The removal of Blagovich as Governor of Illinois last week by the Illinois Senate removed perhaps the most corrupt politician in Illinois from office. Certainly it removed the most well known corrupt politician in Illinois from office. Illinois was (and may be still) the state in which “pay to play” politics was most rampant. No doubt, that was a key factor that swayed the habitually legally challenged Boeing Company to move to its headquarters to Illinois in 2001, albeit it did not publicize it was looking thusly for a more “friendly to lawbreaking state” when it announced it was moving out of Washington state earlier that same year. After all, the executives that inhabit Boeing’s executive suites are not stupid by far—they are just largely corrupt.

If you are a Washingtonian like I am, you’ve got to be wondering who is the most corrupt politician in our own state—or, in effect, who is our Blagovich.

And that is where I can provide authoritative guidance on the subject. To my knowledge, the most corruption by far in this state occurs in the King County Courthouse in downtown Seattle, where even supposedly “above the corrupt fray” judges seem to be straining themselves to achieve new heights in corruption every day, all in the name of what they consider “justice.” Their definition of the term “justice,” unsurprisingly, is often totally opposed to what any objective person’s definition of the term would be. In this hothouse of corruption in downtown Seattle where the law only applies against defendants and their attorneys, and is not applied to the conduct of anyone else in that building, Dan Satterberg, current King County Prosecutor, is the ringleader of said corruption.

Satterberg’s now legendary Svengali-like ability to get even (relatively) good Democrats to support him when he needs to call in such favors from such powerful people is obviously at work here. Satterberg still runs his office solely on the reputation of a long dead King County Prosecutor that Satterberg had been in effect office administrator (secretary) for. This strategy that Satterberg and his Perkins Coie campaign manager fabricated has worked well for him in that he won his campaign because of these lies, and it still gets him many rulings—some very much opposed to the law—because judges give his office the benefit of the doubt and in effect sleep through arguments by defense attorneys because they think they don’t have to strain their gray cells at all in ruling for the prosecution every time as long as they think Maleng is still running the King County Prosecutors office, as Satterberg has mislead them (and everyone else, for that matter) is the case, even now, many months after Norm Maleng's death.

Satterberg had gone to great lengths to channel Maleng long before Satterberg was actually elected to the office. And this sort of the worst kind of identity theft has gotten Satterberg everything he has wanted to have so far. His office’s attorneys don’t have to work hard on cases as judges almost always rule for them no matter how inane, lie filled, and law adverse their "legal" arguments are, which has made the office much more efficient than it would be if Satterberg, many of his prosecutors, and so many King County Superior Court Judges were not corrupted as noted. You’ve got to wonder if many prosecutors now telecommute because of this due to the fact that they thusly don’t really have to do any work other than show up for court hearings, and they don’t have to base their arguments on the law in order to win whatever they want in King County Superior Court. True, Satterberg’s continued channeling of Maleng is highly offensive, but it works to achieve his ends, so he continues to use Maleng’s good name for purposes outside the law.

But perhaps the most troubling and pervasive corruption in Satterberg’s office is not his identity theft of a respected dead man (Maleng) in order to violate the law at will through biased court rulings in Maleng’s (Satterberg’s) favor irrespective of the law or facts of the individual case. It is instead his habit of being so overly close to unethical corporations and law firms (to be fair, law firms generally perform business with the same, or worse, ethics than those of the largest and most moneyed corporation they represent) that he has, in effect, been literally living "up their arses." (I think that "arses" is a more dignified term than the relatively course and common term "asses" would be in this case.)

You may ask yourself, what is Satterberg doing thusly up their arses? I have the answer to that. He is simply looking for “pay to play” (“pay to prosecute,” more accurately) campaign cash and any other quid pro quo favors he can obtain by doing so. And he has been very good at rummaging around thusly inside companies' “intestinal tracts” that want favors outside the bounds of the law in King County Superior Court. Boeing and Perkins Coie have been frequent "points of entry" for said corruption of Satterberg. I highly doubt he limits “his” office’s corruption just to those two companies, however. I’ll leave it to others to post as comments or contact me with their experiences of Satterberg “pay to prosecute” corruption with other companies that they have witnessed personally, or other corruption of his office.

That Satterberg was able to totally defile a King County Prosecutor’s office in such relatively short time “he” has held that office after the office was handed to him after the “opportunity” of Norm Maleng’s death presented itself to him is indeed almost unprecedented. Perhaps he was so competent to do so because one of his heroes that he has followed the policies of with great admiration is George W. Bush, the thankfully former president, who did a similar thing in defiling our federal government and our Constitution in the very recent past.

That Satterberg has fooled so many (including many King County Superior Court Judges) for even this long is troubling, indeed. You have to excuse the grieving family of Norm Maleng for placing their trust in Satterberg. Satterberg (and his Perkins Coie campaign manager) were solely at fault for his brazenly channeling Norm Maleng from the minute Norm Maleng died, and any family member in such a horrific situation would be vulnerable to someone who was indicating they could channel Norm from the great beyond. Most people have to remember a loved one from memories, pictures, and videos. Few have the misfortune to meet people as unethical as Satterberg, who are con men who can channel their dead beloved at the drop of a hat. John Edward (no, not John Edwards, the former senator and presidential candidate), a "psychic medium," is vastly more ethical than Dan Satterberg is in this regard. I watched a John Edward show or two years ago when he was first popular. From what I remember, John Edward said he could communicate with some loved ones who have "passed on". Dan Satterberg is a "psychic" of a much different kind, however. If you followed his campaign, Satterberg did not claim he was the only "medium" with which people could communicate with the departed soul of Norm Maleng. No, his schtick was much more like this--Norm Maleng's soul never did pass on--it just took temporary rest in Dan Satterberg's body until it decides to pass on. A subtle difference I know, but it does back up Satterberg's act that has drawn in people that should be the last people on earth that would like Dan Satterberg if he was just his unfortunate self--Dan Satterberg, at least until he stops thusly impersonating Norm Maleng, is the defacto Norm Maleng until Dan Satterberg informs Norm Maleng's friends, colleagues, and family that Norm's soul has left his body for much greener pastures. I really doubt that will ever happen, however, until Dan Satterberg sees that thusly holding Norm Maleng's soul hostage is no longer of any political or financial benefit to him, just as he won't stop his "pay to prosecute" "ethic" until he has decided that Boeing, Perkins Coie, and other such companies' campaign contributions and other favors he has received as quid pro quo kickbacks are no longer of any benefit to him personally, as well.

This resorting to such “new low” methods in faking his own ethicality is just like the same trait we have seen in Blagovich in his uncanny ability to try to con people into thinking he is something he is actually the opposite of. Yes, Satterberg is Washington State’s Blagovich, and Washingtonians should handle him the same way Blagovich’s corruption was ended in Illinois. Personally I would like Norm Maleng’s good name disassociated from Satterberg forever to protect Norm Maleng’s reputation from being abused as it has been in King County Superior Court and the King County Prosecutor’s Office. No, I make no claim that I am in any way Norm Maleng, and Satterberg should apologize for misrepresenting himself as Maleng in court and everywhere else, pending his removal from office by impeachment or any other means that are legal for his other misdeeds. Satterberg and his “working together partner in crime” Boeing may have violated the law at will up to this point with no repercussions for doing so, but that doesn’t mean that we should stoop to their low levels in addressing their intentional ethical and legal lapses.

Satterberg has instructed all people in his office that have handled my case to do whatever Boeing and Boeing’s outside counsel (Perkins Coie, where his campaign manager works, and others) want irregardless of whether it is legal to do so or not. How corrupt is that? You thought that Satterberg was running the King County Prosecutor’s Office (KCPO)? Not so. Boeing and their outside counsel (his campaign contributors) get to decide how justice is defiled in King County, per Satterberg’s direction. If you knew all of the bogus arguments by the KCPO (actually Boeing and their outside counsel, in my particular case) and related rulings in my case, you would know this independent of Satterberg’s direction to everyone handling my case. How does Satterberg explain this corruption? I don’t know, but I expect he will argue that letting Boeing and Boeing’s outside counsel do almost all of the KCPO work on my case themselves was done for “efficiency” purposes, so that prosecutors' time could be freed up for use on other cases in which the right to do the legal work had not been sold off to his campaign contributors yet, as was already done in my case. That doesn't make it right by far, however.

I suggest, if you are a large corrupt company, that you check all the cases that will be potentially before the King County Superior Court and see if you can buy off Satterberg as Boeing has before someone ethical succeeds in removing him and his cronies from office. Have a whistleblower on staff that is trying to put you personally in prison for your serious and bottom line maximizing crimes? Can't figure out how to get rid of that whistleblower legally? That is your problem. There is no way to get rid of a whistleblower legally without bending the law severely or breaking it completely. Check my case for details on how Boeing did it. You will have to get your "hands dirty" with illegal surveillance of the whistleblower and/or their press contacts and by filing false and very, very misleading police reports, but you can rest assured until Dan Satterberg is removed from office that your campaign cash and other favors will buy you whatever "justice" you want against that whistleblower for their daring to put you in prison for your numerous felonies. For even more quid pro quo favors delivered to Satterberg, Satterberg will let you write all the legal arguments in the case, and let you make decisions to charge the whistleblower or not charge the whistleblower (an easy choice, for someone of your ethic) and let you decide yourself what to charge them with, even if it is an obviously bogus, fabricated and/or trumped up charge. Satterberg has friends on the King County Superior Court bench that will do everything they can to ensure the outcome that you pay Satterberg for, no matter how much it offends the law itself or any quaint old fashioned concept of "justice." I don't presume to know all such illegal bribes Satterberg takes other than the quid pro quo campaign contributions. He may be very open to accept other favors of any illegality level. To find out his preferences, I suggest you meet with him somewhere where your conversations about this subject will be private for obvious reasons. Don't get me wrong. I am for whistleblowers, and very much against companies like yours that don't do business legally. I hope you get caught, and tried anywhere but King County Kangaroo Superior Court. but you may as well try to take advantage of Mr. Satterberg's services while they are for sale to the highest bidder for a hopefully very, very limited time.

My case was never about what Boeing, Boeing's outside counsel, and Satterberg prevaricated it was about. It wasn't at all about sending me to prison for giving the press info about a few Boeing airplane sales wins that Airbus already knew they had lost. It was always about the other stuff they were careful never to link to the case so as to not out their real motivations.

It instead was always about protecting their executives from doing time themselves for crimes they know their executives have committed. Hence, the extreme efforts to get any evidence of their executive's wrongdoing "back in house" where it can be covered up by getting files back from The Seattle Times, etc. It always was, and still is, about whistleblower retaliation. Boeing has broke new ground in the area of whistleblower retaliation in recent times. Now, Boeing terminates all employees who talk to the press, even those who only communicate with the press about Boeing's own lawbreaking exclusively. This illustrates that Boeing's real goal in these matters is not to simply have the law applied to its employees and not instead applied to itself and its executives in any way. Their goal instead is to illegally retalialiate against whistleblowers and, by doing so, not to therefor face any repercussions for their own systemic violations of the laws and regulations.

Now that we know who our state’s most corrupt politician is, it is time that he is treated as he should be treated—just like Blagovich. He may still claim to be Norm Maleng throughout that process, but we know just how much of a lie that is, and what a very distasteful lie it is, as well.