and the core issue(s) of Fraud upon the Court which involves tens of millions of dollars of collusive tribulations that are being accomplished by officers of the court’s, multiple, admittedly errant, Rule 2014 Affidavits. Albeit the premise is unequivocally established, where the Court(s) and United States Trustee are to halt such malfeasance, there remains a staunch, enigmatic, protective posture by the United States Trustee as the Court’s “policing” and public equity issues “watchdog” and the complete blind eyes of the bankruptcy court in reckless disregard of the facts that is allowing the bandits an exit strategy. Perjury issues are documented by the “original” United States Trustee Motion to Disgorge Traub Bonacquist & Fox (D.I. 2195), which also states that the Rule 2014 Affidavit’s are intentional acts of deception. All one has to do is read the “orginal” US Trustee’s Disgorge Motion for $1.6 million of Traub Bonacquist & Fox February 15, 2005(D.I. 2195). The appellee’s desire to sweep the issues under the rug as quickly as possible as the have gained “unjust enrichment” by documented “unclean hands”. The appellee’s seek dismissal or denial of standing which are conspicuous efforts facilitating their “bad faith” endeavors through labors to Obstruct justice dissipatedly! Such must be arrested. In aspirations to allay the issues at hand by divergence; the appellee’s and United States Trustee rush to pounce and dismiss ALBER willfully disregarding the Fed.R.App Proc 26(c) 3 day rule. It is by disingenuous remarks over the simple semantics of the fact that the ALBER appeal was noticed on the 19th instead of the 18th that the appellee’s and the United States Trustee hope and pray the court will issue a “bad faith” finding. They seek to depart from the Perjury and superior issue(s) by the total & extreme censure of dismissal with prejudice, under the Poulis standard, which was errantly utilized as an enterprise to improperly administer justice, doing so disingenuously and being simply incongruous! The issues are really rather simple, a matter of principal, what is right or wrong. The United States system of justice is built upon the American fundamental belief in righteousness can persevere against injustice. Purportedly all one has to do is present the facts and the integrity of the judicial process will do what is required to be done as a matter of equitable justice. Thus far this is fallacy. The appellee’s have engaged in court confirmed “bad faith” conduct. Doing so deliberately as the United States Trustee, along with the bankruptcy courts are being widely indulgent with acts of leniency that are contrary to statutory mandates and a derision of their fiduciary duties to their office. The acts of leniency have gone well beyond the protecting of a single aberrant item. The combined efforts by the appellee’s and the United States Trustee to dismiss or expunge ALBER and HAAS are squanderers acts to facilitate the manifest prejudice that is occurring through “nolle prosequi”! Each step of the system of justice has to decides upon supporting the leniency of perpetrators of Fraud on the Court or continuous bias against “pro se” parties who are “outsiders” of the system. We seek the conscience of the system to halt the massive crusade to silence the facts and the Truth. The rare sparkle of American righteousness to stand tall on good principal and remain inflexible in the fight against lawlessness. As “pro se” parties we are the weak seeking the home of the honorable and brave. This petitioner prays the Third Circuit Court look at the Facts, which are overpowering concerning the “malum in se”, so that the Court may confirm the long established precedents and mandates that mandate disqualification of such nefarious acts and Official notification of the US Attorney’s officer. This Motion serves as, “inter alia”, a response to the false facts remarked upon in the items that were not served upon HAAS. Wherefore I, Steven Haas, (a/k/a Laser Haas) aver, “under penalty of perjury” that this document is true and correct; B. Statement of Issues presented The appellee’s and United States Trustee, (also as appellee) failed to serve proper notice upon Steven Haas and the remedy is a full review of the facts in the briefs by Steven Haas! Should the Court deny Appellee’s and United States Trustee desire to dismiss Robert Alber appeal for being filed on January 19, 2007 instead of the January 18,2007 where the appellee’s have total disregard, inter alia, for Fed R App Proc 26(c) that states “When a party is required or permitted to act within a prescribed period after a paper is served on that party, 3 calendar days are added to the prescribed period;” where the appellee’s, District Court and UST seek to errantly utilize Poulis Standards in a biased improper manner to dismiss Alber? Are multiple, intentionally, False Rule 2104 Affidavits permitted? Did the United States Trustee position itself errantly, in direct violation of 18 U.S.C. § 3057(a) and 28 U.S.C. § 586(a)(3)(F), when the United States Trustee infers it has the authority, without citing any applicable proof, that the Trustee can “settle” confessed False Rule 2014 Affidavits by giving contractual, intentional permission to continuous circumvention of § 327(a) and Rule 2014 in the US Trustee’s Stipulation to Settle document (D.I. 2201)? Is the admission by Barry Gold and Traub Bonacquist & Fox of four (4) payments of $30,000 each by Traub Bonacquist & Fox to Barry Gold, both pre and post petition a violation of the Janet Reno Reform Act of 1994 Scheme to Fix Fee’s under 18 U.S.C. § 155 also mandating disqualification? Did the Bankruptcy Court abuse its discretion in stating that no Perjury had occurred and declaring that the Court would not refer matters to the US Attorneys office per 18 U.S.C. § 3057(a)? Are the court(s), appellee’s and United States Trustee abusing discretion in denying HAAS standing despite the Court approved contracts of the eToys Debtor that indemnify and hold harmless all parties, persons and sub parties of Collateral Logistics, Inc. concerning loss of Collateral of Debtor in any manner whatsoever? Was the Bankruptcy Court Order for responses of January 25, 2005 a “total come clean” Order or are the parties permitted to continue with non-disclosures which have not yet been ferreted out? Due to the overwhelming willful blindness to the serious syndicated efforts to perpetuate intentional, collaborative, Fraud upon the Court, will the Third Circuit retain authority over the eToys debtor case and assure sufficient deterrent to voluminous acts of Fraud by inner circle parties for the sake of the Judicial Process and to restore the Integrity of the System? B. Background Fracts and Relevant Issues of Record 1. On or about March 7, 2001 eToys, (eToys or Debtor) (Del Bankr Ct 01-706) the publicly traded entity filed for bankruptcy protection. Thereafter parties were hired per standard bankruptcy endeavors to manage a Chapter 11 liquidating plan based on the presumption that there was $290 million in debt with less than $30 million in cash reserves to handle. The Court approved professionals for the Debtor included, “inter alia”, Collateral Logistics, In., (CLI) CLI is owned 100% by Steven Haas (a/k/a Laser Haas) (“HAAS”), as the “sole”: Liquidation consultant of the estate. The Bankruptcy Court also approved “inter alia”, Morris Nichols Arsht & Tunnel (“MNAT”) and Traub Bonacquist & Fox (“TBF”) as the Court approved counsels for the Debtor and Unsecured Creditors Committee, respectively. The Debtor’s PLAN was confirmed in November 2002. 2. A mass release/exodus of the personnel of the debtor was consistently occurring from the inception of the bankruptcy case as eToys had over 1000 employees. The United States Trustee (“UST”) has testified that the UST warned the parties against replacing key personnel of the Debtor with anyone connected to retained professionals of the estate. (UST Motion to Disgorge TBF $1.6 million) (eToys D.I. 2195 19-35) (“Disgorge Motion”)(“EXHIBIT 1”). After a time it was discovered (proven by HAAS) more than 3 years later, that TBF as counsel for the Creditors had placed an “undisclosed” paid associate (Barry Gold) of the Creditor’s counsel within the Debtor as “wind down coordinator”. Who subsequently became CEO/ President and then Confirmed Plan Administrator at the behest of TBF. (eToys D.I.2195 6) 3. The issues of TBF connections to Barry Gold are now confessed and have never been disputed. TBF confessed that the payments to Barry Gold of four (4) separate times of $30,000 each, both pre and post petition to Barry Gold. (admitted in detail at the March 1, 2005 hearing; the transcript of which is in the record) (eToys D.I. 2228) (60-69) “EXHIBIT 8” Making Barry Gold a direct paid associate of TBF. These scandalous issues and facts all came to light after the Court held an Emergency Hearing upon the non-disclosure items of TBF, MNAT & Barry Gold on December 1, 2004 and Ordered Responses on January 25, 2005 per Local Rules. (the “Responses”). (D.I. 2228, EXHIBIT 8 provides the transcript excerpts of Courts direct examination of Paul Traub of TBF $30,000 payment issues). 4. The Asst United States Trustee, upon insurmountable proof of non-disclosures, issued a Motion to Disgorge TBF on February 15, 2005(EXHIBIT 1). The very first footnote within the Disgorge Motion states erroneously that Barry Gold did not have to apply per § 327(a) even though the UST displayed detailed knowledge of Barry Gold being a “wind-down coordinator.” (Exhibit 1 6) This Circuit has well established the principal that anyone with autonomy or authority in bankruptcy matters must apply and be disinterested. In re: First Merchants Acceptance Corp., No. 97-1500(JJF), 1997 WL 873551, at*2 and at*3 (D.Del.Dec. 15, 1997) establishing the “quantitative” and “qualitative” standards for who is defined as a professional). 5. The Disgorge Motion also affirmed that the retained parties affirmed there were no conflict of interest issues in violation of Sections § 101 (14) and §327(a) by submitting multiple Rule 2014 affidavits. (Disgorge Motion 5,9) TBF and MNAT have now admitted to submitting errant Rule 2014 affidavits. (TBF Objection 16) (Responses)(eToys D.I.2171). 6. The Disgorge Motion 17 documented continuous multiple Rule 2014 falsifications by the additional confessions that TBF sought expansions of their duties in the Goldman Sachs issues and affirmatively misrepresented there were no conflicts. More alarming is the degree of “mens rea” that is documented by the confessed fact that TBF admitted, as is certified by the Disgorge Motion 18, where TBF reflected it considered amending their Rule 2014 Affidavits once the relationships became apparent in another case. (Disgorge Motion 18 refers to the Del Bankr. case In re Bonus Sales 03-12284 (MFW)). Whereas TBF continued its Fraud upon the Court by choosing “ad hoc” to continuing to remain silent about the “undisclosed” connections as the eToys Debtor Plan had already been confirmed giving abundant proof of the “scienter” requisites. These TBF issues are documented in both the Disgorge Motion and the Opinion of October 4, 2005 (the OPINION) (D.I.2319) (“EXHIBIT 4”). As well as the corresponding Order to approve the UST’s settlement (D.I.2320). 7. MNAT’s confessions came within the Court Ordered responses of January 25, 2005(eToys D.I. 2177), the Depositions the Court permitted on February 9, 2005 as well as within the Courtroom testimony (which the Court permitted to be entered into the record during the March 1, 2005 hearing)( eToys D.I. 2228). The acts of multiple false Rule 2014 affidavits are not in contention. It is conclusions of law that is argued; whether disqualification is mandatory, which is in debate. In re: First Jersey Securities the 3rd Cir. stated ‘where there is an actual conflict of interest, however, disqualification is mandatory’. (citing In re Marvel Entertainment Group, 140 F.3d at 476.) The UST has never sought disgorgement or disqualification of MNAT. Barry Gold is a Professional Per §327(a) connected to TBF. 8. TBF and Barry GOLD, have all given abundant testimony before the Courts admitting that Barry Gold was placed as such on or about May 21, 2001 (post petition), documented by the engagement letter of Barry Gold, that was not produced until 3 years later after HAAS proved that TBF and Barry Gold were “affiliated” parties. The engagement letter for Barry Gold (the Hiring Letter) (EXHIBIT 5) is sufficient “prima facie” evidence of willful intent to perpetrate fraud on the court, by officers of the court as the Hiring Letter is a solid item of “actus reus”, for it contains the proof of willful, circumvention of the Court and the Code, irreverently, after the UST forewarned the parties against such endeavors, by the deceptive option to encourage or permit Barry Gold not to comply with the Code; worded egregiously, in the following manner: “As of the Commencement Date, your position with the Company shall be as Wind Down Coordinator and you shall retain such position until (i) the approval of your employment as an Officer of the Company by order of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware (the “Bankruptcy Court”) —“ The HIRING LETTER’s opt out clause from §327(a); stated a reward for not seeking approval- “—and you have waived the condition in clause (i), then you shall be appointed as President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company and your employment with the Company will be for an initial term ending May 20, 2002.” 9. It is plainly obvious that the HIRING LETTER was an intentional act to engage in subterfuge after being cautioned against such issues by the UST and as such is reprehensible. In is plausible that it was a way for Barry Gold to avoid a Perjury statement while participating in the scheme. As it was also a premeditated act by the “collaborative” drafting of TBF, MNAT, Barry Gold and others, it mandates disqualification as per this Circuit’s adopted principals as seen in the matter of In re Martin 817 F 2d 175 180 (1st Cir1987) addressing both the “unclean hands” doctrine and listing the 12 factors to consider in application of who must apply and disclose by 327(a). See also In re Seatrain Lines, Inc., 13 B.R. 980, 981 (S.D.N.Y. 1981) and In re Fretheim, 102 B.R. 298, 299 (D. Conn. 1989). In re Twinton Properties 27 B.R. 817 Bankr. (CCH) 69096 (MD. Tenn. 1983) listing the 9 elements to be clear and convincing of no conflict. In re Kraft v Aetna (appraiser cannot bypass 327(a) by stating mechanical services.) In re: Childress v. Middleton Arms (“Bankruptcy Court may not authorize even if the (Plan) debtor would be better served”.) Barry Gold as “wind-down coordinator” and duplicative of CLI duties was mandated to apply per §327(a) and the conspired scheme of the HIRING LETTER mandates referral to the US Attorney’s office. 10. The remarks by the UST, within the brief as a response to the ALBER initial brief, specifically – “The United States Trustee did not seek sanctions against Mr. Gold, whom eToys had hired as an employee under corporate governance principals rather than as a professional person under 11 W.S.C. § 327(a).” (UST Alber 3 d Cir response brief pg5) – which is conjured up and demonstrates that in this eToys Debtors case the UST is miserably inept. 11. The statement is extremely disingenuous as it is contrary to the very instructions that any UST is given within their own handbook and guidelines as seen on the Dept. of Justice US Trustee website, where you find The US Trustee Manual states the following on-point discussion of this issue; 11 U.S.C. § 101(14)(A)-(D) “mandates a literal approach to the disinterested person requirement and sets forth in detail a series of characteristics that disqualify a person.” While continuing it remarks upon the financial advisor [wind-down coordinator] issue “If a professional has the characteristic then disqualification is automatic.” And “Since the language of the statute is clear, it must be applied as written” citing In re: Middleton Arms, Ltd. Partnership, 934 F.2d 723 (6ht Cir. 1991). Financial Advisor/workout consultant is a professional subject to 327(a) especially with any degree of autonomy In re: Riker industries, Inc., 122 B.R. 964, 973 (Bankr N.D. Ohio 1991), Stahl v. Bartley Lindsay co. 137 B.R. 305, 309 (D. Minn 1991); In re: Marion Carefree Ltd. Partnership 171 B.R. 584, 588 (Bankr. N.D. Ohio 1994); In re: First Jersey Securities 180 F.3d 504, 509 (3rd Cir. 1999). 12. Also remarked upon and germane to this eToys Debtor is the additional remarks of In re: Stahl v Bartley Lindsay 137 B.R. 305, 309 (D. Minn. 1991) “Courts have concluded that financial advisors must be retained under 11 USC § 327(a).” The United States Attorney Manual states that Counsel for interested parties (creditors, third parties, post-petition business parties) have an obligation to report felonies, 18 U.S.C. § 4 Misprison)(USAM Civ.R.Man 48.) After the initial subterfuge was successful, the appellee’s just kept raking in control of the estate and compounded their collusive efforts to devour estate assets due to the blindness of the UST. 13. Also accomplishing additional acts of subterfuge through Perjury, despite the statement of the OPINION that no perjury is documented, are the false remarks as “plan administrator” in the Plan Declaration of Barry Gold (eToys D.I. 1312). Barry Gold signs the Plan Declaration, “under penalty of perjury”, (eToys D.I. 1312 page 24, 63). Under part C. Plan Proposed in Good Faith 1129(a)(3) Part C. 44 Barry Gold testifies “under penalty of perjury” “The Plan represents extensive arms’ length negotiations among the Debtors, the Creditors’ Committee, and other significant parties in interest, as well as their advisors. The Debtors proposed the Plan in good faith —“ 14. It is with great ease that the drafters of the Hiring Letter seal their concealment of their fraudulent deeds and acquire total control of the Debtor with the Plan Declaration (eToys D.I. 1312) part (c) 19 it states; “Pursuant to the Plan, the Creditors’ Committee, with the consent of the Debtors shall designate the Plan Administrator. Subject to the ultimate supervisory authority of the PEDC —“ 15. Barry Gold asserts in 20 of eToys docket item 1312, without revealing that he is associated with the Creditor’s and Debtor alike; feigning as if multiple “arms length” parties had negotiated in “good faith” appointment of Barry Gold as plan administrator where 20 remarks: “The Creditors’ Committee has designated me to Serve as the Plan Administrator” 16. Making the situation more morose is the compounding “mens rea” where ALBER questioned Barry Gold on the stand in a Plan Confirmation hearing, where ALBER had suspicions of the connections of Barry Gold with TBF. (eToys D.I. )(Transcript of October 16 2002 hearing Alber’s direct of Barry Gold). Barry Gold denied, being less than candid, that he was ever connected to TBF and everyone in the room, TBF, MNAT, Frederick Rosner, CrossRoads, LLC, Richard Cartoon and the Dept of Justice Attorney, Mark Kenney all knew that this was false and sat silent. Robert Alber specifically asked the court in a follow up hearing 2002 to assure that if the allegations were to later have foundation that the parties would not have a “get out of jail free card” by the exculpatory clauses within the Plan. Which the Court at that time so Ordered. (please see Transcripts in the record of pre plan hearings ) 17. It simply boggles the mind that the Court would be so ostentatious as to state in the OPINION that no Perjury has occurred. When there are over 10 separate acts of Perjury that is documented. (not counting the fact that every time a fee’ application was submitted it also required additional affirmation of no conflicts). Mr. Busenkell of MNAT also testified, during the February 9, 2005 depositions the Court permitted, that MNAT worked with eToys in August and September 1999. Even the CEO of eToys prior to Barry Gold; Toby Lenk, testified in his Affidavit that TBF instructed them what to do pre petition. TBF, MNAT & Barry Gold basically owned eToys from start to finish and have rigged the Plan confirmation voting. The Bankruptcy Court and United States Trustee know the Law. 18. Now the Appellant and HAAS can already have a field day in pointing out all the continuous non-disclosed issues as TBF has paid Barry Gold. The fact that while TBF, MNAT, Barry Gold and others drafted the clandestine Hiring Letter, while submitting multiple False Rule 2014 Affidavits, deciding to continue in non disclosure after denying during Plan confirmation hearings that any connections existed gives ample ammunition to everyone to request their disqualification and referral to the US Attorney’s office. 19. Yet “graviora manet” as TBF, MNAT and Barry Gold all have continuous “non-disclosures” of their connections to Bain/KB Toys. Bain/KB Toys acquired the bulk of the eToys Debtor assets. (please see “EXHIBIT 11” the MNAT connections to Bain/KB Toys and Mattel) and also see (“EXHIBIT 12”) the documentation of undisclosed connections of TBF and Barry Gold to Stage Stores that is affiliated with Bain/SanKaty and where Michael Glazer who was the long standing CEO of KB Toys was also a Director and stockholder of Stage Stores. The fact that Bain/KB toys acquired the eToys Debtor assets in discounts of tens of millions is Collusion to defraud an estate. One has the right to ask the question why these issues remain idle by the UST’s office which is specifically required to “police” and halt such? 20. The UST and the Bankruptcy Court should be running over everyone to obtain the credit for halting such atrocities instead of their inexplicable staunch refusal to address such undefeatable facts. For the proof of everything that is continuously wrong is Court docket records. There can be no greater “prima facie” evidence or smoking gun. They are all “caught” pure and simple. Where can one go when such mayhem of lawlessness is protected by the gate keepers of the Law? 21. The artificial performance of the UST in eToys is aptly demonstrated by the UST own contradictory presentations, as the current Asst US Trustee now assigned to Wilmington DE, has previously cited In re Stahl v Bartley Lindsay where he argued the very principal of financial advisor issues In re Cold Metal 02-43619 (E D Ohio Bankr. 2002). (“EXHIBIT 9”) For the US Trustee Andrew Vara stated in 10 of the United States Trustee objection to Aarque employment (EXHIBIT 9) “case law indicates that professionals subject to retention include individuals or entities whose duties centrally impact upon administration of the debtor’s estate.” Barry Gold became the “sole” totally “autonomous” controller of the estate by clandestine subterfuge and is disqualifiable even if he were not connected to anyone for failure to apply per the requisites of § 327(a). (That is of course, unless one argues that Barry Gold being a paid associate of TBF really left TBF in control of the Debtor.) 22. The Asst US Trustee, correctly cited In re Marion Carefree Limited Partnership, 171 B.R. 584, 588 (Bankr. N.D. Ohio 1994) as such is cited in the US Trustee Handbook, Supra. While the Asst US Trustee also cited In re United Color Press, Inc. 129 B.R. 143, 145 (Bankr S.D. Ohio 1991) stating “professionals are those who play a “central and intimate role in reorganization of the debtor’s estate.”” (emphasis added). Barry Gold as wind-down coordinator is an intimate role in the debtor’s estate! Therefore Barry Gold must apply. 23. Abiding by the well-established 3d Circuit precedent, which the Delaware Bankruptcy Court has also extensively remarked upon, the Asst Trustee Andrew Vara stated; “In determining who is a professional, courts examine the degree of autonomy such person or entity is given in performing duties called for by the retention application”. Where the UST correctly cited In re Riker Industries., Inc., 122 B.R. 964, 973 (Bankr. N.D. Ohio 1990) remarking that “a person who plays a central role in the in the administration of the estate is a professional person”. 24. Now the UST has brought in the full weight and clout of the EOUST from Washington D.C. by the General Counsel in this ALBER instant appeal to defend the converse position of offering a Stipulation to Settle (STIPULATION)(D.I. 2201) (“EXHIBIT 7”) which gives TBF implied immunity and the right to continue to remain undisclosed about many additional issues. The Stipulation was approved by the Court on October 4, 2005(eToys D.I. 2320) and is the very item, the “core” issue of this instant appeal as Mark Kenney, the US Attorney for the Region 3 Trustee’s office, seeks to defend the following unlawful clause which seeks to permit vague “authorized” circumvention of Section § 327(a) contrary to Constitutional statutory mandates implying that such “reasonable settlement” is within discretionary powers of the UST’s office by the following statement on behalf of TBF; “WHEREAS the United States Trustee shall mot seek to compel TBF top make any additional disclosures:” 25. None other than the original United States Region 3 Trustee in charge of the eToys matter has now entered the fray of this instant appeal in an effort to defend such improper intentional circumvention of the Code. Despite her reports to Congress on such employment issues demonstrating the UST’s thorough knowledge and that the entire UST EOUST has detailed familiarity of the issues at hand. In the report to Congress as Region 3 Trustee in 2004, just prior to the Emergency Motions of HAAS and Robert Alber, the Region 3 Trustee stated to the Committee on the Judiciary of the United States House of Representatives (“Trustee Report”) (“EXHIBIT 10”) whereupon Trustee Roberta DeAngelis remarked “Professionals may be compensated only after application, notice to parties, and approval by the bankruptcy court”(page 3 Trustee Report). More significantly the Trustee Report remarks on page 2 that; “Full and complete compliance requires that the professional report all connections, not just those connections that, in the judgment of the professional, may be relevant. It is the court’s task to determine whether the connections are disqualifying. In its administration of Chapter 11 cases, the United States Trustee endeavors to assure that the self-reporting required of professionals is provided and that disqualifying connections are brought to the attention of the court.” 26. UST’s are appointed under 28 U.S.C. § 581. They are obligated to report any criminal offenses and assist in any subsequent prosecutions.(18 U.S.C. § 3057; 28 U.S.C. § 586(a)(3)(F)). The duties of the UST include (1) monitoring applications for compensation and reimbursement; (2) monitoring plans and disclosure statements in chapter 11 cases; (3) making sure that all reports, schedules, and fees required to be filed by the debtors are in fact filed; (4) monitoring the functioning of creditor’s committees; (5) notifying the U.S. Attorney of possible crimes uncovered and cooperating with the U.S. Attorney in subsequent prosecutions; (6) monitoring the progress of bankruptcies and keeping cases moving; and (7) monitoring the employment of professional persons in bankruptcy cases. In re Columbia Gas Systems Inc., 33 F.3d 294, 296 (3d Cir. 1994). 27. It is grave cause for concern that in direct defiance to the Oaths of Office the EOUST and Region 3 Trustee’s are here in breach of their fiduciary duties under the statutory mandates of 28 U.S.C. § 586(a)(3)(F); 18 U.S.C. § 3057(a) for the benefit of statutory violators in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1346 that may also violate the Victims Persons Act of 18 U.S.C. § 3771. Mark Kenney has even petitioned the Court to strike and expunge ALBER and HAAS at direct material “obstructive” harm for the benefit of felons; when HAAS and ALBER informed the KB Toys bankruptcy Court that TBF was illegitimately seeking to prosecute the $100 million dollar preferential of parties TBF, MNAT and Barry Gold were connected to. (please see Del. Bankr. KB Toys 04-10120 D.I. 2228) 28. As both MNAT and TBF are fiduciaries and as such have expressed levels of trust as “officers of the court”, the intentional “non-disclosure(s)” desecrated and breached their fiduciary duties consciously. Within this Circuit such matters have been addressed concerning issues of fraud and fiduciary obligations such as In re Mushroom Transportation Company Inc., case no. 02-3754 where in a Precedential Opinion Her Honor Mary F Walrath stated “furthermore the fiduciary, because of his position of trust, would have an affirmative duty to the principal to disclose the Fraud. Absent a disclosure, the fiduciary commits an act of continual covering up of the Fraud.” Also remarked “ as the cases discussed above illustrate, the existence of a fiduciary relationship is relevant to a discovery rule analysis precisely because it entails such a presumptive level of trust in the fiduciary that it may take a “smoking gun” to excite searching inquiry on the “principals” part into its fiduciary behavior”. C. HAAS has Standing as the Debtor is Material in Breach 29. The Court also approved the employment of Collateral Logistics, Inc. (CLI) as the liquidation consultant of the Debtor. Steven Haas (a/k/a Laser Haas) (HAAS) is the sole 100% owner of CLI. The Court approved contracts and Orders for CLI engagement provides that all expenses be paid by the Debtor including taxes, insurance, labor, legal etc. The CLI contract required specific experienced personnel that the Debtor would pay for, which HAAS was the key/senior consultant that was on location throughout the tenure of CLI, for 50 hours per week, for nearly 8 months. This is also affirmed by multiple affidavits supplied by the Chairman of the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors. (the Chairman) (“EXHIBIT 2”). The fact that the Debtor estate has a Court approved contract stating the Debtor is responsible for paying “all expenses” including “labor” is all the requisite pecuniary interest that anyone needs to have standing as “person aggrieved” as a matter of “equitable justice”. (please see CLI Contracts approved by the Court)(D.I. 253 & 523)(original NIBS entries 249 & 515) (“EXHIBIT 3”). 30. Within the first Court approved Contract it states in 2 “such fee [CLI] shall be net of any and all cost and expenses of eToys, including, without limitation, taxes, insurance, security, personnel, rent, labor and utilities, all of which will be paid by eToys”. Making anyone that eToys does not pay a “person aggrieved” with pecuniary labor damages’. A “party in interest … may raise and may appear and be heard on any issue” the “determination calls for a case by case analysis, … that takes into consideration … ‘the particular purposes of the provision in question.\'” In re Peachtree Lane Assocs., Ltd., 188 B.R. 815, 824 (N.D. Ill. 1995) (comprehensive examination of the precedent on what satisfies the standard for being a party in interest); accord In re Johns-Manville Corp., 36 B.R. 743 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 1984)(Party in interest “must be determined on an ad hoc basis”). It is “‘generally understood to include all persons whose pecuniary interests are directly affected by the bankruptcy proceedings.\'” Thirteen Chapter 7 Cases Of Former Trustee Germain, 182 B.R. 375, 377-78 (Bankr. D. Conn. 1995) (quoting In re Hutchinson, 5 F.3d 750, 756 (4th Cir. 1993)). It also includes entities which are not creditors but which have a “practical” or “sufficient” stake in the outcome of the proceedings so that “fundamental fairness requires … [they] be afforded an opportunity to be heard on the issues that affect them.” Peachtree Lane Assocs., 188 B.R. at 827 (non-creditor which is the defendant in an adversary proceeding may challenge the venue of a bankruptcy case because the creditor “has a legally protectible interest in the venue of the adversary proceeding …. [which] in turn, gives them[non-creditor] a direct interest in the proper venue of the underlying … case ….”) 31. It also states in the CLI contract that “CLI agrees to devote to this project one senior supervisor”(CLI Collateral Maintenance 1). Finally, the appellee’s and UST are seeking to deny HAAS standing and legal counsel that is “contractually” obligated to be provided for by the eToys Debtor in the Original contract with CLI, where it remarks in 6 “the” Indemnification contract clause as is affirmed & specifically stated in 10 of the amended that legal services will be provided for the estate due to any material breach. (the Amended CLI Indemnification 10 gives additional strength to guarantee’s to provide for CLI’s legal protections against the “willful” acts, such as circumvention of the Code that has caused diminished returns on Collateral of the Debtor) There can be no greater material breach than work that has been completed in good faith only to be denied payment due to Fraud upon the Court, which is addressed in the initial CLI contract 6 as it states that eToys, the DEBTOR, “eToys shall defend, indemnify and hold CLI and its affiliates and the officers, directors, agents and employees of each, harmless from and against any and all claims, suits, damages, losses, liabilities, obligations, fines, penalties, costs and expenses (whether based on tort, breach of contract, product liability, patent or copyright infringement or otherwise), including reasonable legal fees and expenses of whatever kind or nature, arising out of or based on any loss of the Collateral other than any such loss arising out of CLI’s negligence or intentional misconduct.” 32. At the barest of minimums one is to be permitted a hearing on such facts, if nothing less than by Section 503(b) Substantial Contribution, as the work was Court approved is completed. Also such issue, due to the doctrine of equitable justice, the documented “unclean hands” gives rise to the credence of the feasibility that the guilty parties are engaged in retaliatory vexatious litigation against the “whistle-blower” and at a minimum commands an independent review of the facts and a full evidentiary hearing as it is established that –“claimant who intends to assert an admin claim based upon § 503(b) need not give advance notice prior to plan confirmation. Additionally the motive for taking actions to benefit the estate is of little relevance” In re Hall fin. Group v DP Partners., 106 F.3d. 667, 30 Bankr. Ct. Dec. (CRR) 624, (5th Cir. 1997). The mere chance of a §503(b) issues gives standing until adjudication on merits. 33. HAAS is named as an appellee in the MNAT Dist Ct appeal that is consolidated with the ALBER appeal. ( Del Dist Ct 05-830 & 05-831)As a matter of equitable justice in order to prevent manifest injustice the Court’s must address the Fraud upon the Court issue independently with a full evidentiary hearing. 34. The CLI contracts also state, with the Courts approval, (provided as a cost saving benefit to the Debtor) that the counsels for the estate would facilitate the submittal of paperwork to the Court on behalf of CLI and HAAS. The former Chairman of the Creditors Committee has supplied multiple Affidavits which confirms this (“EXHIBIT 2”) as well as the fact that the Court approved Orders of CLI state “with the assistance of Debtors counsel”. TBF, MNAT with the help of meetings with Irell & Manella, Susan Balaschak of TBF, David Gatto of the Debtor, the Chairman of the Creditors Committee and Barry Gold all discouraged HAAS and CLI from having independent counsel. (EXHIBIT 2) 35. The appellee’s have stated that HAAS signed a “waiver” in an Affidavit by HAAS. The Chairman’s Affidavit (EXHIBIT 2) testifies to the fact that the paperwork on behalf of CLI was to be supplied by the “assistance of Debtor’s counsel”. The appellee’s drafted the HAAS Affidavit (“EXHIBIT 6”). The fact that the appellee’s produced the HAAS Affidavit in such bad faith it is “ex dolo malo non oritur action” and is void “ab initio” as the appellee’s procured such under the “pretense” that they were doing so on behalf of CLI and/ or HAAS only to surreptitiously utilize said document against CLI and/or HAAS. Can there be any greater, serious, Model Rule of Conduct violation? The appellee’s and UST seek one minute to grant HAAS standing to defeat HAAS. Which is also why the District stated that ALBER appeal was not submitted until January 23, 2007, that ALBER failed to notice HAAS. Now the appellee’s and UST do not properly notice HAAS and yet seek to jump the fence and dismiss ALBER. Additional Non Disclosures that are materially adverse 36. HAAS and Robert Alber contend that the parties are utilizing apple to orange comparison of false facts and controversy in facilitative efforts to deny standing or dismiss in an endeavor to complete the cover up of the many facts that HAAS told the bankruptcy court concerning hidden cash assets, the collusion of selling asset of the eToys Debtor to “un-disclosed” “connected parties”, the purchase of claims and thus acquired plan votes by “undisclosed” connected parties. Stage is owned by SanKaty, Bain and affiliated parties and is co-debtor with Liquidity Solutions. Liquidity Solutions has acquired the bulk of the Debtor’s claims, without disclosure by anyone of the connections. The appellee’s controlled plan votes. 37. The Confirmed Plan Clause 4.3(d)(i) permits Barry Gold to settle issues under $1 million without seeking the Court’s approval. Including those claims acquired by Liquidity Solutions. The parties, the UST and the Court have consistently ignored the multiple requests by HAAS and ALBER for Rule 2004 examination of books & records. Which is problematical by the bankruptcy Court’s approved destruction of books & records. (eToys D.I. 300). 38. This improper claims are to be equitably subordinated. TBF, MNAT and Barry Gold, as a fiduciary duty should be fighting to expunge each other. Instead they collectively are defending their schemes. A large issue of equitable subordination includes the failure to review a preferential that occurred within 90 days prior to the bankruptcy filing that involves over $100 million to undisclosed connected parties of an original $40 million dollar note . (please see In re Bucyrus 94-20786 (E D Wisc Bankr. 1994). This preferential can now also be equitably subordinated and at a minimum needs an independent review other than the collective blind eyed parties of MNAT, TBF, and Barry Gold etc. 39. Even Her Honor Mary F. Walrath remarked upon the truism of the sardonic issue of rewarding conflicted counsels and punishment of [plaintiff’s] (in this case whistle blowers). In the Opinion of October 4, 2005 (the OPINION) (“EXHIBIT 4”) the bankruptcy Court remarked correctly with the following on point statement; on page 14 &15 of the OPINION it was noted that Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b)(6) did apply; reflecting that “extra-ordinary circumstances” existed. Citing In re Benjamin’s Arnolds, Inc., No. 4-90-6127, 1997 WL 86463. at *10 (Bankr. D. Minn. Feb 28, 1997) the OPINION continued to remark that relief can be granted from a final fee order which had been entered nearly three years earlier. In re Southmark Corp., 181 B.R. 291, 295 (Bankr. N.D. Tex. 1995). Even the UST’s DISGORGE MOTION. In re Hazel Atlas Glass principals of equitable justice. Yet, for some inexplicable reason the premise was discarded as it pertains to HAAS or CLI or ALBER, despite Circuit mandates; the OPINION remarks are correctly noted and then rejected in a manner that flabbergasts, where Her Honor Mary F Walrath remarked concerning the case of In re Southmark: “The failure of an attorney employed by the estate to disclose a disqualifying conflict of interest, whether intentional or not, constitutes sufficient ‘extraordinary circumstances’ to justify relief under Rule 60(b) (6). To hold otherwise would only serve to penalize the [Plaintiff] for delay that was beyond his control and to reward conflicted attorneys for failing to disclose” 40. MNAT continues to remain silent about many undisclosed connections while having the audacity to represent Bain affiliates before and during the eToys issues. The act of not disclosing Goldman Sachs and GECC, that MNAT has already admitted, are already sufficient documentation of multiple acts, defeating the single aberrant act defense, mandating disqualification. In re Hot Tin Roof, 205 B.R. at 1003, the Court noted: “Where the professional maintains any connections proscribed by§327(a) and does not disclose those connections, the attorney should expect nothing more [less] than the denial of compensation and the disgorgement of fee’s received”. 41. Notwithstanding decisions that hold that any failure to make complete disclosure requires disqualification, denial of compensation and disgorgement (See, e.g. In re EWC, 138 B.R. at 280-84). There are respected and often cited cases throughout the bankruptcy realm which are affirmed by this Circuit remarking upon willful circumvention of the Code as In re: Granite Partners L.P., 219 B.R. 22 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 1998) where the issue was addressed of a “conscious decision to not specifically refer to known connections with potential litigation targets.” Barry Gold, MNAT & TBF should all be void “ab initio”! Just for the mere fact of the plumb audacity to dare endeavor to perpetrate such Fraud upon the Court after the original Asst US Trustee warned them not to do such ventures. (DISGORGE MOTION 19 35). The disqualifying attribute is specifically set forth in the Code, “courts tend to read the statutory requirements literally”. See In re S.S. Retail Stores Corp ., No. c98-3794, 1999 WL 281304,*2 (Bankr. N.D. Ca April 30, 1999); U.S.Trustee v. Price Waterhouse, 19 F.3d 138 (3rd Cir. 1994) (cases cited therein); In re: Middleton Arms, Ltd Partn, 934 F.2d 723 (6th Cir. 1991) which long established the mandate where “courts cannot use § 105 powers to disregard disinterestedness criterion.” The Code seems to apply everywhere else, except in the eToys bankruptcy case. 42. The standard is unequivocal as the UST remarked in the DISGORGE MOTION the same principals while citing cases of the 3d Circuit The Trustee’s acknowledgement of the case of In re First Jersey Securities is significant as it is a 3d Circuit case that remarks ‘where there is an actual conflict of interest, however, disqualification is mandatory’. (emphasis added) (citing In re Marvel Entertainment Group, 140 F.3d at 476.).While multiple, continuous acts of additional false Rule 2014 affidavits occurred. PLAN desecrations persevere extensively ! 43. Silencing the issues of Fraud and the Truth and the facts by denying standing, granted by Article III of the Constitution, was incontrovertibly never intended to be a tool for “fraudulent parties” to pervert worthy merits by Perjury. The dismissal of ALBER, HAAS and/or CLI by the Dist Ct, the TEAM of appellee’s and the UST under Poulis or any other guise falsely states the issues of appeal as ALBER lacking merits. The multiple felonies that are being committed by the appellees are profuse in a ruthless negligent manner. 44. Mark Kenney, actually disclosed the pathway to find proof to issues of conflicts by an angered “lapse linguae” similar to the “faux pas” of the producing of the HIRING LETTER by Barry Gold. Mark Kenney was informing HAAS that no violations had occurred and mentions that the matters of TBF and Barry Gold had been handled in another bankruptcy matter of In re Bonus Stores 03-12284 (MFW) (DE Bankr 2003). Resulting in proofs of where to look for what Mark Kenney was referencing HAAS discovered the existence of the partnership of TBF and Barry. The single largest piece of irrefutable court record proof that shined light is the Asset Disposition Advisor (ADA) documents and the history of ADA. 45. Immediately after the heated multiple discussions with Mark Kenney; Henry Heiman (CLI attorney in 2004) conveyed a threat from TBF and an attorney thereof, Susan Balaschak that if HAAS did not “back off”, he would never be paid, his career would suffer greatly and they would utilize additional endeavors to harm HAAS. (The threat warning was in email form and does not constitute a waiver of attorney client privilege). The perpetual insistence by the UST’s office that they can settle fraud issues, being willfully blind to “malum in se” that is uninterrupted, while recklessly disregarding the harm to HAAS, CLI or ALBER or other parties of interest is simply inconceivable. MNAT and the appellee’s utilized similar methods of syndicated efforts to Obstruct justice by being clandestinely involved in ALBER Arizona matters. (please see “EXHIBIT 14” MNAT notice to Arizona courts to be notified that was speciously “not” in the docket records and is documentation of criminal Obstruction.) 46. As the acts by the appellees are continuous thus they can no longer offer a defense that anything is a single/inadvertent aberrant act. The Court’s intervention and referral to the US Attorney prosecution is warranted. United States v. Marcello, 13 F.3d 752 (3d Cir. 1994) (single act of aberrant behavior requires a spontaneous, thoughtless, single act involving lack of planning); United States v. Glick, 946 F.2d 335 (4th Cir. 1992) (conduct over a ten-week period involving a number of actions and extensive planning was not “single act of aberrant behavior”); United States v. Williams, 974 F.2d 25 (5th Cir. 1991), cert. denied, 507 U.S. 934 (1993) (a single act of aberrant behavior is generally spontaneous or thoughtless; a demand note dated several days before the robbery is neither); United States v. Carey, 895 F.2d 318 (7th Cir. 1990) (single act of aberrant behavior contemplates a spontaneous and seemingly thoughtless act rather than one which was the result of substantial planning); United States v. Garlich, 951 F.2d 161 (8th Cir. 1991) (fraud spanning one year and several transactions was not a “single act of aberrant behavior”). The current acts of fraud are continuous, over 5 years and the appellee members, as well as the UST have abandoned their respective fiduciary duties in the pursuit of defending the “acts” and the right to give such immunity. Where is the conscience of the system? 47. Enigmatically and “contra legem”, less than 10 days after the Asst UST submitted the DISGORGE MOTION, Mark Kenney with the electronic signature of the new Region 3 Trustee submitted a Stipulation to Settle the admitted acts of circumvention of the Code. This endeavor of “nolle prosequi” completely disregards the proof(s) of “mens rea” provided by the HIRING LETTER and the fact that it remained clandestine in form until Barry Gold produced it as a defensive evidence in his January 25th Response to demonstrate he had clean hands. It also remains disingenuous in ignoring the germane & serious issue that the hiring of Barry Gold was after being forewarned by the US Trustee’s office not to do the very act that they did despitefully in such a deceitful manner. ALBER was dismissed improperly by biased concepts rushing to conclude. 48. ALBER and HAAS have sufficient argument that the ALBER brief in the Del Dist. Ct appeal 05-830 was not dilatory or bad faith. Even the letter by Mark Minuiti shows confusion over whether a Magistrate has any authority in bankruptcy matters. Combined with the additional issue that ALBER had reached out to the parties to discuss a briefing schedule, that ALBER had incurred “brain surgery” while also receiving a “shot gun” Order from the Magistrate that was “not” received by him until 7 days after the Order for the January 18, 2007 deadline was issued. Despite all such rhetoric over semantics and the simple issue that the appellee’s have admitted that the ALBER brief was noticed on the 19th, just 1 day after the 18th is the germane fact that all such is made moot by the Fed.R.App.Proc. 26(c) which grants an additional 3 days “unless notice was immediately served” and such did not occur here. The Dist Court’s issue in dismissing ALBER and HAAS are under false pretenses and “color of law”. 49. It is as if the Government machine and agents thereof have made a major mistake of manufacturing a silly putty defense and would rather continue the making of silly putty, irregardless of expense, harm, destruction or high water before admitting that silly putty does not belong here in the first place. TBF, Barry Gold are a § 327(a) issue and disqualification applies! 50. This Mark Kenney Stipulation seeks to outright circumvent Sections § 327(a) at the benefit of profuse “Malum in se” such as Perjury, Scheme to Fix Fee’s, False Oaths or Declarations, Intimidation of Victim/Witness and other felony statutory violations. This unprecedented endeavor by Mark Kenney is even beyond the latitude of the Courts as is established and affirmed in the 3 rd Circuit as well as the Supreme Court “ (please see the established precedent case of In re Middleton Arms, L.P., 934 F.2d 723, 724 (6th Cir. 1991) Where the Sixth Circuit found that the prohibition against disinterestedness was “unambiguous” and held that “[section] 327 prevents individual bankruptcy courts from having to make determinations as to the best interest of the debtors”.). 51. It is well established in the 3d Circuit that a Court cannot disregard “unambiguous” statutory language that mandates disqualification for non disclosure of conflict of interest. See Michael v Federated Dep’t Stores, Inc (In re: Federated Dep’t Stores, Inc.), 44 F.3d at 1319 (holding that the debtor’s retention of a professional who was not disinterested, as required under the Code, was invalid from day one despite the bankruptcy court’s approval based upon equitable concerns). See also the matter of United States Trustee v. Price Waterhouse, 19 F.3d 138 (3rd Cir. 1994) where the Third Circuit referred to the adoption of the Sixth Circuits well established standard that “bankruptcy courts cannot use equitable principles to disregard unambiguous statutory language.” Id, at 142. 52. Going beyond statutory mandates of disqualification by permitting continuous acts of multiple, intentional, collaborative clandestine endeavors of such by the combined parties of MNAT, TBF and Barry Gold to circumvent the Court and the Code, which is “corrigenda”! While also assisting the parties in remaining undisclosed about being connected to the purchaser of the estate assets, which is Collusion to defraud an estate and voids the sale of the assets to the “fraudulent” purchase for failures to be a proper ‘bona fide” purchaser as mandated by the Code. It will be extremely hard to find a greater preponderance of “Malum in se” to steal control of estate assets with subterfuge efforts to gain control in their entirety. While the issue of the violation of the “bona fide” requisite also has emergency present day harm issues as KB Toys filed bankruptcy and transferred eToys to connected parties for merger with the public entity of BabyUniverse on NASDQ.(Scheduled to complete by Nov 2007). At the barest of minimums this warrants a thorough investigation and the Courts interceding in a matter of grave importance as the dissolved public equity holders are going to be totally defrauded of the entity being public again while the Debtor has the ability to be made whole and rescind the bogus transaction! 53. After HAAS had also notified the Court in charge of the KB Toys bankruptcy that TBF was not disclosing connections to BAIN/KB Toys while seeking permission to prosecute the $100 million preferential of Michael Glazer who was a director and stock holder of Stage Stores while TBF and Barry Gold worked there for the Directors of Stage. (please see Stage Stores Supplemental by TBF Stage Stores S Tx Bankr 00-35078) (“EXHBIT 13”). Thereupon, speciously; the CLI claim was transferred to another justice (consummating the threats against HAAS by TBF and Susan Balaschak) after Mark Kenney aggressively engaged in defending the expunging and striking of HAAS and ALBER statements in the KB Toys case. (please see docket item 2228 in the KB Toys bankruptcy Del 04-10120 the UST Motion to Strike HAAS). 54. ALBER appeal must be returned to the bankruptcy court if for none other than His Honor Kent Jordan who was subsequently promoted to the 3 rd Circuit Court heard all 3 appeals while in tenure at the District Delaware Ct. It was then discovered that His Honor Kent Jordan was a partner at the firm of Morris James that represented CLI in the eToys matter. As a matter of Rule 455 Judge Kent A Jordan is to be recused; § 455. Disqualification of justice, judge, or magistrate judge (a) Any justice, judge, or magistrate judge of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned. (b) He shall also disqualify himself in the following circumstances: (1) Where he has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party, or personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts concerning the proceeding; (2) Where in private practice he served as lawyer in the matter in controversy, or a lawyer with whom he previously practiced law served during such association as a lawyer concerning the matter, or the judge or such lawyer has been a material witness concerning it; 55. Additionally, in rebuttal to the dismissal of ALBER is the fact that His Honor Kent Jordan had a hearing that permitted ALBER additional time due to medical issues and major case personal issues that are “not” unrelated to this Debtor’s case. For every time ALBER had a deadline in the eToys case he would be inundated with mountains of briefing, interrogatories and response demands in multiple personal cases over a $14,000 piece of property. It was since discovered that MNAT, Barry Gold, Ellen Gordon and other eToys parties are to be witnesses against ALBER personal cases in Arizona. MNAT clandestine efforts to keep abreast of the ALBER personal cases is in direct violation of Model Rules of Conduct and a serious issue that is compounded by the fact that the Magistrate Judge sealed documents in the Dist Ct Appeal of ALBER that must be unsealed. MNAT was required to file a brief also! 56. Alber was dismissed, errantly, under the “pretext” of the Poulis Standard; which is inappropriate for multiple reasons. Alber appeal brief was timely. The clerks “reported” date of the 23rd is also erroneous as that is the date of the clerks mandate for ALBER to notice HAAS. The Clerk went beyond authority it withholding ALBER’s brief from the record for 5 days. Also incredible is the appellee’s will allow the ALBER appeal to be dismissed for not servicing HAAS only to hypocritically seek to deny HAAS standing while also being guilty of failing to serve HAAS in actuality. The only person that can object for failure to service HAAS is HAAS. The 3 rd Circuit stated In the Matter of Scrborough v Eubanks, 747 F.2d 871, 875 (3d Cir. 1984), “because [an order of dismissal] deprives a party of its day in court — doubts should be resolved in favor of reaching a decision on the merits.” Id. At 878”. A hearing must be afforded ALBER before dismissal under the Poulis doctrine which must include the fraud issues. 57. Multiple remarks within the UST brief to this Circuit Court are disingenuous such as the remark on pg 5 of the UST brief that “The United States Trustee’s motion did not suggest a sanctions amount [against TBF]. The Disgorge Motion specifically sought $1.6 million while stating erroneously that it could do nothing about the additional $1.9 million TBF had received “post” Plan confirmation due to Rule 1144. (please see EXHIBIT 1 footnote 2 and 37 thru 39). Or the inference that the UST and the bankruptcy Court have broad discretion in settling matters, while not revealing to this Court that the matter the Stipulation seeks to settle is Perjury issues revolving around multiple, intentional, deceptive acts such as false Rule 2014 affidavits. Where there is an actual conflict of interest, however, disqualification is mandatory. See In re Marvel Entertainment Group, 140 F.3d at 476.) (emphasis added.) . In re Middleton Arms, L.P., 934 F.2d 723, 724 (6th Cir. 1991) the Sixth Circuit found that the prohibition against disinterestedness was “unambiguous” and held that “[section] 327 prevents individual bankruptcy courts from having to make determinations as to the best interest of the debtors”. In re BH & P Inc., 949 F.2d 1300, 1317-18 (3rd Cir. 1991) (holding that a trustee “breache[s] the duty of disclosure” when he “contemplate[s] and discusse[s] a specific situation involving a potentiality for conflict” but fails to disclose it.) In re BH&P is cited within In re First Jersey Securities (appeal cases 98-5236 and 98-5290 3rd Circuit Opinion filed June 10 1999) where the 3rd Circuit stated “In summary, § 327(a) mandates disqualification when there is an actual conflict of interest”. 58. The dismissal by Her Honor Sue L Robinson by the Poulis Standard; being also erroneous due to the fact that the Poulis Standard must be utilized as the “last resort” where newly assigned Justice utilized such as the very first and therefore errant remedy. As this Circuit has documented consistently, the Poulis sanction is an absolute final remedy that must only be utilized as a last resort and other sanctions must be considered, reviewed and even a hearing extended, especially when the litigant ALBER has proved abundant good faith in driving across the country from California to Delaware numerous times to appear at hearings. Hardly giving credence to the argument fostered by the Court that ALBER was not diligent in prosecuting his endeavor. (please see the Matter of John Difrancesco v Aramark 05-2026 3 rd Circuit reversal where the Court reversed a dismissal and where the Circuit remarked that the Court must provide the litigant with a hearing prior to dismissal.) The Court found in Difrancesco abuse of discretion. Also with respect to the second requirement of Poulis the appellee’s in this instant matter only benefit from delay and have sought, incessantly to not have the matter heard. For there is no defense against issues that one has already confessed to the Court and there remains an abundant need to hold onto the false premise that the parties contend they are no longer required to disclose. As if the confession of one conflict of interest issue exonerates one from all other hidden acts or ploys. Confess to stealing a dime and there is no need to mention the $10,000. 59. It is recognized that “Fraud upon the Court” is a serious issue; as the Circuits and the Supreme Court have established the “doctrine” of extended timing, which all seem to find their genesis in cases such as Hazel-Atlas Glass Co. v Hartford-Empire Co., 322 U.S. 328 (1944) (“Hazel-Atlas”)where it has been established that an Order is made void “ab initio” as stated in the In the matter of Kenner v. Comm’r Of Internal Revenue, 387 F.2d 689, 691 (7th Circuit 1968) “a decision produced by fraud on the court is not in essence a decision at all and never becomes final.” (Until such is address the case remains open.) B. Erroneous Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law 60. Efforts to erroneously disregard §327(a) specifically when it is “confessed” that the “post-petition”, “wind-down coordinator”, Barry Gold, who is the admitted “paid” associate did not apply to the Court.(mandating disqualification) Remains an issue that is the primary false logic which the house of subterfuge is built upon. Both the OPINION and even the US Trustee’s DISGORGE MOTION made mention of the ‘wind down coordinator” issue demonstrating detailed review of the HIRING LETTER and yet ignored the severity of such an issue by remarking that Barry Gold was not required to apply. It is as if the Law has left the plane of existence in the Delaware bankruptcy realm. 61. PLAN desecrations exist extensively ! It is also “admitted” that Paul Traub and Michael Fox of TBF discussed the issue of amending their 2014 application when the existence of the “non-disclosed” connections of TBF to Barry Gold became readily apparent in the case of In re Bonus Stores 03-12284 (MFW) (DE Bankr 2003) whereupon the offending parties decided, “ad hoc” to continue remaining silent, compounding deceptions upon the Court . (It was well known that HAAS was digging everywhere to find concrete proof of why Barry Gold sided with TBF & MNAT to defraud CLI). 62. The Court docket items leave no doubt about the severity of the issues at hand. There are points of facts that have been overlooked which cannot, for the sake of the “good order of society” remain ignored as the Supreme Court has established which the Bankruptcy Court affirmed in this case the on point issue in the case of In re Hazel-Atlas Supra– the High Court explained that the inquiry focuses on if the alleged fraud harmed the judicial process: [T]ampering with the administration of justice in the manner indisputably shown here [counsel fraudulently created evidence and introduced it in trial] involves far more than an injury to a single litigant. It is a wrong against the institutions set up to protect and safeguard the public, institutions in which fraud cannot complacently be tolerated consistently with the good order of society. Surely it cannot be that preservation of the integrity of the judicial process must always wait upon the diligence of litigants. The public welfare demands that the agencies of public justice be not so impotent that they must always be mute and helpless victims of deception and fraud. 63. While both the Asst. UST and the Bankruptcy Court acknowledged this “well established” principal ; somewhere along the way it subsequently vanished into thin ai
    Reply
  4. laserhaas

    October 12, 2007 at 4:12 am

    Attached is an Affidavit concerning the Facts

    eToys sold the assets to Bain/KB

    Bain,KB, Stages Stores, SanKaty and eToys
    were therefore all connected to Mitt Romney
    at the time.

    The attorneys in eToys have already admitted to
    doing multiple, intentionally false, Rule 2014 Affidavits

    This Perjury has facilitated the Fraud upon the Court by
    Officers of the Court.

    Morris Nichols Arsht & Tunnel (MNAT) represents Bain
    and eToys at the same time, this is a crime.

    MNAT represented eToys when eToys sold the bulk of the
    estate to Bain KB for discounts in the tens of millions…

    While MNAT represented Bain and MNAT
    Colm F Connolly was a partner at the law firm of MNAT

    Then Colm Connolly was made a US Attorney for Delaware.

    Not only refusing to prosecute his former firm and associates
    he is complicit in efforts to cover up the fact such is connected
    to Mitt Romney who controlled and/or owned Bain, Sankaty,
    KB, Stages Stores and eToys at the time.

    As there are more than $300 million in fraud issues unprosecuted.

    Colm Connolly has much explaining to do.

    As you will see by the attached affidavit

    Dept of Justice key personnel either resign in frustration of not being able to do what is right or those that look the other way get promoted

    Take the to be Judge of Del Dist Ct

    Colm F Connolly as a US Attorney who was a partner at MNAT is refusing to prosecute the fraud, perjury and racketeering of MNAT, Bain and Bain owners which one happens to be Mitt Romney..

    While it is great career advancement to refused to prosecute or investigate your former partner or client,

    Especially when he is a Presidential hopefull,

    It is none the less, illegal and a serious issue, when you are Caught!!

    Reply
  5. laserhaas

    October 13, 2007 at 4:35 am

    This document and the items provided by Steven Haas (a/k/a Laser Haas) (Laser) comes to parties of interest today, the 12th day of October 2007 “under penalty of perjury”. As the facts are correct and true, being documented by official court docket records.

    Many possible headlines, all true, just choose one depending on your nerve!

    Dept of Justice personnel Cover up Racketeering in eToys, Stage Stores and KB bankruptcy matters which has connections to Mitt Romney

    Dept of Justice has conflict of interest in failing to prosecute
    Perjury and fraud that has benefited Mitt Romney

    Delaware US Attorney has failed to prosecute Perjury, fraud
    and conspiracy in eToys bankruptcy case despite over 100
    documented statutory violations and confessions
    to falsifying multiple Rule 2014 Affidavit’s!

    Dept of Justice engages in cover up of $300 million dollar fraud case of eToys.

    Dept of Justice has conflict of interest issues for refusing to prosecute Perjury and $300 million in Fraud related issues concerning eToys, KB & Stage Store bankruptcies.

    US Attorney Colm F Connolly failed to prosecute $300 million in Perjury and Fraud issues of eToys involving Colm F Connolly’s former clients & law firm MNAT.

    Laser Haas own attorney, Henry Heiman emails threat of
    Traub Bonacquist law firm for Haas to “back off’ or else!

    The short version of the story of corruption and Fraud!

    The issues are complex, convoluted and yet really simple. $300 million has been fleeced from the bankruptcy cases of KB, Stage Stores and eToys reprehensibly. Perjury is being supported by multifaceted exploitation of legal premises in order to protect inner circle legal elite. All one has to do is look at Court docket records as the facts are there!

    The court approved firm of the Creditors in eToys is Traub Bonacquist (TBF). TBF has already admitted to providing the court with multiple, false affidavit’s that they knew were false. A false affidavit by any regular citizen is perjury. The Delaware law firm of Morris Nichols (MNAT) represents the estate of eToys by the Court’s approval. MNAT has also admitted to filing multiple false Rule 2014 affidavits. [Perjury]
    What TBF, MNAT and the CEO of eToys did not tell anyone in the beginning [2001], until it was discovered 3 years after the fact[fall 2004]. Is that TBF, MNAT and Barry Gold all have undisclosed connections to Bain/KB. Which is a major crime of collusion and fraud, being that eToys sold the bulk of the assets to Bain/KB. An issue that is compounded further by the fact that Bain was controlled and/or owned by Presidential hopeful Mitt Romney.
    Then the Court, the US Trustee and the US Attorney refused to investigate or disqualify the parties, including MNAT, even though the Law and all legal precedents mandates such disqualification and referral for prosecution must be done.
    To make matters even worse, TBF, MNAT drafted a “clandestine” Hiring Letter for Barry Gold, as a way for Mr. Gold to avoid perjury risk. Then TBF & MNAT placed Barry Gold in as the eToys, “wind down coordinator”, who became the President/CEO and finally the confirmed Plan Administrator in control of $50 million in cash.
    TBF also confessed to the Court, on March 1, 2005 that he paid Barry Gold 4 separate payments of $30,000, each which halted once TBF placed Barry Gold within the eToys estate, in secret. Where Barry Gold then received an initial $40,000 per month. Making Barry Gold a direct paid party of TBF. The fact that MNAT and TBF drafted the Hiring Letter that allowed Barry Gold to intentionally circumvent the Law and the Court is a feat only exceeded by the lack of prosecution of a matter that is connected to a $300 million in unanswered fraud issues while the original stockholders are thrown away and eToys.com is going public again on NASDQ with only 17 stockholders. While no one knows if Mitt Romney is to be one of the stockholders in the new company, many of the Bain employed persons are participating in the merger with BabyUniverse.com which will seal the deal of stealing the assets from the eToys shareholders even though it is now readily apparent that the sale to Bain/KB failed the legal requisite of being “bona fide”!
    The Courts have continuously acted contrary to Constitutional mandates shamefully and have stricken, expunged and dismissed our proofs of fraud at the direct request of the United States Trustee. Repeatedly throwing out Laser and the eToys shareholders. This is Obstruction of Justice in every sense of the word.

    Delaware US Attorney Colm F Connolly

    The US Attorney, Colm F Connolly, for Delaware; has refused to investigate or prosecute the issues for several years. Being that the whistle blowers are Laser Haas, a Court approved employee in the bankruptcy case and other “pro se” parties such as eToys stockholders, it is easy to sweep the issue under the rug.
    After all, who are people, press, authorities going to give the most credibility to? The “pro se” parties who are losing their rights to be paid? Or the esteemed DOJ parties of a US Attorney, US Trustee who have the blessing of a Chief Federal Justice? After all we all trust the system of justice!
    Armed with the newly discovered evidence that one of possible reasons the US Attorney, Colm F Connolly is refusing to investigate and prosecute the case may be due to the fact that he was a partner at the firm of Morris Nichols and Bain was his client.
    Morris Nichols (MNAT) represented both Bain and eToys when eToys sold the assets to Bain/KB in 2001 for discounts in the tens of millions. The participating parties in the schemes have also received more than $14 million in fee’s. (that we know of)
    Combine that with the fact that Bain was owned or controlled by the Presidential hopeful, Mitt Romney, plus $300 million in unexplained preferentials and you have an abundance of motive. Now Colm F Connolly is being considered for a Federal District Court Judge position vacated by Kent A Jordan who already participated in all four of the Delaware District Court appeals concerning eToys.

    Undisclosed conflict of interest is against the Law.

    If one just considers, for one moment that acts of cronyism by justices, court Clerks and Dept of Justice authorities are happening. Which seeks to snow the general public while giving immunity to officers of the court. Then anyone has to really question why are those esteemed, publicly trusted, authoritative parties permitting willful circumvention of the Law? Why is the Government we vote into office permitting acts of lawlessness that has facilitated fraud upon the court in a premeditated fashion? What is the motivation of the Court and Dept of Justice to permit criminal acts to continue without prosecution? At the same time why is the Dept of Justice and the Courts allowing the crooks to keep the spoils?
    In case the reader may desire a chance to grasp the diverse legal issues; and understand the criminal acts at hand. We break it down into simple semantics.
    The bankruptcy law only allows a bankruptcy judge authority over civil actions. Conflict of interest Federal Rules, Code and regulations exist to make sure attorneys keep their hands out of the cookie jar. Courts and lawyers decide where the bankrupt entities monies shall be dispersed.
    If they (the attorneys) are connected to any party in the case, then it is a conflict of interest and a possibility of preferential treatment. Therefore Congress has mandated disclosure of all relationships, to keep everything above board.
    Being that the Court and lawyers are, in essence, self-policing, any discovered “conflict of interest” that was not disclosed Congress and the U.S. Supreme Court mandates that such requires disqualification and disgorgement. (the return of monies that have been gained improperly and throwing the fox’s out of the hen house.)
    Congress also mandates that such is a criminal act and must be referred to the Dept of Justice for prosecution. The policing party to assure that process is the United States Trustee. The US Trustee is permitted no latitude in deciding whether or not to prosecute.
    The law mandates, under 28 U.S.C § 586(a)(3)(F), that a US Trustee must Notify and Refer non disclosure of conflict of interest acts by court approved persons to the US Attorney’s office. Both the US Trustee and a Judge are ordered by the statutory mandate of 18 U.S.C. § 3057(a) to notify the US Attorney’s office of any bad faith acts that they have witnessed being done by lawyers. This mandate is so restrictive that the Dept of Justice website states if a Trustee desires not to prosecute (because the act was not intentional), then the Trustee is still required to report the crimes to the US Attorney’s office and the Trustee may then submit a Memo of Declination to prosecute. Even then the US Attorney has to do an independent investigation and if such investigation takes more than 1 hour, a case number must be assigned. No case number, no case!
    Yet speciously, despite the proof and confessions of multiple acts of Perjury. Perjury that has perpetrated “fraud on the court” resulting in more than $300 million dollars in fraudulently obtained assets, remains unpunished and continuous.

    Dept of Justice and the Courts know the law of disqualification well

    The Dept of Justice and the Courts know the law. A judge or US Attorney can not become such straight out of law school. They have extensive experience in such matters being well versed in their fiduciary responsibilities and are salaried well above the American average, usually around $120,000 or more per year.
    Yet, it seems in this eToys or Delaware bankruptcy cases that the DOJ and the Courts recognizes that the public is basically lacking in such detailed knowledge. Therefore the DOJ, with the blessing of the Courts are encourage the perpetrators, with their high political connections, to believe they get away with the crime. Everyone who is charged to halt the crimes are being willfully blind with recklessly disregard of the facts, as the Dept of Justice & Judges have the additional luxury of invulnerability.
    The Dept of Justice United States Trustee takes an Oath of Office and is charged, under 28 U.S.C. § 586, with the fiduciary duty as both the “policing” agent of professional employment issues in bankruptcy; while the US Trustee is also the “watchdog” of public equity bankruptcies, per the authority of the Janet Reno Reform Act of 1994.
    It is this fiduciary failure of the Dept of Justice, under the façade of the “color of law” (perversion of legal statutory mandates & obligations) by the pretense of acting as if one is performing one’s duties, which is permitting the corruption of the justice system.
    The wholesale slaughter of the good order of society has been effected, with an “in your face” mockery of justice by destruction of the judicial process through statements by the Courts, that a person must have the courts permission, to make a 911 call to the Court about grand scale larceny. Such implies the perpetrators, who are officers (and friends) of the court are “above the Law”!
    They control so much power, influence, money and political connections and even utilize our own attorney’s to deliver threats (by giving them higher paying cases) that the Courts, the perpetrators and the Dept of Justice personnel, all the way from Washington D.C. have entered the 3rd Circuit appeals as appellee’s defending the right to throw our proofs of the Perjury and Fraud out of the record.(3rd Cir 06-4308 & 07-2360)
    While it is true we are just a few “pro se” parties of very little significance, the fact remains it is the American system of justice that is being corrupted. All the proofs of the crimes are within Court docket records, there is no hyperbole or conjecture here. The lies the parties told yesterday contradict the lies they are telling today. It is the internet that has now provided access to court docket records. Through Congressional Acts that seek to provide the public with the ability to make sure that things no longer go on behind closed doors.
    The cronyism that has gone on for an extended period of time is so arrogant, they simply assert the fact that they will ignore the public records and retaliate in every manner their power permits against anyone who would dare use the internet to ferret out the Truth. Dov Avni, a stock holder in Stage who owned only $4500 in stock was ordered by the Court to pay $380,000.00 and the US Marshall’s were sent after him half a dozen times. It is all right there in the Court records.
    One of the items Dov Avni brought to our attention was the fact that the F.D.I.C had granted Stage Stores a banking charter for the credit cards of Stage. The original worth of that bank was $75 million. It was never declared in Stage Stores bankruptcy and was sold for $150 million to the World Bank. This is also a huge crime.
    They, the judges who are willfully blind, the US Trustee’s who act in reckless disregard of the facts, are protecting their career associates who are doing syndicated, criminal acts; by stating they are above the law and the American public does not have standing or permission to address and stop the malfeasance. It is our hope, that the internet keeps this story alive as they have threatened us with our demise for our failure to “back off”.

    Perjury acts documented by the US Trustee

    The Asst U S Trustee (AUST) testified in the Feb 15, 2005 Disgorge Motion (eToys docket item 2195) whereupon the AUST stated the following items

    1. The AUST testified about having detailed discussions with the parties and cautioning them to refrain from violations of § 327(a). Specifically against the replacement of key personnel of the eToys (Debtor) with any new officers that are connected to the retained [court approved] attorneys in eToys. Disgorge motion 19 and 35.
    2. As stated in parts 1 thru 9 in the Disgorge Motion the US Trustee affirmed that Traub Bonacquist & Fox (TBF) had filed multiple Rule 2014 affidavits reaffirming [falsely] that there were no conflicts of interest. (TBF was court approved Creditors counsel)
    3. Parts 10 to 19 the AUST stated that TBF was vastly experienced in matters of disclosure, being well versed in the Code requirements while TBF did not claim ignorance of the requirements with the AUST detailing the Dept of Justice in depth knowledge of the legal requirements of disclosing.
    4. In 17 the Trustee confirms that TBF had breached its duty to disclose.
    5. Also it part 17 it states that TBF compounded its failure by providing multiple affirmative misrepresentation [Perjury] that falsely stated TBF remained a “disinterested person”.
    6. A serious additional element proving the legal prosecutorial requisite of “scienter” (knowledge of doing intentional wrong) is the fact, which the AUSA acknowledge in 18, is TBF confessed that it considered amending their Rule 2014 affidavit when the issues became known in anther case of In re Bonus Sales. Whereby TBF decide to continuously remain silent on the issue which had been hidden for a long time. (this is a Big confession)
    7. In part 19 the Disgorge motion states that Barry Gold’s hiring was no accident, specifically remarking upon the fact that Barry Gold was placed within the Debtor directly at the behest of TBF.
    8. Part 21 of the motion states that TBF seriously affected the judicial process, while the disgorge motion also stated
    9. Within part 27 the US Trustee states “A court may ordinarily disqualify a professional, deny compensation in whole or in part, or even order disgorgement —“ this remark is disingenuous as explained bellow.
    10. Of special note is the fact that both the US Trustee and the Court offered up the controlling precedent of Law that the 3rd Circuit and US Supreme Ct states as the controlling issue, the case of In re Hazel Atlas Glass, which denotes the fact that Fraud upon the Court is a continuous offense until sufficiently remedied! “any Court decision that was acquired through fraud on the court is in essence no decision at all becoming void “ab initio”.”

    Several items that are amazing within the AUST disgorge motion is the fact that Mr. Perch concludes that Fraud upon the Court had occurred ( 35) and if the court were to disgorge anything less (than $1.6 million) it would simply be viewed “as a cost of doing business” lacking in sufficient deterrent value. ( 39 “conclusion”).
    Then, in an appalling and specious manner, less than 10 days later, the Dept of Justice attorney for the new Region 3 Trustee offers a Stipulation to Settle that provides the following illegitimate language while the Dept of Justice offers TBF implied settlement with immunity;
    “WHEREAS the United States Trustee shall not seek to compel TBF to make any additional disclosures”

    The Mark Kenney Stipulation to Settle does not state any legal basis for doing an act that of circumventing the Code; an endeavor that even a Federal Justice is prohibited from effecting. The 3rd Circuit cites repeatedly the matter of In re Middleton Arms, L.P., 934 F.2d 723, 724 (6th Cir. 1991) where the Sixth Circuit found that the prohibition against disinterestedness was “unambiguous” and held that “[section] 327 prevents individual bankruptcy courts from having to make determinations as to the best interest of the debtors. (Where there is an actual conflict of interest, however, disqualification is mandatory. See In re Marvel Entertainment Group, 140 F.3d at 476.) (emphasis added.). United States Trustee v. Price Waterhouse, 19 F.3d 138 (3rd Cir. 1994) where the Third Circuit referred to the adoption of the Sixth Circuits well established standard that “bankruptcy courts cannot use equitable[any] principles to disregard unambiguous statutory language.” Id, at 142
    The Chief Justice in the eToys Bankruptcy, Mary F Walrath, (MFW) stated on page 14&15 of her own OPINION that Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b)(6) did apply reflecting that “extra-ordinary circumstances” did exist. Citing In re Benjamin’s Arnolds, Inc., No. 4-90-6127, 1997 WL 86463. at *10 (Bankr. D. Minn. Feb 28, 1997).
    MFW also continued to remark that this Opinion “constitutes the finding of facts and conclusions of Law–” whereupon the OPINION concludes, against all established principals and logic, with brazen disregard for unambiguous statutory language, that Mr. GOLD was “not” required to apply by § 327(a).
    Cementing a distortion of justice by concluding with the demoralizing remark that it was not necessary for the Court to submit the issue to the U.S. Attorney office. In direct disregard of the Federal Judicial Canon’s of Conduct and in direct legal violation of 18 U.S.C. § 3057(a) which specifically states any judge knowing of a violation by a judge or lawyer under their purview, who is engaged in acts contrary to the law, must notify the US Attorney.
    Laser Haas and Alber had contacted the U S Attorney office in Delaware and had detailed discussions, providing extensive proof to Ellen Sights and Debra within the US Attorney’s office of Delaware.
    The erroneous conclusions contravenes the absolute correct statement the chief justice affirmed in the OPINION when she remarked:
    “The failure of an attorney employed by the estate to disclose a disqualifying conflict of interest, whether intentional or not, constitutes sufficient ‘extraordinary circumstances’ to justify relief under Rule 60(b) (6). To hold otherwise would only serve to penalize the [Plaintiff] for delay that was beyond his control and to reward conflicted attorneys for failing to disclose”

    So one must conclude that the Judge is either unable to read her own writing or two different people (personalities) proffered the remarks.
    As the conflicting attorneys are being reward and HAAS has been expunged with fraud and perjury utilizations in denying court approved contracts, fee’s and expenses of more than $3 million for blowing the whistle.
    It appears almost readily apparent that there must be a type of alcohol within the Delaware Federal Court realm which encourages double-mindedness and acts by venerated authoritative figures that are acting contrary to the Law and Oath’s they are sworn to uphold!
    Just as significant is the fact that the US Trustee and court have ignored the Law, the “well established” within the 3rd Circuit and the US Supreme Ct. per many cases such as In re Middleton Arms, L.P., 934 F.2d 723, 724 (6th Cir. 1991) which long established the mandate where “courts cannot use § 105 [sua sponte] powers to disregard disinterestedness criterion”. (emphasis added). ! In re: First Jersey Securities the 3rd Cir. stated ‘where there is an actual conflict of interest, however, disqualification is mandatory’. (citing In re Marvel Entertainment Group, 140 F.3d at 476.) “Section 105(a) cannot be used to circumvent the clear directive of section 327(a)”. Id. At 725

    The US Trustee has sought leniency in 3 different ways within the Disgorge motion.
    a. The AUST falsely stated in the first footnote that “Gold, as an employee of the debtors rather than a professional employed under 11 U.S.C. §§ 327(a) was not required to file a Rule 2014 affidavit.”
    b. The refusal to seek disqualification is clearly erroneous, as is stated in the Middleton Arms etc. cases , disqualification is Mandatory!
    c. This is the Biggie, the item that is of serious interest now with the newly discovered evidence of Colm F Connolly’s direct connection as a Dept of Justice Attorney who gained such employment while being an attorney at Morris Nichols Arsht & Tunnel (MNAT) for there is no mention, whatsoever, of disgorging MNAT. WoW!!!!!!

    As it is clearly demonstrated above, a “wind down coordinator” [financial advisor] is a Professional as defined by the Law and the US Trustee’s hand book and guidelines (please see In re: Middleton Arms, Ltd. Partnership, 934 F.2d 723 (6ht Cir. 1991). Financial Advisor/workout consultant [wind-down coordinator] is a professional subject to 327(a) especially with any degree of autonomy In re: Riker industries, Inc., 122 B.R. 964, 973 (Bankr N.D. Ohio 1991), “bankruptcy courts determine the definition of a professional person due to his autonomy and authority over bankruptcy related matters”.)
    The US Trustee’s Disgorge Motion even testifies on the “financial advisor” issue by citing an on point reflection of a similar case and situation. Part 16 of the Disgorge endeavor verbatim
    “Regardless of whether such connections affected its disinterestedness, TBF was obligated to disclose its connections with Gold as soon as the debtors employed Gold. See Mateer of CF Holding Corp., 164 B.R. 799, 806- 07 (Bankr. D. Conn. 1994) (debtor’s financial advisor denied over $795,000 in fees and expenses for failure to timely disclose —-)”

    You can also see such detail in the cases of In re: Stahl v Bartley Lindsay 137 B.R. 305, 309 (D. Minn. 1991) “Courts have concluded that financial advisors must be retained under 11 USC § 327(a). In re Martin 817 F 2d 175 180 (1st Cir1987) –addressing both the “unclean hands” doctrine and listing the 12 factors to consider in application of who must apply and disclose by 327(a).
    The statements by the Court and US Trustee are very disingenuous in seeking not to disqualify, while ignoring other statutory mandates concerning Barry Gold failures to apply per § 327(a) which is cause for disqualification
    The staunch efforts of judicial and DOJ “nolle prosequi” (failure to prosecute) grossly violates the law and in effect administrates cronyism into full blown complicity that results from retaliatory acts of fraud against Haas and the eToys shareholders,
    Such is accomplished by the reckless disregard of the facts and willful blindness of Dept of Justice officials concerning large scale RICO activities. Persistently repeated by Dept of Justice and other Federal authorities nefariously; with belligerent endeavors to strike, expunge and dismiss Haas or Alber in the 3rd Circuit appeals dissipatedly.
    Now, even the full might and authority of the Washington D C Dept of Justice highest officials have signed their names, (in an endeavor of imprimatur) by flagrantly using the clout of the highest office of the US Government Dept of Justice to influence matters contradictory to their Oath of office and the Law.
    As can be seen on the Dept of justice website. The statement that no disqualification is required or that Barry Gold need not apply is extremely untruthful; being completely divergent to the very instructions that any UST is given within their own handbook and guidelines ( see http://www.usdoj.gov/ust/r15/Forms/EOUST_Ch7-11_Fee_App_Guidelines.PDF ) as seen on the Dept. of Justice US Trustee website, where you find The US Trustee Manual states the following on-point discussion of this issue;
    11 U.S.C. § 101(14)(A)-(D) “mandates a literal approach to the disinterested person requirement and sets forth in detail a series of characteristics that disqualify a person.”
    While continuing it remarks upon the financial advisor [wind-down coordinator] issue
    “If a professional has the characteristic then disqualification is automatic.” And “Since the language of the statute is clear, it must be applied as written” citing In re: Middleton Arms, Ltd. Partnership, 934 F.2d 723 (6ht Cir. 1991). Financial Advisor/workout consultant is a professional subject to 327(a) especially with any degree of autonomy In re: Riker industries, Inc., 122 B.R. 964, 973 (Bankr N.D. Ohio 1991), Stahl v. Bartley Lindsay co. 137 B.R. 305, 309 (D. Minn 1991); In re: Marion Carefree Ltd. Partnership 171 B.R. 584, 588 (Bankr. N.D. Ohio 1994); In re: First Jersey Securities 180 F.3d 504, 509 (3rd Cir. 1999).

    There are also articles and briefs supplied by the Dept of Justice General Counsel to Congressional Committee’s demonstrating advanced knowledge of such by the very same Roberta DeAngelis who seeks as the US DoJ General Counsel to defy in the eToys appeals. In the report to Congress as Region 3 Trustee in 2004, just prior to the Emergency Motions of HAAS and Robert Alber, the Region 3 Trustee stated to the Committee on the Judiciary of the United States House of Representatives (“Trustee Report”) (“EXHIBIT 10”) whereupon Trustee Roberta DeAngelis remarked “Professionals may be compensated only after application, notice to parties, and approval by the bankruptcy court”(page 3 Trustee Report). More significantly the Trustee Report remarks on page 2 that;
    Full and complete compliance requires that the professional report all connections, not just those connections that, in the judgment of the professional, may be relevant. It is the court’s task to determine whether the connections are disqualifying. In its administration of Chapter 11 cases, the United States Trustee endeavors to assure that the self-reporting required of professionals is provided and that disqualifying connections are brought to the attention of the court.”

    All this contradictory decision making demonstrating, at the barest of minimums, that the Dept of Justice is acting “double minded” is the reality of how the US Dept of Justice and the Court knows the key fact that Barry Gold is a “wind down coordinator” for the only place that such is mentioned by the perpetrating parties is within the Barry Gold response to the allegations. Specifically the Barry Gold Hiring Letter that was drafted by TBF, MNAT, Barry Gold, David Gatto (VP/CFO of eToys) and others, which contains the following deliberate, willful ability to circumvent the Court and the Code, which is most certainly a crime; after the UST forewarned the parties against such endeavors, by the deceptive option to encourage or permit Barry Gold not to comply with the Code; worded egregiously, in the following manner:

    “As of the Commencement Date, your position with the Company shall be as Wind Down Coordinator and you shall retain such position until (i) the approval of your employment as an Officer of the Company by order of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware (the “Bankruptcy Court”) —“

    The HIRING LETTER’s opt out clause from §327(a); stated a reward for not seeking approval-

    “—and you have waived the condition in clause (i), then you shall be appointed as President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company and your employment with the Company will be for an initial term ending May 20, 2002.”

    As anyone can see Barry Gold is rewarded [bribed] by his waiving, at his own volition, the requirement of applying to the Court, for if you remember that this letter remained hidden until the conflict issues were “ferreted” out, then it is simply plausible that Barry Gold required a “get out of jail free card” to avoid committing perjury and everyone involved said “ O K” we will draft you a hiring letter with a sneaky little phrase allowing you plausible deniability.

    Dept of Justice and SEC are informed of Laser Haas anxiety

    If you look at the Dept of Justice’s large scale fraud endeavors against the public you will find reports by the former Director Lawrence Friedman stating in 2004 that over 10,000 cases of fraud was addressed that resulted in $60 million in fraud corrections. http://www.usdoj.gov/ust/eo/public_affairs/press/docs/silver_screen_final_10-28-04.htm
    .such remarks were similarly made in 2003 which can be viewed here http://www.usdoj.gov/ust/eo/public_affairs/testimony/docs/testimony.pdf )
    Mr Friedman resigned right after the March 1, 2005 hearings and Mark Kenney’s efforts to ask the court to strike and expunge Haas and Alber (please see the press release at http://www.usdoj.gov/ust/eo/public_affairs/press/docs/friedman_resignation_4-27-05.htm ) Mr. Friedman had emailed Laser Haas directly and told him the issues would be addressed by his staff on the very same day that Mark Kenney had offered the illegitimate “get out of jail free card” to TBF.
    From: Lawrence.A.Friedman@usdoj.govDate: 02/25/05 14:49:58To: ‘laserhaas@msn.com’Cc: Kelly.B.Stapleton@usdoj.govSubject: RE: Item sent to the record today
    Mr.. Haas:

    You most assuredly have our attention and my personal commitment that we will act in every case where action is required and we are aware of it. Please understand however, that like any prosecutor, we must exercise appropriate discretion in carrying out our responsibilities which while sometimes in a particular case may seem unjust, it is done with perspective to ALL matters we handle. I sympathize with your frustration and again assure you that my staff is extremely competent to handle this matter and will exercise appropriate judgment.

    Lawrence A. Friedman, Director
    Executive Office for US Trustees
    United States Department of Justice
    Washington, DC

    Even though Director Friedman had taken preemptive action in replacing the Region 3 Trustee, Roberta DeAngelis which can be seen at the following website ( http://www.usdoj.gov/ust/eo/public_affairs/press/docs/stapleton_release2_12-04.htm
    ) and had followed up with the Disgorge efforts against Traub, it is readily apparent that someone else was running the show and we believe this is why Lawrence Friedman resigned. For the fact remains the declaration he made about his competent staff has proved to be, at a minimum, one readily apparent fallacy. While I did do my best to provide him the leeway he requested as is seen in my emails to Director Friedman

    From: laserhaas@msn.com [mailto:laserhaas@msn.com]
    Sent: Friday, February 25, 2005 5:13 PM
    To: Friedman, Lawrence A
    Subject: RE: Item sent to the record today

    Dear Mr. Friedman:

    I deeply apologize for upsetting you and tying up resources with my emails and faxes.

    My intention was and remains the endeavor to get your offices attention and confirmation that someone is paying jurisprudent oversight to what is occurring concerning the flagrant matters at hand.

    Having received your request I most apologetically will comply and accept your email acknowledgement to also confirm you are on top of the matter.

    Which until reception of your email I felt my pursuit of justice was falling into a void.

    Sincerely

    Laser Steven Haas

    Further conversations were not so cordial.
    From: Lawrence.A.Friedman@usdoj.govDate: 02/25/05 14:01:06To: ‘BHaasS@aol.com’Cc: Kelly.B.Stapleton@usdoj.gov; Frank.J.Perch@usdoj.gov; Mark.Kenney@usdoj.gov; ‘kell.b.stapleton@usdoj.gov’; ‘rsussman@kronishlieb.com’; ‘mminuti@saul.com’; ‘jgarrity@shearman.com’; ‘gwerkheiser@mnat.com’; ‘condo28@mail.com’; ‘laserhaas@msn.com’; ‘Grobinson@sec.gov’; ‘ssherillbeard@sec.gov’; ‘bbrook@bbhhlaw.com’Subject: RE: Item sent to the record today
    Dear Mr. Hass:

    Please stop sending me copies of all these emails. My staff is extremely capable of passing on to me any items that would require my attention. If any party in each of the 1,650,000 cases filed last year served me with copies of every communication we would not have time to take any position in regards to your case.

    Lawrence A. Friedman
    Director, Executive Office of US Trustees
    United States Department of Justice
    Washington, DC

    —–Original Message—–
    From: BHaasS@aol.com [mailto:BHaasS@aol.com]
    Sent: Friday, February 25, 2005 4:49 PM
    To: bhaass@aol.com
    Cc: Stapleton, Kelly B.; kell.b.stapleton@usdoj.gov; Perch, Frank J.;
    Kenney, Mark; Friedman, Lawrence A; rsussman@kronishlieb.com;
    mminuti@saul.com; jgarrity@shearman.com; gwerkheiser@mnat.com;
    condo28@mail.com; laserhaas@msn.com; Grobinson@sec.gov;
    ssherillbeard@sec.gov; bbrook@bbhhlaw.com
    Subject: Item sent to the record today

    To All parities of interest:

    This is to make everyone aware that Collateral Logistics, Inc. (“CLI”) — Steve Haas as President does state adamantly the following:

    CLI Objects to the request by the US Trustee to amend more softly the original US Trustee request of disqualification and disgorgement of $1.5 million in fee’s — whereas CLI feels that said original request was not, in many ways, severe enough correction of the matter at hand.

    Secondly the request to move forward the smaller settlement with broad indemnification language is strenuously objected to along with the request to hear the settlement matter on March 1, 2005.

    It is much more appropriate that those that did deceive admit the facts at hand and their intent and throw yourselves on the mercy of the Court and those harmed by the scheming.

    This rampant endeavor to gain a monopoly of the Delaware Court system through power, influence and corruption has to cease.

    Sincerely
    Steve Haas
    President and CEO
    Collateral Logistics, Inc.

    Surely one should find it odd that the replacing of a Region 3 Trustee is marked with a press release, while the person who was replaced, removed or side ways appointed has no mention, whatsoever, as being promoted to the General Counsel position in Washington D C. ( http://www.usdoj.gov/ust/eo/public_affairs/press/index.htm ).
    The fact remains that the US Attorney Colm F Connolly and Mark Kenney, along with the US Trustee (formerly Roberta DeAngelis and Frank Perch)(now Kelly B Stapleton and Andrew Vara ) along with the General Counsel of the Dept of Justice EOUST ( the former Region 3 Trustee Roberta DeAngelis) have all refused to disqualify, disgorge properly and prosecute Traub Bonacquist & Fox, Morris Nichols Arsht & Tunnel, Barry Gold, Bain/KB Toys, Liquidity Solutions, Xroads LLC, Wells Fargo/Foothill Capital, David Gatto, David Haddad (who had hidden $2 million in cash overseas) Richard Cartoon and Fredrick Rosner (Traub’s local counsel who had moved to 4 different firms carrying eToys case with him).
    Colm F. Connolly
    Colm F. Connolly has served as the United States Attorney for the District of Delaware since September 4, 2001. Mr. Connolly was an Assistant United States Attorney from 1992 to 1999 and a partner with the Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnel law firm in Wilmington, Delaware 2from 1999 to 2001. After graduating from the Duke University School of Law in 1991, Mr. Connolly clerked for Judge Walter K. Stapleton of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. Mr. Connolly holds a bachelor’s degree from the University of Notre Dame and a master’s degree from the London School of Economics.

    There are $300 million in unanswered issues, while denying access to books n records. With the newly discovered evidence that Colm F Connolly was with Morris Nichols prior to becoming a US Attorney. The whole Delaware Bankruptcy system has gone A W O L in a syndicated White Collar Criminal manner that would make Al Capone and the G-dfather desire to rise from the grave….

    The Facts are indisputable, No Prosecution has occurred of deliberate Fraud

    So the issue is very simple, the AUST has stated that he [fore]warned the parties against replacing key personnel of the Debtor with anyone connected to the [court] retained professionals in the case. You also have documentation by the US Trustee’s office that not only was that warning disregarded, the parties engaged in drafting a “clandestine” Hiring Letter that remained hidden for 3 years until the “non-disclosure” of “conflict of interest” issues was discovered. Where the offending parties admitted they filed multiple, false Rule 2014 Affidavits. (which is Perjury) as is now documented in another, less connected issue concerning Mitt Romney’s campaign participant the 23-count indictment Wednesday, Alan B. Fabian, who is also accussed of Perjury in a bankruptcy matter (and all he did was deny a connection on a $3 million dollar issue). Which can be seen at the following web link http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=mitt+romney+campaign+fraud+perjury&btnG=Search
    So, after you have the issue of being warned, with admitted acts of multiple, false affidavits, you also have the fact that TBF confessed that he paid Barry Gold four (4) separate payments of $30,000 each before and after eToys filed bankruptcy, Which was halted once TBF placed Barry Gold within the debtor as “wind down coordinator” who then became President and CEO after choosing to deliberately not inform the court by an illegal , contractual measure that was drafted by every “officer of the Court” you can think of within the case, (which is a conspiracy to defraud).
    Now if that is not enough for you, add to the items above that we have since discovered 100 other felony violations, including the fact that eToys sold the assets to Bain/KB Toys whom TBF, MNAT, David Gatto and Barry Gold have all been connected to. This is the most serious of violations, it simply Can Not be done, they, in essence, sold the assets to themselves, under the “guise” of being the highest of trusted parties with affidavit’s swearing up and down that they had No such Connections.
    jabramczyk@mnat.com Jon E Abramczyk partner MNAT tel 302 351-9211
    Jon regularly represents major Fortune 500 corporations and their directors in Delaware, including Morgan Stanley & Co., Inc., Viacom, Inc., CBS Corporation, Hallmark Cards and QUALCOMM, Inc. He recently successfully represented Bain Capital, Vornado and KKR in the Court of Chancery litigation challenging their acquisition of Toys-R-Us.
    As MNAT has failed to disclose and being that the conspiracy to defraud was soooo successful, the parties decided to have it all. The confirmed PLAN of eToys that decides what the creditors and eToys shareholders get was drafted by the parties under the guise that they were all “arms length” “good faith” negotiating parties. While the US Trustee and Court state that no proof has been provided that any Perjury has occurred (despite the already known confessions to the contrary) you have another smoking gun. For Traub supplied Barry Gold as the confirmed Plan administrator, the sole party in control of the entire $50 million that remained. The Plan also states that Barry Gold can not have any relationship to anyone and that it must be done “arms length” Which is documented by Barry Gold with false remarks {Perjury] as “plan administrator” in the Plan Declaration Barry Gold signs “under penalty of perjury”, (eToys D.I. 1312 page 24, 63). Under part C. Plan Proposed in Good Faith 1129(a)(3) Part C. 44 Barry Gold testifies

    “The Plan represents extensive arms’ length negotiations among the Debtors, the Creditors’ Committee, and other significant parties in interest, as well as their advisors. The Debtors proposed the Plan in good faith —“

    As if this is not enough, Barry Gold is permitted to pay any items under $1 million without the Court’s approval and is further compounded by the issue that the AUST has already acknowledged that TBF received $1.7 million after the Plan was confirmed.
    You also have other issues such as Wells Fargo loaned eToys $40 million in November 2000 and then took out $120 million before eToys filed on March 7, 2001. A preferential that is 100% rescindable under the bankruptcy Law of equitable subordination as the loan originated by Foothill Capital and was returned to, with all the profits to Wells Fargo. Having never been under review by independent counsel is a crime that is documented in the matter of In re Bucyrus 94-20786 (E D Wisc) Gellene as counsel of the firm of Milbank & Tweed. Gellene went to jail for his perjury when someone he was connected to loan the debtor $35 million ( a former Goldman Sachs party) and the loan was never reviewed. Milbank & Tweed was disgorged their entire $1.9 million and lost a lawsuit of $30 million. ( please see the web stories at the following http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3975/is_200601/ai_n17187297 and http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/whitecollarcrime_blog/legal_ethics/index.html the Oesterle Law Professors blog is a wealth of information on such, just as his friend Peter Henning who addresses White Collar crimes )
    When Barry Gold and TBF worked for the Stage Stores Bankruptcy (S Texas 00-35078) (which is also owned by Bain, SanKaty, Mitt Romney, Michael Glazer (CEO of KB) TBF never disclosed that Liquidity Solutions is “co-debtor” with Stage Stores ( a fact that is very Well hidden!)
    Liquidity Solutions and companies affiliated with Liquidity began buying up many of the claims (and plan votes) in eToys. There is nothing against the law about buying up creditors claims, the Courts actually encourage the business. However, you must Disclose such, for any related party by such conflict can give preferential treatment to such “undisclosed” connections at direct, materially adverse harm to everyone else. Which is also complicated by the other factors, the Court, speciously permitted the unusual act of approving destruction of books n records. Which tends to hide the proof of who is owed what.
    Even more morose, is the aforementioned issue that Barry Gold is the sole authority of who gets paid what settlements under $1 million without the requisite of the Courts approval. Every single time Laser or the eToys shareholders have asked for review of books n records as well as all accounting, that is permitted under Bankruptcy Rule 2004 (it is even permitted to use such review as a “fishing” expedition to search for malfeasance). The Court, the TEAM of TBF, MNAT and Barry Gold and the US Trustee who is mandated to enforce such, have all simply ignored the requests. Will not even hold a hearing about such.
    Now complete the circle that the US Trustee, as is testified within the Disgorge Motion is the “watchdog” as per 11 U.S.C. § 307 and the Janet Reno Reform Act of 1994. (see disgorge motion 2). Along with the fact that the US Attorney has refused to prosecute or hire any independent special attorney while at the same time the Dept of Justice personnel who were trying to handle the matter all resigned. Whereupon the removed Region 3 Trustee, Roberta DeAngelis was promoted to the position of General Counsel in Washington D .C , after the person who demoted her resigned, which is further compounded by the fact that DeAngelis is now entering the appeals as an appellee defending the egregious actions and erroneous decisions. At the same time asking the Court’s to strike, expunge and dismiss Laser and Alber, which in effect steals the monies that they are righteously entitled to and are being defrauded of by “unclean hands” who have gained “unjust enrichment” by the manifest injustice of pretense and “color of law” intentional acts of circumvention of the Court by Perjury, who by deliberate acts of subterfuge are still hording the spoils of their crimes with glee.
    To finally cap it all off, DeAngelis states to the court in her brief that if the Court should decide the appellants have merit, then the Court should return the case to the Del Dist Court instead of the bankruptcy court. Where it just so happens that the US Attorney who has refused to prosecute his former associates and parties he “represented” (specifically Bain, Goldman Sachs etc) is now being considered to be promoted to the vacant Del Dist Ct position.
    We only need one crime and act of cronyism to warrant Congressional investigation and press attention.
    Yet here we have the grandest of schemes, by the grandest of players, who are all esteemed members of the Court and Dept of Justice, who are acting contrary to Law and in a treasonous manner to their oath of office and fiduciary duty.
    We seriously doubt that so many judicial and Dept of Justice parties meant to get entangled in one of the largest racketeering events you will see. What we really believed happened is each separate arm went to protect slight acts that collaboratively make for an organized syndicate indictment.
    If there are any among you that doubt parties can be corrupted by acts of cronyism that is connected to $300 million and powerful political promotion possibilities, by all means, please raise your hand!

    Reply
  6. laserhaas

    October 13, 2007 at 4:41 am

    email all comments or questions to laserhaas@msn.com

    This document and the items provided by Steven Haas (a/k/a Laser Haas) (Laser) comes to parties of interest today, the 12th day of October 2007 “under penalty of perjury”. As the facts are correct and true, being documented by official court docket records.

    Many possible headlines, all true, just choose one depending on your nerve!

    Dept of Justice personnel Cover up Racketeering in eToys, Stage Stores and KB bankruptcy matters which has connections to Mitt Romney

    Dept of Justice has conflict of interest in failing to prosecute
    Perjury and fraud that has benefited Mitt Romney

    Delaware US Attorney has failed to prosecute Perjury, fraud
    and conspiracy in eToys bankruptcy case despite over 100
    documented statutory violations and confessions
    to falsifying multiple Rule 2014 Affidavit’s!

    Dept of Justice engages in cover up of $300 million dollar fraud case of eToys.

    Dept of Justice has conflict of interest issues for refusing to prosecute Perjury and $300 million in Fraud related issues concerning eToys, KB & Stage Store bankruptcies.

    US Attorney Colm F Connolly failed to prosecute $300 million in Perjury and Fraud issues of eToys involving Colm F Connolly’s former clients & law firm MNAT.

    Laser Haas own attorney, Henry Heiman emails threat of
    Traub Bonacquist law firm for Haas to “back off’ or else!

    The short version of the story of corruption and Fraud!

    The issues are complex, convoluted and yet really simple. $300 million has been fleeced from the bankruptcy cases of KB, Stage Stores and eToys reprehensibly. Perjury is being supported by multifaceted exploitation of legal premises in order to protect inner circle legal elite. All one has to do is look at Court docket records as the facts are there!

    The court approved firm of the Creditors in eToys is Traub Bonacquist (TBF). TBF has already admitted to providing the court with multiple, false affidavit’s that they knew were false. A false affidavit by any regular citizen is perjury. The Delaware law firm of Morris Nichols (MNAT) represents the estate of eToys by the Court’s approval. MNAT has also admitted to filing multiple false Rule 2014 affidavits. [Perjury]
    What TBF, MNAT and the CEO of eToys did not tell anyone in the beginning [2001], until it was discovered 3 years after the fact[fall 2004]. Is that TBF, MNAT and Barry Gold all have undisclosed connections to Bain/KB. Which is a major crime of collusion and fraud, being that eToys sold the bulk of the assets to Bain/KB. An issue that is compounded further by the fact that Bain was controlled and/or owned by Presidential hopeful Mitt Romney.
    Then the Court, the US Trustee and the US Attorney refused to investigate or disqualify the parties, including MNAT, even though the Law and all legal precedents mandates such disqualification and referral for prosecution must be done.
    To make matters even worse, TBF, MNAT drafted a “clandestine” Hiring Letter for Barry Gold, as a way for Mr. Gold to avoid perjury risk. Then TBF & MNAT placed Barry Gold in as the eToys, “wind down coordinator”, who became the President/CEO and finally the confirmed Plan Administrator in control of $50 million in cash.
    TBF also confessed to the Court, on March 1, 2005 that he paid Barry Gold 4 separate payments of $30,000, each which halted once TBF placed Barry Gold within the eToys estate, in secret. Where Barry Gold then received an initial $40,000 per month. Making Barry Gold a direct paid party of TBF. The fact that MNAT and TBF drafted the Hiring Letter that allowed Barry Gold to intentionally circumvent the Law and the Court is a feat only exceeded by the lack of prosecution of a matter that is connected to a $300 million in unanswered fraud issues while the original stockholders are thrown away and eToys.com is going public again on NASDQ with only 17 stockholders. While no one knows if Mitt Romney is to be one of the stockholders in the new company, many of the Bain employed persons are participating in the merger with BabyUniverse.com which will seal the deal of stealing the assets from the eToys shareholders even though it is now readily apparent that the sale to Bain/KB failed the legal requisite of being “bona fide”!
    The Courts have continuously acted contrary to Constitutional mandates shamefully and have stricken, expunged and dismissed our proofs of fraud at the direct request of the United States Trustee. Repeatedly throwing out Laser and the eToys shareholders. This is Obstruction of Justice in every sense of the word.

    Delaware US Attorney Colm F Connolly

    The US Attorney, Colm F Connolly, for Delaware; has refused to investigate or prosecute the issues for several years. Being that the whistle blowers are Laser Haas, a Court approved employee in the bankruptcy case and other “pro se” parties such as eToys stockholders, it is easy to sweep the issue under the rug.
    After all, who are people, press, authorities going to give the most credibility to? The “pro se” parties who are losing their rights to be paid? Or the esteemed DOJ parties of a US Attorney, US Trustee who have the blessing of a Chief Federal Justice? After all we all trust the system of justice!
    Armed with the newly discovered evidence that one of possible reasons the US Attorney, Colm F Connolly is refusing to investigate and prosecute the case may be due to the fact that he was a partner at the firm of Morris Nichols and Bain was his client.
    Morris Nichols (MNAT) represented both Bain and eToys when eToys sold the assets to Bain/KB in 2001 for discounts in the tens of millions. The participating parties in the schemes have also received more than $14 million in fee’s. (that we know of)
    Combine that with the fact that Bain was owned or controlled by the Presidential hopeful, Mitt Romney, plus $300 million in unexplained preferentials and you have an abundance of motive. Now Colm F Connolly is being considered for a Federal District Court Judge position vacated by Kent A Jordan who already participated in all four of the Delaware District Court appeals concerning eToys.

    Undisclosed conflict of interest is against the Law.

    If one just considers, for one moment that acts of cronyism by justices, court Clerks and Dept of Justice authorities are happening. Which seeks to snow the general public while giving immunity to officers of the court. Then anyone has to really question why are those esteemed, publicly trusted, authoritative parties permitting willful circumvention of the Law? Why is the Government we vote into office permitting acts of lawlessness that has facilitated fraud upon the court in a premeditated fashion? What is the motivation of the Court and Dept of Justice to permit criminal acts to continue without prosecution? At the same time why is the Dept of Justice and the Courts allowing the crooks to keep the spoils?
    In case the reader may desire a chance to grasp the diverse legal issues; and understand the criminal acts at hand. We break it down into simple semantics.
    The bankruptcy law only allows a bankruptcy judge authority over civil actions. Conflict of interest Federal Rules, Code and regulations exist to make sure attorneys keep their hands out of the cookie jar. Courts and lawyers decide where the bankrupt entities monies shall be dispersed.
    If they (the attorneys) are connected to any party in the case, then it is a conflict of interest and a possibility of preferential treatment. Therefore Congress has mandated disclosure of all relationships, to keep everything above board.
    Being that the Court and lawyers are, in essence, self-policing, any discovered “conflict of interest” that was not disclosed Congress and the U.S. Supreme Court mandates that such requires disqualification and disgorgement. (the return of monies that have been gained improperly and throwing the fox’s out of the hen house.)
    Congress also mandates that such is a criminal act and must be referred to the Dept of Justice for prosecution. The policing party to assure that process is the United States Trustee. The US Trustee is permitted no latitude in deciding whether or not to prosecute.
    The law mandates, under 28 U.S.C § 586(a)(3)(F), that a US Trustee must Notify and Refer non disclosure of conflict of interest acts by court approved persons to the US Attorney’s office. Both the US Trustee and a Judge are ordered by the statutory mandate of 18 U.S.C. § 3057(a) to notify the US Attorney’s office of any bad faith acts that they have witnessed being done by lawyers. This mandate is so restrictive that the Dept of Justice website states if a Trustee desires not to prosecute (because the act was not intentional), then the Trustee is still required to report the crimes to the US Attorney’s office and the Trustee may then submit a Memo of Declination to prosecute. Even then the US Attorney has to do an independent investigation and if such investigation takes more than 1 hour, a case number must be assigned. No case number, no case!
    Yet speciously, despite the proof and confessions of multiple acts of Perjury. Perjury that has perpetrated “fraud on the court” resulting in more than $300 million dollars in fraudulently obtained assets, remains unpunished and continuous.

    Dept of Justice and the Courts know the law of disqualification well

    The Dept of Justice and the Courts know the law. A judge or US Attorney can not become such straight out of law school. They have extensive experience in such matters being well versed in their fiduciary responsibilities and are salaried well above the American average, usually around $120,000 or more per year.
    Yet, it seems in this eToys or Delaware bankruptcy cases that the DOJ and the Courts recognizes that the public is basically lacking in such detailed knowledge. Therefore the DOJ, with the blessing of the Courts are encourage the perpetrators, with their high political connections, to believe they get away with the crime. Everyone who is charged to halt the crimes are being willfully blind with recklessly disregard of the facts, as the Dept of Justice & Judges have the additional luxury of invulnerability.
    The Dept of Justice United States Trustee takes an Oath of Office and is charged, under 28 U.S.C. § 586, with the fiduciary duty as both the “policing” agent of professional employment issues in bankruptcy; while the US Trustee is also the “watchdog” of public equity bankruptcies, per the authority of the Janet Reno Reform Act of 1994.
    It is this fiduciary failure of the Dept of Justice, under the façade of the “color of law” (perversion of legal statutory mandates & obligations) by the pretense of acting as if one is performing one’s duties, which is permitting the corruption of the justice system.
    The wholesale slaughter of the good order of society has been effected, with an “in your face” mockery of justice by destruction of the judicial process through statements by the Courts, that a person must have the courts permission, to make a 911 call to the Court about grand scale larceny. Such implies the perpetrators, who are officers (and friends) of the court are “above the Law”!
    They control so much power, influence, money and political connections and even utilize our own attorney’s to deliver threats (by giving them higher paying cases) that the Courts, the perpetrators and the Dept of Justice personnel, all the way from Washington D.C. have entered the 3rd Circuit appeals as appellee’s defending the right to throw our proofs of the Perjury and Fraud out of the record.(3rd Cir 06-4308 & 07-2360)
    While it is true we are just a few “pro se” parties of very little significance, the fact remains it is the American system of justice that is being corrupted. All the proofs of the crimes are within Court docket records, there is no hyperbole or conjecture here. The lies the parties told yesterday contradict the lies they are telling today. It is the internet that has now provided access to court docket records. Through Congressional Acts that seek to provide the public with the ability to make sure that things no longer go on behind closed doors.
    The cronyism that has gone on for an extended period of time is so arrogant, they simply assert the fact that they will ignore the public records and retaliate in every manner their power permits against anyone who would dare use the internet to ferret out the Truth. Dov Avni, a stock holder in Stage who owned only $4500 in stock was ordered by the Court to pay $380,000.00 and the US Marshall’s were sent after him half a dozen times. It is all right there in the Court records.
    One of the items Dov Avni brought to our attention was the fact that the F.D.I.C had granted Stage Stores a banking charter for the credit cards of Stage. The original worth of that bank was $75 million. It was never declared in Stage Stores bankruptcy and was sold for $150 million to the World Bank. This is also a huge crime.
    They, the judges who are willfully blind, the US Trustee’s who act in reckless disregard of the facts, are protecting their career associates who are doing syndicated, criminal acts; by stating they are above the law and the American public does not have standing or permission to address and stop the malfeasance. It is our hope, that the internet keeps this story alive as they have threatened us with our demise for our failure to “back off”.

    Perjury acts documented by the US Trustee

    The Asst U S Trustee (AUST) testified in the Feb 15, 2005 Disgorge Motion (eToys docket item 2195) whereupon the AUST stated the following items

    1. The AUST testified about having detailed discussions with the parties and cautioning them to refrain from violations of § 327(a). Specifically against the replacement of key personnel of the eToys (Debtor) with any new officers that are connected to the retained [court approved] attorneys in eToys. Disgorge motion 19 and 35.
    2. As stated in parts 1 thru 9 in the Disgorge Motion the US Trustee affirmed that Traub Bonacquist & Fox (TBF) had filed multiple Rule 2014 affidavits reaffirming [falsely] that there were no conflicts of interest. (TBF was court approved Creditors counsel)
    3. Parts 10 to 19 the AUST stated that TBF was vastly experienced in matters of disclosure, being well versed in the Code requirements while TBF did not claim ignorance of the requirements with the AUST detailing the Dept of Justice in depth knowledge of the legal requirements of disclosing.
    4. In 17 the Trustee confirms that TBF had breached its duty to disclose.
    5. Also it part 17 it states that TBF compounded its failure by providing multiple affirmative misrepresentation [Perjury] that falsely stated TBF remained a “disinterested person”.
    6. A serious additional element proving the legal prosecutorial requisite of “scienter” (knowledge of doing intentional wrong) is the fact, which the AUSA acknowledge in 18, is TBF confessed that it considered amending their Rule 2014 affidavit when the issues became known in anther case of In re Bonus Sales. Whereby TBF decide to continuously remain silent on the issue which had been hidden for a long time. (this is a Big confession)
    7. In part 19 the Disgorge motion states that Barry Gold’s hiring was no accident, specifically remarking upon the fact that Barry Gold was placed within the Debtor directly at the behest of TBF.
    8. Part 21 of the motion states that TBF seriously affected the judicial process, while the disgorge motion also stated
    9. Within part 27 the US Trustee states “A court may ordinarily disqualify a professional, deny compensation in whole or in part, or even order disgorgement —“ this remark is disingenuous as explained bellow.
    10. Of special note is the fact that both the US Trustee and the Court offered up the controlling precedent of Law that the 3rd Circuit and US Supreme Ct states as the controlling issue, the case of In re Hazel Atlas Glass, which denotes the fact that Fraud upon the Court is a continuous offense until sufficiently remedied! “any Court decision that was acquired through fraud on the court is in essence no decision at all becoming void “ab initio”.”

    Several items that are amazing within the AUST disgorge motion is the fact that Mr. Perch concludes that Fraud upon the Court had occurred ( 35) and if the court were to disgorge anything less (than $1.6 million) it would simply be viewed “as a cost of doing business” lacking in sufficient deterrent value. ( 39 “conclusion”).
    Then, in an appalling and specious manner, less than 10 days later, the Dept of Justice attorney for the new Region 3 Trustee offers a Stipulation to Settle that provides the following illegitimate language while the Dept of Justice offers TBF implied settlement with immunity;
    “WHEREAS the United States Trustee shall not seek to compel TBF to make any additional disclosures”

    The Mark Kenney Stipulation to Settle does not state any legal basis for doing an act that of circumventing the Code; an endeavor that even a Federal Justice is prohibited from effecting. The 3rd Circuit cites repeatedly the matter of In re Middleton Arms, L.P., 934 F.2d 723, 724 (6th Cir. 1991) where the Sixth Circuit found that the prohibition against disinterestedness was “unambiguous” and held that “[section] 327 prevents individual bankruptcy courts from having to make determinations as to the best interest of the debtors. (Where there is an actual conflict of interest, however, disqualification is mandatory. See In re Marvel Entertainment Group, 140 F.3d at 476.) (emphasis added.). United States Trustee v. Price Waterhouse, 19 F.3d 138 (3rd Cir. 1994) where the Third Circuit referred to the adoption of the Sixth Circuits well established standard that “bankruptcy courts cannot use equitable[any] principles to disregard unambiguous statutory language.” Id, at 142
    The Chief Justice in the eToys Bankruptcy, Mary F Walrath, (MFW) stated on page 14&15 of her own OPINION that Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b)(6) did apply reflecting that “extra-ordinary circumstances” did exist. Citing In re Benjamin’s Arnolds, Inc., No. 4-90-6127, 1997 WL 86463. at *10 (Bankr. D. Minn. Feb 28, 1997).
    MFW also continued to remark that this Opinion “constitutes the finding of facts and conclusions of Law–” whereupon the OPINION concludes, against all established principals and logic, with brazen disregard for unambiguous statutory language, that Mr. GOLD was “not” required to apply by § 327(a).
    Cementing a distortion of justice by concluding with the demoralizing remark that it was not necessary for the Court to submit the issue to the U.S. Attorney office. In direct disregard of the Federal Judicial Canon’s of Conduct and in direct legal violation of 18 U.S.C. § 3057(a) which specifically states any judge knowing of a violation by a judge or lawyer under their purview, who is engaged in acts contrary to the law, must notify the US Attorney.
    Laser Haas and Alber had contacted the U S Attorney office in Delaware and had detailed discussions, providing extensive proof to Ellen Sights and Debra within the US Attorney’s office of Delaware.
    The erroneous conclusions contravenes the absolute correct statement the chief justice affirmed in the OPINION when she remarked:
    “The failure of an attorney employed by the estate to disclose a disqualifying conflict of interest, whether intentional or not, constitutes sufficient ‘extraordinary circumstances’ to justify relief under Rule 60(b) (6). To hold otherwise would only serve to penalize the [Plaintiff] for delay that was beyond his control and to reward conflicted attorneys for failing to disclose”

    So one must conclude that the Judge is either unable to read her own writing or two different people (personalities) proffered the remarks.
    As the conflicting attorneys are being reward and HAAS has been expunged with fraud and perjury utilizations in denying court approved contracts, fee’s and expenses of more than $3 million for blowing the whistle.
    It appears almost readily apparent that there must be a type of alcohol within the Delaware Federal Court realm which encourages double-mindedness and acts by venerated authoritative figures that are acting contrary to the Law and Oath’s they are sworn to uphold!
    Just as significant is the fact that the US Trustee and court have ignored the Law, the “well established” within the 3rd Circuit and the US Supreme Ct. per many cases such as In re Middleton Arms, L.P., 934 F.2d 723, 724 (6th Cir. 1991) which long established the mandate where “courts cannot use § 105 [sua sponte] powers to disregard disinterestedness criterion”. (emphasis added). ! In re: First Jersey Securities the 3rd Cir. stated ‘where there is an actual conflict of interest, however, disqualification is mandatory’. (citing In re Marvel Entertainment Group, 140 F.3d at 476.) “Section 105(a) cannot be used to circumvent the clear directive of section 327(a)”. Id. At 725

    The US Trustee has sought leniency in 3 different ways within the Disgorge motion.
    a. The AUST falsely stated in the first footnote that “Gold, as an employee of the debtors rather than a professional employed under 11 U.S.C. §§ 327(a) was not required to file a Rule 2014 affidavit.”
    b. The refusal to seek disqualification is clearly erroneous, as is stated in the Middleton Arms etc. cases , disqualification is Mandatory!
    c. This is the Biggie, the item that is of serious interest now with the newly discovered evidence of Colm F Connolly’s direct connection as a Dept of Justice Attorney who gained such employment while being an attorney at Morris Nichols Arsht & Tunnel (MNAT) for there is no mention, whatsoever, of disgorging MNAT. WoW!!!!!!

    As it is clearly demonstrated above, a “wind down coordinator” [financial advisor] is a Professional as defined by the Law and the US Trustee’s hand book and guidelines (please see In re: Middleton Arms, Ltd. Partnership, 934 F.2d 723 (6ht Cir. 1991). Financial Advisor/workout consultant [wind-down coordinator] is a professional subject to 327(a) especially with any degree of autonomy In re: Riker industries, Inc., 122 B.R. 964, 973 (Bankr N.D. Ohio 1991), “bankruptcy courts determine the definition of a professional person due to his autonomy and authority over bankruptcy related matters”.)
    The US Trustee’s Disgorge Motion even testifies on the “financial advisor” issue by citing an on point reflection of a similar case and situation. Part 16 of the Disgorge endeavor verbatim
    “Regardless of whether such connections affected its disinterestedness, TBF was obligated to disclose its connections with Gold as soon as the debtors employed Gold. See Mateer of CF Holding Corp., 164 B.R. 799, 806- 07 (Bankr. D. Conn. 1994) (debtor’s financial advisor denied over $795,000 in fees and expenses for failure to timely disclose —-)”

    You can also see such detail in the cases of In re: Stahl v Bartley Lindsay 137 B.R. 305, 309 (D. Minn. 1991) “Courts have concluded that financial advisors must be retained under 11 USC § 327(a). In re Martin 817 F 2d 175 180 (1st Cir1987) –addressing both the “unclean hands” doctrine and listing the 12 factors to consider in application of who must apply and disclose by 327(a).
    The statements by the Court and US Trustee are very disingenuous in seeking not to disqualify, while ignoring other statutory mandates concerning Barry Gold failures to apply per § 327(a) which is cause for disqualification
    The staunch efforts of judicial and DOJ “nolle prosequi” (failure to prosecute) grossly violates the law and in effect administrates cronyism into full blown complicity that results from retaliatory acts of fraud against Haas and the eToys shareholders,
    Such is accomplished by the reckless disregard of the facts and willful blindness of Dept of Justice officials concerning large scale RICO activities. Persistently repeated by Dept of Justice and other Federal authorities nefariously; with belligerent endeavors to strike, expunge and dismiss Haas or Alber in the 3rd Circuit appeals dissipatedly.
    Now, even the full might and authority of the Washington D C Dept of Justice highest officials have signed their names, (in an endeavor of imprimatur) by flagrantly using the clout of the highest office of the US Government Dept of Justice to influence matters contradictory to their Oath of office and the Law.
    As can be seen on the Dept of justice website. The statement that no disqualification is required or that Barry Gold need not apply is extremely untruthful; being completely divergent to the very instructions that any UST is given within their own handbook and guidelines ( see http://www.usdoj.gov/ust/r15/Forms/EOUST_Ch7-11_Fee_App_Guidelines.PDF ) as seen on the Dept. of Justice US Trustee website, where you find The US Trustee Manual states the following on-point discussion of this issue;
    11 U.S.C. § 101(14)(A)-(D) “mandates a literal approach to the disinterested person requirement and sets forth in detail a series of characteristics that disqualify a person.”
    While continuing it remarks upon the financial advisor [wind-down coordinator] issue
    “If a professional has the characteristic then disqualification is automatic.” And “Since the language of the statute is clear, it must be applied as written” citing In re: Middleton Arms, Ltd. Partnership, 934 F.2d 723 (6ht Cir. 1991). Financial Advisor/workout consultant is a professional subject to 327(a) especially with any degree of autonomy In re: Riker industries, Inc., 122 B.R. 964, 973 (Bankr N.D. Ohio 1991), Stahl v. Bartley Lindsay co. 137 B.R. 305, 309 (D. Minn 1991); In re: Marion Carefree Ltd. Partnership 171 B.R. 584, 588 (Bankr. N.D. Ohio 1994); In re: First Jersey Securities 180 F.3d 504, 509 (3rd Cir. 1999).

    There are also articles and briefs supplied by the Dept of Justice General Counsel to Congressional Committee’s demonstrating advanced knowledge of such by the very same Roberta DeAngelis who seeks as the US DoJ General Counsel to defy in the eToys appeals. In the report to Congress as Region 3 Trustee in 2004, just prior to the Emergency Motions of HAAS and Robert Alber, the Region 3 Trustee stated to the Committee on the Judiciary of the United States House of Representatives (“Trustee Report”) (“EXHIBIT 10”) whereupon Trustee Roberta DeAngelis remarked “Professionals may be compensated only after application, notice to parties, and approval by the bankruptcy court”(page 3 Trustee Report). More significantly the Trustee Report remarks on page 2 that;
    Full and complete compliance requires that the professional report all connections, not just those connections that, in the judgment of the professional, may be relevant. It is the court’s task to determine whether the connections are disqualifying. In its administration of Chapter 11 cases, the United States Trustee endeavors to assure that the self-reporting required of professionals is provided and that disqualifying connections are brought to the attention of the court.”

    All this contradictory decision making demonstrating, at the barest of minimums, that the Dept of Justice is acting “double minded” is the reality of how the US Dept of Justice and the Court knows the key fact that Barry Gold is a “wind down coordinator” for the only place that such is mentioned by the perpetrating parties is within the Barry Gold response to the allegations. Specifically the Barry Gold Hiring Letter that was drafted by TBF, MNAT, Barry Gold, David Gatto (VP/CFO of eToys) and others, which contains the following deliberate, willful ability to circumvent the Court and the Code, which is most certainly a crime; after the UST forewarned the parties against such endeavors, by the deceptive option to encourage or permit Barry Gold not to comply with the Code; worded egregiously, in the following manner:

    “As of the Commencement Date, your position with the Company shall be as Wind Down Coordinator and you shall retain such position until (i) the approval of your employment as an Officer of the Company by order of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware (the “Bankruptcy Court”) —“

    The HIRING LETTER’s opt out clause from §327(a); stated a reward for not seeking approval-

    “—and you have waived the condition in clause (i), then you shall be appointed as President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company and your employment with the Company will be for an initial term ending May 20, 2002.”

    As anyone can see Barry Gold is rewarded [bribed] by his waiving, at his own volition, the requirement of applying to the Court, for if you remember that this letter remained hidden until the conflict issues were “ferreted” out, then it is simply plausible that Barry Gold required a “get out of jail free card” to avoid committing perjury and everyone involved said “ O K” we will draft you a hiring letter with a sneaky little phrase allowing you plausible deniability.

    Dept of Justice and SEC are informed of Laser Haas anxiety

    If you look at the Dept of Justice’s large scale fraud endeavors against the public you will find reports by the former Director Lawrence Friedman stating in 2004 that over 10,000 cases of fraud was addressed that resulted in $60 million in fraud corrections. http://www.usdoj.gov/ust/eo/public_affairs/press/docs/silver_screen_final_10-28-04.htm
    .such remarks were similarly made in 2003 which can be viewed here http://www.usdoj.gov/ust/eo/public_affairs/testimony/docs/testimony.pdf )
    Mr Friedman resigned right after the March 1, 2005 hearings and Mark Kenney’s efforts to ask the court to strike and expunge Haas and Alber (please see the press release at http://www.usdoj.gov/ust/eo/public_affairs/press/docs/friedman_resignation_4-27-05.htm ) Mr. Friedman had emailed Laser Haas directly and told him the issues would be addressed by his staff on the very same day that Mark Kenney had offered the illegitimate “get out of jail free card” to TBF.
    From: Lawrence.A.Friedman@usdoj.govDate: 02/25/05 14:49:58To: ‘laserhaas@msn.com’Cc: Kelly.B.Stapleton@usdoj.govSubject: RE: Item sent to the record today
    Mr.. Haas:

    You most assuredly have our attention and my personal commitment that we will act in every case where action is required and we are aware of it. Please understand however, that like any prosecutor, we must exercise appropriate discretion in carrying out our responsibilities which while sometimes in a particular case may seem unjust, it is done with perspective to ALL matters we handle. I sympathize with your frustration and again assure you that my staff is extremely competent to handle this matter and will exercise appropriate judgment.

    Lawrence A. Friedman, Director
    Executive Office for US Trustees
    United States Department of Justice
    Washington, DC

    Even though Director Friedman had taken preemptive action in replacing the Region 3 Trustee, Roberta DeAngelis which can be seen at the following website ( http://www.usdoj.gov/ust/eo/public_affairs/press/docs/stapleton_release2_12-04.htm
    ) and had followed up with the Disgorge efforts against Traub, it is readily apparent that someone else was running the show and we believe this is why Lawrence Friedman resigned. For the fact remains the declaration he made about his competent staff has proved to be, at a minimum, one readily apparent fallacy. While I did do my best to provide him the leeway he requested as is seen in my emails to Director Friedman

    From: laserhaas@msn.com [mailto:laserhaas@msn.com]
    Sent: Friday, February 25, 2005 5:13 PM
    To: Friedman, Lawrence A
    Subject: RE: Item sent to the record today

    Dear Mr. Friedman:

    I deeply apologize for upsetting you and tying up resources with my emails and faxes.

    My intention was and remains the endeavor to get your offices attention and confirmation that someone is paying jurisprudent oversight to what is occurring concerning the flagrant matters at hand.

    Having received your request I most apologetically will comply and accept your email acknowledgement to also confirm you are on top of the matter.

    Which until reception of your email I felt my pursuit of justice was falling into a void.

    Sincerely

    Laser Steven Haas

    Further conversations were not so cordial.
    From: Lawrence.A.Friedman@usdoj.govDate: 02/25/05 14:01:06To: ‘BHaasS@aol.com’Cc: Kelly.B.Stapleton@usdoj.gov; Frank.J.Perch@usdoj.gov; Mark.Kenney@usdoj.gov; ‘kell.b.stapleton@usdoj.gov’; ‘rsussman@kronishlieb.com’; ‘mminuti@saul.com’; ‘jgarrity@shearman.com’; ‘gwerkheiser@mnat.com’; ‘condo28@mail.com’; ‘laserhaas@msn.com’; ‘Grobinson@sec.gov’; ‘ssherillbeard@sec.gov’; ‘bbrook@bbhhlaw.com’Subject: RE: Item sent to the record today
    Dear Mr. Hass:

    Please stop sending me copies of all these emails. My staff is extremely capable of passing on to me any items that would require my attention. If any party in each of the 1,650,000 cases filed last year served me with copies of every communication we would not have time to take any position in regards to your case.

    Lawrence A. Friedman
    Director, Executive Office of US Trustees
    United States Department of Justice
    Washington, DC

    —–Original Message—–
    From: BHaasS@aol.com [mailto:BHaasS@aol.com]
    Sent: Friday, February 25, 2005 4:49 PM
    To: bhaass@aol.com
    Cc: Stapleton, Kelly B.; kell.b.stapleton@usdoj.gov; Perch, Frank J.;
    Kenney, Mark; Friedman, Lawrence A; rsussman@kronishlieb.com;
    mminuti@saul.com; jgarrity@shearman.com; gwerkheiser@mnat.com;
    condo28@mail.com; laserhaas@msn.com; Grobinson@sec.gov;
    ssherillbeard@sec.gov; bbrook@bbhhlaw.com
    Subject: Item sent to the record today

    To All parities of interest:

    This is to make everyone aware that Collateral Logistics, Inc. (“CLI”) — Steve Haas as President does state adamantly the following:

    CLI Objects to the request by the US Trustee to amend more softly the original US Trustee request of disqualification and disgorgement of $1.5 million in fee’s — whereas CLI feels that said original request was not, in many ways, severe enough correction of the matter at hand.

    Secondly the request to move forward the smaller settlement with broad indemnification language is strenuously objected to along with the request to hear the settlement matter on March 1, 2005.

    It is much more appropriate that those that did deceive admit the facts at hand and their intent and throw yourselves on the mercy of the Court and those harmed by the scheming.

    This rampant endeavor to gain a monopoly of the Delaware Court system through power, influence and corruption has to cease.

    Sincerely
    Steve Haas
    President and CEO
    Collateral Logistics, Inc.

    Surely one should find it odd that the replacing of a Region 3 Trustee is marked with a press release, while the person who was replaced, removed or side ways appointed has no mention, whatsoever, as being promoted to the General Counsel position in Washington D C. ( http://www.usdoj.gov/ust/eo/public_affairs/press/index.htm ).
    The fact remains that the US Attorney Colm F Connolly and Mark Kenney, along with the US Trustee (formerly Roberta DeAngelis and Frank Perch)(now Kelly B Stapleton and Andrew Vara ) along with the General Counsel of the Dept of Justice EOUST ( the former Region 3 Trustee Roberta DeAngelis) have all refused to disqualify, disgorge properly and prosecute Traub Bonacquist & Fox, Morris Nichols Arsht & Tunnel, Barry Gold, Bain/KB Toys, Liquidity Solutions, Xroads LLC, Wells Fargo/Foothill Capital, David Gatto, David Haddad (who had hidden $2 million in cash overseas) Richard Cartoon and Fredrick Rosner (Traub’s local counsel who had moved to 4 different firms carrying eToys case with him).
    Colm F. Connolly
    Colm F. Connolly has served as the United States Attorney for the District of Delaware since September 4, 2001. Mr. Connolly was an Assistant United States Attorney from 1992 to 1999 and a partner with the Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnel law firm in Wilmington, Delaware 2from 1999 to 2001. After graduating from the Duke University School of Law in 1991, Mr. Connolly clerked for Judge Walter K. Stapleton of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. Mr. Connolly holds a bachelor’s degree from the University of Notre Dame and a master’s degree from the London School of Economics.

    There are $300 million in unanswered issues, while denying access to books n records. With the newly discovered evidence that Colm F Connolly was with Morris Nichols prior to becoming a US Attorney. The whole Delaware Bankruptcy system has gone A W O L in a syndicated White Collar Criminal manner that would make Al Capone and the G-dfather desire to rise from the grave….

    The Facts are indisputable, No Prosecution has occurred of deliberate Fraud

    So the issue is very simple, the AUST has stated that he [fore]warned the parties against replacing key personnel of the Debtor with anyone connected to the [court] retained professionals in the case. You also have documentation by the US Trustee’s office that not only was that warning disregarded, the parties engaged in drafting a “clandestine” Hiring Letter that remained hidden for 3 years until the “non-disclosure” of “conflict of interest” issues was discovered. Where the offending parties admitted they filed multiple, false Rule 2014 Affidavits. (which is Perjury) as is now documented in another, less connected issue concerning Mitt Romney’s campaign participant the 23-count indictment Wednesday, Alan B. Fabian, who is also accussed of Perjury in a bankruptcy matter (and all he did was deny a connection on a $3 million dollar issue). Which can be seen at the following web link http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=mitt+romney+campaign+fraud+perjury&btnG=Search
    So, after you have the issue of being warned, with admitted acts of multiple, false affidavits, you also have the fact that TBF confessed that he paid Barry Gold four (4) separate payments of $30,000 each before and after eToys filed bankruptcy, Which was halted once TBF placed Barry Gold within the debtor as “wind down coordinator” who then became President and CEO after choosing to deliberately not inform the court by an illegal , contractual measure that was drafted by every “officer of the Court” you can think of within the case, (which is a conspiracy to defraud).
    Now if that is not enough for you, add to the items above that we have since discovered 100 other felony violations, including the fact that eToys sold the assets to Bain/KB Toys whom TBF, MNAT, David Gatto and Barry Gold have all been connected to. This is the most serious of violations, it simply Can Not be done, they, in essence, sold the assets to themselves, under the “guise” of being the highest of trusted parties with affidavit’s swearing up and down that they had No such Connections.
    jabramczyk@mnat.com Jon E Abramczyk partner MNAT tel 302 351-9211
    Jon regularly represents major Fortune 500 corporations and their directors in Delaware, including Morgan Stanley & Co., Inc., Viacom, Inc., CBS Corporation, Hallmark Cards and QUALCOMM, Inc. He recently successfully represented Bain Capital, Vornado and KKR in the Court of Chancery litigation challenging their acquisition of Toys-R-Us.
    As MNAT has failed to disclose and being that the conspiracy to defraud was soooo successful, the parties decided to have it all. The confirmed PLAN of eToys that decides what the creditors and eToys shareholders get was drafted by the parties under the guise that they were all “arms length” “good faith” negotiating parties. While the US Trustee and Court state that no proof has been provided that any Perjury has occurred (despite the already known confessions to the contrary) you have another smoking gun. For Traub supplied Barry Gold as the confirmed Plan administrator, the sole party in control of the entire $50 million that remained. The Plan also states that Barry Gold can not have any relationship to anyone and that it must be done “arms length” Which is documented by Barry Gold with false remarks {Perjury] as “plan administrator” in the Plan Declaration Barry Gold signs “under penalty of perjury”, (eToys D.I. 1312 page 24, 63). Under part C. Plan Proposed in Good Faith 1129(a)(3) Part C. 44 Barry Gold testifies

    “The Plan represents extensive arms’ length negotiations among the Debtors, the Creditors’ Committee, and other significant parties in interest, as well as their advisors. The Debtors proposed the Plan in good faith —“

    As if this is not enough, Barry Gold is permitted to pay any items under $1 million without the Court’s approval and is further compounded by the issue that the AUST has already acknowledged that TBF received $1.7 million after the Plan was confirmed.
    You also have other issues such as Wells Fargo loaned eToys $40 million in November 2000 and then took out $120 million before eToys filed on March 7, 2001. A preferential that is 100% rescindable under the bankruptcy Law of equitable subordination as the loan originated by Foothill Capital and was returned to, with all the profits to Wells Fargo. Having never been under review by independent counsel is a crime that is documented in the matter of In re Bucyrus 94-20786 (E D Wisc) Gellene as counsel of the firm of Milbank & Tweed. Gellene went to jail for his perjury when someone he was connected to loan the debtor $35 million ( a former Goldman Sachs party) and the loan was never reviewed. Milbank & Tweed was disgorged their entire $1.9 million and lost a lawsuit of $30 million. ( please see the web stories at the following http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3975/is_200601/ai_n17187297 and http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/whitecollarcrime_blog/legal_ethics/index.html the Oesterle Law Professors blog is a wealth of information on such, just as his friend Peter Henning who addresses White Collar crimes )
    When Barry Gold and TBF worked for the Stage Stores Bankruptcy (S Texas 00-35078) (which is also owned by Bain, SanKaty, Mitt Romney, Michael Glazer (CEO of KB) TBF never disclosed that Liquidity Solutions is “co-debtor” with Stage Stores ( a fact that is very Well hidden!)
    Liquidity Solutions and companies affiliated with Liquidity began buying up many of the claims (and plan votes) in eToys. There is nothing against the law about buying up creditors claims, the Courts actually encourage the business. However, you must Disclose such, for any related party by such conflict can give preferential treatment to such “undisclosed” connections at direct, materially adverse harm to everyone else. Which is also complicated by the other factors, the Court, speciously permitted the unusual act of approving destruction of books n records. Which tends to hide the proof of who is owed what.
    Even more morose, is the aforementioned issue that Barry Gold is the sole authority of who gets paid what settlements under $1 million without the requisite of the Courts approval. Every single time Laser or the eToys shareholders have asked for review of books n records as well as all accounting, that is permitted under Bankruptcy Rule 2004 (it is even permitted to use such review as a “fishing” expedition to search for malfeasance). The Court, the TEAM of TBF, MNAT and Barry Gold and the US Trustee who is mandated to enforce such, have all simply ignored the requests. Will not even hold a hearing about such.
    Now complete the circle that the US Trustee, as is testified within the Disgorge Motion is the “watchdog” as per 11 U.S.C. § 307 and the Janet Reno Reform Act of 1994. (see disgorge motion 2). Along with the fact that the US Attorney has refused to prosecute or hire any independent special attorney while at the same time the Dept of Justice personnel who were trying to handle the matter all resigned. Whereupon the removed Region 3 Trustee, Roberta DeAngelis was promoted to the position of General Counsel in Washington D .C , after the person who demoted her resigned, which is further compounded by the fact that DeAngelis is now entering the appeals as an appellee defending the egregious actions and erroneous decisions. At the same time asking the Court’s to strike, expunge and dismiss Laser and Alber, which in effect steals the monies that they are righteously entitled to and are being defrauded of by “unclean hands” who have gained “unjust enrichment” by the manifest injustice of pretense and “color of law” intentional acts of circumvention of the Court by Perjury, who by deliberate acts of subterfuge are still hording the spoils of their crimes with glee.
    To finally cap it all off, DeAngelis states to the court in her brief that if the Court should decide the appellants have merit, then the Court should return the case to the Del Dist Court instead of the bankruptcy court. Where it just so happens that the US Attorney who has refused to prosecute his former associates and parties he “represented” (specifically Bain, Goldman Sachs etc) is now being considered to be promoted to the vacant Del Dist Ct position.
    We only need one crime and act of cronyism to warrant Congressional investigation and press attention.
    Yet here we have the grandest of schemes, by the grandest of players, who are all esteemed members of the Court and Dept of Justice, who are acting contrary to Law and in a treasonous manner to their oath of office and fiduciary duty.
    We seriously doubt that so many judicial and Dept of Justice parties meant to get entangled in one of the largest racketeering events you will see. What we really believed happened is each separate arm went to protect slight acts that collaboratively make for an organized syndicate indictment.
    If there are any among you that doubt parties can be corrupted by acts of cronyism that is connected to $300 million and powerful political promotion possibilities, by all means, please raise your hand!

    Reply
  7. laserhaas

    October 13, 2007 at 1:52 pm

    Stage Stores had an undeclared asset of a FDIC banking charter for their credit cards.

    Acquired for $75 million,

    Not listed as an asset on the bankruptcy schedules
    (the failure to list an asset is a crime)

    Then sold to the World Bank for $150 million.

    Who did the money go to,, we don’t know…but SanKaty was involved.

    By the way, did you know SanKaty is an off shore holding entity that Romney owns 100% located in Bermuda?

    When Credit Suisse pointed out to the Court non disclosure of conflict of interest of Barry Gold and Traub Bonacquist & Fox, Traub had to file a supplemental, which gave us tons of history on Barry Gold and Traub that we did not previously know of.

    Barry Gold met Traub at TSS bankruptcy, Barry Gold was CFO at TSS for 24 years, yet he never places this on any current resumes,,, hmmmmmm

    Just as importantly immediately after Credit Suisse forced Traub to disclose the connections to Barry Gold the Credit Suisse tens of millions of dollar issues were immediately, preferentially settled.

    While Romney has stated many different time dates of when he gave up control (depending on what bullet he is dodging)

    The biggest dodge, which the press has been snowed about, is whether he gave up or sold his ownerships or transferred them to other entities such as the foriegn held SanKaty Trust….

    Be careful of the mighty arm of political power and influence.

    Dov Avni, a Stage Stores shareholder, who owned $4500 in Stage stock… when he tried to press the court to address the fraud issues such resulted in Dov Avni being sanctioned by the Court for $380,000 and the US Marshall’s being sent after Dov Avni even when the bankruptcy case of Stage Stores is closed.

    Another hidden gem related to Stage Stores is that it is C0-debtor with Liquidity Solutions.

    After Paul Traub and the Bain Law firm of Morris Nichols placed Barry Gold in as controlling authority of eToys, doing so in secret, Liquidity Solutions began buying up the claims in eToys, while Barry Gold has the authority to settle any one of those claims without the courts permission. A Contract term agreed to by the “arms length” “good faith” negotiations between Debtor and Creditor.

    That is between the “arms length” “good faith” negotiations between Barry Gold, Paul Traub and Morris Nichols.

    while we have not been able to pin down the total ownership of Liquidity Solutions we did spend a week in the building they own in Hackensac N J…Rolls Royce tag numbers and all….

    Reply
  8. laserhaas

    October 15, 2007 at 1:01 am

    everyone has stated that the legal issues of eToys Bain Mitt Romney is hard to comprehend. So we have tried to put it in simple, less statutory form.

    Dept. of Justice does Cover-up of $300 million in Fraud connected to Mitt Romney.

    The public entity eToys.com filed for bankruptcy in 2001. At which time the court approved the law firms of Traub Bonacquist (TBF) and Morris Nichols (MNAT) to be the Creditors and Debtor’s counsel. The law mandates that both firms have no connection with eToys or with each other. The rules of conflict of interest are designed to assure the public and the creditors get a fair deal, especially when public stock companies are involved. They are to keep their hands out of the cookie jar.
    The policing agent assigned to be the watchdog for the public is the Dept of Justice US Trustee’s office. The US Trustee program was formed around 1987 to separate such duties from the Judges who were handling bankruptcy cases. Congress felt such separations were necessary in order to halt any corruption with the millions, which has since become billions of dollar, in complex legal decisions and fee’s that Judges permit law firms and professionals to earn each year.
    There are more than 100 statutory violations that have occurred in eToys. Including perjury, scheme to fix fees, intimidation of victim/witness, conspiracy, obstruction of justice and RICO violations tp name a few. The $300 million in fraud has not been prosecuted by the DOJ, even though confessions to perjury have occurred.
    So that the reader may understand the serious consideration of the issues below I, Steven Haas (a/k/a Laser Haas) testify that the foregoing is true and correct. These statements are made under the “Penalty of perjury” this 14th day of October 2007.
    Collateral Logistics’ Inc (CLI), a company owned by Laser Haas, was hired as the Court approved liquidation consultant as eToys had announced that they were going to auction off everything for $5 million. The bankruptcy assets were eventually sold to Bain/KB for discounts in the tens of millions. At that time Bain was owned and/or controlled by the Presidential hopeful Mitt Romney.
    The sales efforts of Laser managed to get back more than $45 million into the eToys bank accounts. Yet for some inexplicable reason the new CEO of eToys, Barry Gold and the law firms TBF & MNAT kept finding fault with Laser’s accomplishments. When Laser discovered the possibility that Barry Gold and TBF might be connected he was offered a very clever bribe of $800,000.
    Upon turning down that gratuitous offer a campaign to destroy Haas began which forced Laser to hire a new attorney for CLI, one Henry Heiman who was formerly a Trustee in Delaware. TBF, MNAT and Barry Gold had submitted some documents to the Court stating that Haas generously waived all earnings. CLI was entitled to more than $3 million in fees and expenses. Heiman stated that he would correct the matter, that the contracts the court approved were undeniable and that CLI would be paid in 30 days. Haas told Heiman and the US Trustee office how the parties had tried to invite Haas to become one of the “good ole boys”. Both stated there was no real law broken and that no court violation had occurred by denying the legalities of conflict of interest issues.
    Two years later Laser began to sense that Heiman did not have the best interest of CLI as a first priority and so Laser started to research the Code and Rules of the bankruptcy system that anyone can find on the Dept of Justice website. Where one learns that the Courts can only approve attorneys for work in a bankruptcy matters once the attorneys submit an Affidavit, under Bankruptcy Rule 2014, stating that there is no connection or conflict of interest. They must not touch the cookies in the cookie jar.
    Immediately Laser had discovered that his attorney Heiman and the US Attorney for the Region 3 Trustee of Delaware, Mark Kenney, had stated falsely to Haas that the bribe was not an issue unless accepted. Many false affidavit’s, which is Perjury, had been submitted by the attorneys who had been paid more than $14 million in fees and expenses. Attorneys must re-certify there are no conflicts whenever the seek payments.
    Upon many additional discoveries Laser again contacted the Attorney for the Dept of Justice, Mark Kenney and informed him of the issues at hand. This resulted in heated phone conversations whereby Heiman emailed Laser a threat by Susan Balaschak of TBF, that if Haas did not “back off” not only would CLI not get paid for the work the Court had approved, Laser’s career would suffer greatly and TBF would seek additional retaliations to come after Haas for monies earned prior to that time.
    When Laser called the Dept of Justice about such, Mark Kenney also addressed Haas in an angry manner and stated that the conflict of interest issues of Barry Gold and TBF had been handled in Bonus Sales. There it was, out of anger, a slip of the tongue, Mark Kenney accidentally provided Haas with the place to find the proofs that the US Trustee Dept had known all along. It is clear that undisclosed conflicts of interest between TBF and Barry Gold existed and had already been addressed by the Courts twice before. Knowing the fact that issues hidden tends to corrupt, Congress has mandated that all court cases now be available to the public by Internet access. A system called PACER.
    Research on PACER of the bankruptcy case of Bonus Sales (Del Bankr 03-12284) led to the discovery of a company TBF owner, Paul Traub and Barry Gold owned together. That being the entity of Asset Disposition Advisors. (ADA) It is really simple, the old adage of the lie told yesterday is forgotten when one tells a lie today.
    Haas attorney Heiman refused to supply the Court with this damming information and Heiman immediately asked the Court to withdraw as CLI counsel. Upon Laser’s supplying of the proof to the Court, the eToys shareholders reached out to Laser. The comparing of notes led to discovery of many additional hidden secrets. Both the shareholders and Haas made Emergency motions to ask the Court to deal with the issue of the false affidavits that were to be heard on December 22, 2004.
    The Director, Lawrence Friedman, of the US Trustee’s in Washington D C replaced Roberta DeAngelis by a press release on Dec. 22, 2004. At the Emergency hearing on Dec. 22, 2004 the Judge Ordered TBF, MNAT and Barry Gold to address the non=disclosure of conflict of interest issues with responses by Jan. 25, 2005. The Asst US Trustee, Frank Perch armed with the many confessions of multiple, intentionally false affidavits, then Motioned to Disgorge TBF $1.6 million on Feb. 15, 2005.
    Just when Laser and the eToys shareholder key researcher (Robert Alber) felt that justice would occur, out of the blue, less than 10 days later Mark Kenney enters a Stipulation to Settle that reduces the penalty of the returned monies of $1.6 million to only $750,000. At the same time Mark Kenney included language within the settlement that implied a get out of jail free card to everyone while also permitting improper circumvention of the Law. It illegally states that the parties would not be compelled to tell any of their other unlawful activities. Mark Kenney charged by Oath with protecting the public’s interest had turned turncoat and seeks to protect the perpetrators of fraud on the court with a slap on the wrist fine. This is simply absurd!
    Not only has TBF & MNAT confessed to several acts of false affidavits, Paul Traub of TBF also confessed directly to the court that he paid Barry Gold four payments of $30,000 each that halted when TBF & MNAT placed Barry Gold secretly within the Debtor. At which time a hidden Hiring Letter shows that Barry Gold was given illegal permission to circumvent the Court and the Law, by his own choice. Once he agreed to violate the law, he was then paid $40,000 per month and a bonus at the end. To earn this money all Barry Gold had to do was work 4 days per month for the Debtor.
    Laser and Alber immediately complained to the Court, to Frank Perch and the Director of the Dept of Justice EOUST office, Lawrence Friedman. Mr. Friedman emailed Haas his staff was on top of it and that the matters would be addressed properly.
    At the same time Haas and Alber began researching for the reasons why the US Attorney Mark Kenney would stick his neck out, so flagrantly against the Law. To everyone’s surprise the additional non-disclosures the Stipulation tried to cover up was the fact that MNAT, TBF and Barry Gold all had non-disclosed connections to Bain/KB. TBF and Barry Gold had worked for a Bain, SanKaty, as Mitt Romney owned an entity called Stage Stores, which was also a bankruptcy matter in another state, Texas.
    MNAT, it turns out, also represents Bain interests on a regular basis. MNAT had handled a Mitt Romney/Bain connected entity, the Learning Company, when it merged with Mattel. Both the Bain and Mattel issues mandate immediate removal of MNAT and referral to the United States Attorney’s office for prosecution.
    Yet the Disgorge motion and Stipulation to Settle does not even mention MNAT. There are also multiple $100 million dollar preferential issues in both eToys and KB Toys bankruptcy that have never been reviewed. MNAT brazenly represents Bain in the KB Toys bankruptcy case.This is also a crime as has been established in the matter of In re Bucyrus. In that case Milbank was disgorged their entire fee’s paid, the Law firm lost a $20 million lawsuit and Gellene was sent to jail for his perjury in trying to hide such from the Court by false affidavits. A book on the Gellene matter is available on Amazon, entitled Eat what you kill -The fall of a Wall Street Lawyer.
    To demonstrate how little the $750,000 meant to TBF as a deterrent, Paul Traub then petitioned the Court to handle the $100 million dollar preferential of Michael Glazer and Bain in the KB Toys bankruptcy case. TBF and Barry Gold did not inform the KB Judge of their connections to Bain and Glazer. Whereupon Haas and Alber immediately cried foul to Asst US Trustee Frank Perch, to the Court and to Lawrence Friedman.
    Mark Kenney responded to the proofs provided by Laser by Obstructing justice stepping in as the defense for TBF and asked the courts to strike and expunge the proofs provided by Laser and Alber. The Court signed an Order dismissing Laser’s comments and then held a hearing about the issue. As if such treasonous defenses and improper procedures were not enough Laser discovers that Mr. Perch and Lawrence Friedman both put in their resignations, from their positions of esteemed office, for “personal reasons”.
    As Mark Kenney was successful in assisting in the defense of TBF, MNAT and Barry Gold the court also assisted the threats of TBF against Haas by allowing the CLI claims hearing to be rescheduled. Haas lawyers now have a slam dunk case against the fraud and admitted acts of perjury, strangely, Laser’s new counsel, Brad Brook, asked to withdraw, stating that Haas had disappeared and could not be reached. Brook could not offer or state it was a monetary issue as his firm believed in Laser’s case so much they took it upon contingency.
    The Court permitted the rescheduling, the withdrawal of Laser’s attorney and then summarily dismissed the CLI claims case. The Court ignoring the issues of due process and Constitutional rights, even went so far as to refuse Laser’s new counsel from speaking to the Court the very day the Court dismissed the $3 million claim for the Court approved contracts of CLI.
    Both Haas and Alber complained to the FBI, the US Marshall’s, the OIG, the OGE and the OPR offices of the US Government. All of which referred Haas and Alber to the US Attorney’s office in Delaware and the US Dept of Justice office of General Counsel of the EOUST in Washington D.C..
    The sham of this referral is the fact that the after the resignation of Lawrence Friedman, the party that was replaced as Region 3 Trustee, Roberta DeAngelis was promoted by the Dept of Justice to be the Acting General Counsel for the US Trustee’s. DeAngelis is now in charge of investigating her own cases that she was removed from.
    Making matters even worse the US Trustee’s office has been acting as appellee in the appeals of Haas and Alber defending TBF, MNAT and Barry Gold by asking the Courts to strike, expunge and dismiss the Haas and Alber appeals for being “without merit”. Roberta DeAngelis has actually signed a brief asking the 3rd Circuit to dismiss.
    Heading off the first appeal of Laser, the bankruptcy court issued a 57 page Opinion that testifies on behalf of the perpetrators and states clearly erroneous findings of fact and conclusions of law to justify the position. It is as if the Delaware bankruptcy court has become a twilight zone and sanctuary for white-collar, syndicated crime!
    Anyone can plainly see that the entire system is geared behind defending TBF, MNAT and Barry Gold the one question that has remained unanswered is Why? Who can it be that the entire system is protecting? At the same time the question comes to mind as to how high does the manipulation of the system go? Is the White House aware of all the perversions of the Justice system and if so, why has no one sought to correct the problem?
    Everywhere that Haas and Alber look they find inexplicable questions of connections and cronyism that remain unanswered, even though the acts of impropriety are clearly evident. Just months ago it was discovered that the Judge who had heard all 4 Delaware District Court appeals in the eToys case, Judge Kent A Jordan, was a partner in the firm of Morris James. As per the law § 455 Kent Jordan should have recused himself from the case for his firm Morris James was the firm that Haas had fired when he had hired Henry Heiman to pursue the claim of CLI in eToys.
    Yet the resignation of esteemed parties does not cease, as Debra Yang of President Bush’s Corp Fraud Task Force also resigned without providing any remedy. A feat that is only made pale by the fact that it is now discovered that the US Attorney for Delaware Colm F Connolly was a partner of the law firm of MNAT. Colm F Connolly is now to the Judge in Delaware District Ct position made vacant by Kent A Jordan.
    It appears it certainly is a good career move to refuse to investigate or prosecute one’s former partner, associates and clients. Especially when the Presidential hopeful Mitt Romney owns one of the clients and has benefited from the malfeasance. However, it now has to be a grave cause of concern for Mr. Connolly, as such actions are unethical, illegal and good reason for failing to be promoted to the Federal Judge position. Mr. Connolly now realizes he is caught, red-handed, with both hands in the cookie jar.

    Reply
  1. 1 Romney campaign out of control: Romney finance co-chairman Fabian charged in 23 count indictment including charges of money laundering, mail fraud, perjury and obstruction of justice « who is willard milton romney? Pingback on Sep 4th, 2007 at 4:08 am

    […] More on this theme: evidence of Romney corruption and incompetence continues to build; GOP needs to start thinking post-… […]

  2. 2 Romney, admitted newcomer to conservatism, announces in new ad: I am more Republican than you are, and I am more honest than you are; I am more conservative than you are « who is willard milton romney? Pingback on Sep 19th, 2007 at 4:36 pm

    […] evidence of Romney corruption and incompetence continues to build; GOP needs to start thinking post-… […]

  3. 3 Yet more Romney corruption: Bain Capital and Ren Zhengfei of Huawei « who is willard milton romney? Pingback on Sep 30th, 2007 at 6:32 am

    […] More on Romney’s web of corruption: evidence of Romney corruption and incompetence continues to build; GOP needs to start thinking post-… […]

  4. 4 laserhaas provides more material on the Romney-eToys scandal « who is willard milton romney? Pingback on Oct 12th, 2007 at 6:02 am

    […] etoy scandal, etoys, fraud, inscrutable legalese, laserhaas, scandal, waste You can find it here and here, attached as responsa to our August 30, 2007 post titled evidence […]

  5. 5 Ron Paul on the Issues - Page 263 - ALIPAC Pingback on Apr 4th, 2012 at 6:59 pm

    […] […]


«
»

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

Gravatar
WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. ( Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. ( Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. ( Log Out /  Change )

Cancel

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: