INTERVIEW WITH SHERMAN SKOLNICK
I spoke by phone with Sherman Skolnick of the Citizens' Committee
to Clean-up the Courts [CCCC]. Here is my transcription of that
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Uh, Sherman Skolnick?
Hi. This is Brian Redman. I talked with you a few days ago?
O.K. I got the Barings Bank thing went out on the Internet, O.K.
I'm also wondering if you have, maybe, 5 minutes, I could ask you
I'd be glad.
O.K. What I've done...
By the way, the message was highly detailed. I hope it didn't
cause you any trouble to transcribe it.
No. As a matter of fact, I... I printed out the transcription
and it's in the mail, O.K.? So you should be gettin' it... mmm,
tomorrow or Saturday.
O.K. Uh, I've been runnin' around a lot, you know, so, I...
Thank you for your efforts.
I have been talking to people all over [the] United States and
elsewhere, gathering information on this. I... You know, I know
a lot of people.
What kind of questions do you have?
O.K. All right, well, number one, O.K. Let me just kind of throw
something out at ya: I got this... You see, what I, the way I
had been recording your recorded messages before was I had a
micro- cassette recorder that I would place right up to the ear
of the phone to record the message. And I, my idea was, I went
to Radio Shack and they told me that there was this kind of a
Yeah, right. It costs about $21 and you plug it directly into
the modular phone line and then into your machine, and it records
directly from the line without any hum or problem.
O.K. So that's what I did. In fact, I'm recordin' ya right now,
if that's O.K.?
O.K. So that's...
...checking out. Better check out, check a little bit if you're
using it for the first time.
You know what I did, I tested it on your recorded message, and it
seemed to work O.K., so... And I just figured, well, I'll do
like a 5 or 10 minute interview and if it turns out O.K. then I
could just transcribe the interview and put it out on the
O.K. I just wanted to, you know, make sure you understood that,
you know, all that stuff.
O.K. A few questions that came up, all right, was with the
Barings Bank, uh -- it's a relatively small bank. You know, like
a billion dollar failure...
Well that's not accurate.
The total estimated, or expected losses may well exceed over $10
billion. And to understand that, you have to consult with
experts on derivatives.
In unwinding a derivative trade that has gone bad, it depends on
the instruments that are involved. Here what was involved is the
price of yen and related matters. While they're unwinding these
transactions, the yen... um, not the yen (excuse me), the Nikei
Index may go down 2,000 points. And if that occurs, as some in
the securities industry expect (although they haven't been asked
about it or quoted in the financial press), if that occurs, that
the [Nikei] Index goes down 2,000 points, then the loss of the
derivative transactions that have gone sour will be very close to
*10* *billion* *dollars*. Not one billion, and not 900 million,
but $10 billion.
O.K. 'Cause there...
It depends on the unwinding of the trades. Because the
derivatives transactions in question here were highly complicated
and are tied in with the Nikei Index.
O.K. Because there was some question. See, I get feedback, all
right? This thing goes out to a lot of readers and I get some
feedback from them. And it occurred to me that, now I had a
chance to, you know, explore some of these issues more in-depth
and kind of... 'Cause they had a lot of questions. I get a lot
I've already talked off-the-record with highly-skilled people in
And they have explained it to me.
Understand something: um, how can I explain this quickly? As a
result of our efforts for over 30-some odd years in investigating
judicial corruption, over the years we've found out that such
corruption involves banks that are owned and operated by judges
and others. As a result, we became, we have become very adept at
financial research. And we have sources all over. And we have
talked to those sources, and they estimate that the loss, when
the Barings Bank transactions get unwound, would be close to $10
O.K. Along the line of sources, I know that you can't reveal
these people, but I'm thinking more in terms of, uh you had
mentioned before that you read, for example, the *Wall Street
Journal*. Are there other sources out there, as for reading,
that you would recommend?
Well I would find it interesting, in the future, what the
*Economist*, which now is trying to get a larger readership in
the United States, that's a...
That's a London...
...that's a London publication [CN -- a magazine], what their
next issue on this question may deal with. They may take a
purely British point of view, or they may take a point of view
sympathetic to the Queen's interest in Barings. Although the
Queen, also, has a stock brokerage -- I believe they're called
COATS(?) -- that handles, traditionally, a lot of the business
of the British monarchy.
O.K. So the *Wall Street Journal*, the *Economist*, there's...
Oh, you mean to get a clear idea of what's going on?
Yeah. Just some of the stuff you read.
...none of these publications, in my opinion, are gonna tell the
unvarnished truth about what is involved. And I can give the
reasons for that.
Because they all have their own special interests behind 'em?
Well... Let me just list a few of the problems. One of the
largest securities firms in the world, Nomura Securities, N-o-m-
u-r-a, reportedly is, and has been, in worse financial condition
than Barings. However, the Bank of Japan, and others, may bail
them out. But some brokerages are quietly "red-flagging" them,
which is a trade term for avoiding somebody. For example, when
some brokerages became aware that there was a problem in Mexico,
they "red-flagged" Mexico. That's the way they tell their
troops, "No transactions with them" -- you see the point?
Likewise, Goldman-Sachs has come within a hair, reportedly, of
going under in respect to the "Mexican problem" -- the
devaluation and the expected defaults by Mexican corporations.
So the financial press, to help the established interests, wish
to play down the Barings thing as much as they possibly can as a,
just another "minor matter". Which I don't believe it is.
O.K. There's a newsletter called *Strategic Investment*, put out
by Lord Rees-Mogg...
Right! I read it. I get copies. I don't subscribe, but friends
of mine send me copies from time to time.
Same... Yeah. Same with me.
I uh... In their latest issue, they're talkin' about this thing
about how Clinton's puttin' up what they call a "Berlin Wall" to
keep dollars from fleeing the country. Have you heard anything
Well what I know that's related to it is, the dollar is hitting,
more and more, new, post-war lows. And the reason for that is
that expert traders in the dollar are expecting the possibility
that the *Deutschmark* will be the new, reserve currency of the
world, rather than the U.S. dollar. And that is based on
information that Clinton and his wife are "going to the wall"
[i.e. will face some degree of justice] soon.
In other words, well, there's been leaks from the investigation
by the independent prosecutor which supports the idea that the
First Lady is, in the near future, most likely gonna be indicted.
And that will put a tremendous cloud over the Clinton White
House. And so, in advance of that, the dollar is being dumped --
let's put it that way.
O.K. I'm just basically, for myself, I'm watchin' the *Wall
Street Journal* myself and just noticin' the dollar/yen thing,
Notice the split in the *Wall Street Journal*: those that work
on the editorial page continue with their detailed items, which
are more *news* items than editorials, about Whitewater. The
other day they had a, um...
I saw it. Yeah.
...a front-page story that "pooh-poohed" Whitewater. The
editorials are closer to the truth than the front-page story --
which is a different faction within the *Wall Street Journal*.
(I know a lot about the back office politics of the *Wall Street
O.K. Yeah, like I say, this, I'm gonna have to keep this
relatively brief. I mean, there's a *lot* of things...
Well then cut out those parts that you feel are not relevant.
No, it's *all* relevant, 'til now. I'm just sayin' that I have
to kind of move along. You know, I'm lookin' for, at this point,
maybe a 10, 15 minute interview. Because I plan on transcribin'
the whole thing.
All right, what subjects do you particularly want to get into?
There's just a few questions that people had, O.K.? And you've
answered, so far, fine; I'm happy with the answers you've given
me so far. And I'd like to get into more detail. You know, my
idea is, maybe call you up once a week, ten, fifteen minutes, and
just kinda, you know, "flesh out" things, and...
My opinion is that the Barings Bank collapse is not an isolated
event. It is part of an ongoing series of scandals which, of
which the Whitewater scandal and the scandal, the series of
scandals in Italy, and in France -- there's some overriding
connection between them. In other words, different factions are
coming out of joint and are fighting with each other, and this is
what happens. And the financial press is *not* making any sense
out of it; they're dealt with as if they're all isolated
situations -- which they may not be.
O.K. With this (movin' to a different subject), with this thing
of the 41 grand jury witnesses in Chicago, that you're sayin'
that the Justice Department has got an assassination team that
has been killin' people...
Uh, yes. The ones that originally contended that were the highly
skilled lawyers, including the former Attorney General, Elliott
Richardson, that represented the Inslaw company. And in rebuttal
to former judge Nicholas J. Bua's report on the grand jury
investigation of whether Inslaw was defrauded by the Justice
Department, Inslaw's attorneys filed certain detailed
descriptions, offering witnesses, that there is within the
Justice Department [an] unmarked section where there is a group
there that conducts domestic and foreign assassinations, and that
*they* were responsible for killing a key witness, a free-lance
journalist, by the name of Danny Casolaro.
Yeah, O.K. What, what some of my readers were interested in is
possibly a list of the names of the victims. I mean, you don't
have to read, you know, it out over the phone. I was thinking
maybe I would contact you by mail, askin' for a list of the
victims if you have...
I think we have compiled a great number of names. In a federal
court case that we brought, in the Fall of '92, on this question,
we accused Bua and others who were supervising the Inslaw federal
grand jury of not paying attention to the fact that *their* team
of investigators were in fact terrorizing and murdering
And we accuse, in the court record, a FBI agent named Mike
"Chuckie" Peters of the same.
O.K. A lot of this I've pretty much covered already through the,
posted out on the Internet.
And one other thing that people have kind of asked me questions
about is this thing that Tsar Nicholas II and the Tsarina and
their family were not actually killed in 1918.
Well there have been a couple of books on this subject. And I
myself, in '74, with a group of my associates, went to New York
to spend two whole days interviewing Alexei Romanov, who contends
(and I believe he's correct) that he is the surviving son of Tsar
Nicholas II, and that his family were *not* murdered, as history
books state, in a basement in Siberia...
All right, so...
...but that they lived out their lives, protected by their
cousins, the British royal family, and that they were housed,
under another name, in Poland. And it's... well, you'd have to
know a lot about history, you'd have to know a lot about this
question, to understand the validity of what I'm saying.
Most of the royal families of Europe -- Russia, Germany, and
England -- are cousins. They're related...
...through Queen Victoria. And, so the uh... And, in 1970, in
one edition only, the *Chicago Tribune* wrote a story about this,
confirming from inside sources that the Tsar, his wife, and their
children were rescued and were not murdered in Ekaterenberg(?),
Siberia, as some had contended.
All right, so in the...
I think that I have extra copies of that, and I will mail you
O.K. What's... One reader...
And the *Tribune* has never recanted that story or corrected it.
It's a correct story, from United Press International.
O.K. One reader said that there's, there were actually movies of
Tsar Nicholas and his family being shot by the Bolsheviks, from
Not true. O.K. And another reader...
What happened is that the Rockefellers, that held $400 million in
gold of the *Romanov* -- not the Russian government, but of the
*Romanov* private fortune -- have a great interest to circulate
those false stories. Otherwise they might have to disgorge the
And they were the ones that financed the movie, in the early
'70s, called "Nicholas and Alexandra". And at the close of the
movie, it shows... uh, you know: the Tsar and his family being
shot to death.
You mean there's an *actual* movie of it happening? It's not
O.K. And you would...
It's *not* true.
O.K. You would say the same for supposed DNA evidence, that
that's not true?
Oh, you mean that recent stuff that came out of the post-Soviet
period there? I don't believe any of it.
And *you* wouldn't believe any of it either, if you had spent two
entire days questioning and examining, you know, uh questioning
Alexei Romanov. I mean, he's got the Tsarist family face, which
cannot -- I mean, I brought artists along to look at that face!
You can't reproduce that face. You can't fake-up that face.
Further than that, since he was a hemophiliac, as a child he wore
braces. And we discussed some inside things about that, some of
the things about wearing braces (which, of course, I'm a
paraplegic myself) that he could not have known otherwise.
I mean, we tested him out on every possible aspect. And he
didn't flunk a single question, no.
All right, and what about this Anastasia? I myself am not
totally positive on this. It seems to me that... I mean, I know
there was this controversy over this woman...
Well... the, what happened is, at the time that the Rockefellers
sponsored the Nicholas and Alexandra movie, to promote, to
further promote the idea that the Tsar had been murdered, the
reason for it is, the German high court at that time (which is
about 1971) had the case of a woman who used the name "Marian
Anderson", but who claimed that she was the surviving daughter,
...the daughter of the Tsar. And she did not succeed in court,
but that does not mean that she didn't necessarily have a valid
And then in the '50s, about 1957, um... what's her name? The
famous actress... did a movie called "Anastasia".
Yeah, I know the... I've heard of the movie. And I can't recall
the actress either. [CN -- Ingrid Bergman(?)]
In other words, there's been various efforts to further circulate
and promote these false stories that the Tsar, the Tsarina, and
their children were murdered. It did *not* happen. Those
that... And the story that ran in one edition of the *Tribune*
in 1970 is a *correct* story. They have never taken it back.
They have never corrected it.
O.K. I just want to close with sayin' most of my readers are very
interested in your material. And I'm real happy that you're
givin' me a chance to kind of expand on, you know, these things
that you're saying.
The Tsarist thing requires a lot of details. I have only
summarized a *very* *small* number of details.
Yeah. Uh, we're makin' progress, O.K., is... What I'm sayin',
is that, before, I would put out these 5-minute commentaries that
sometimes would raise further questions and, that I couldn't...
And the other thing that's in my 5-minute message, which there's
gotta be a lot more details discussed, that you can't do it in 5
minutes -- and that is the secret pact between...
...the Pope and the Western powers, which expired in '93. And
there's a lot to be said about that.
O.K. And I'm just sayin', see what I have to do is I've gotta
transcribe this. And this should keep me busy for a few days,
anyway, gettin' this stuff out.
If this stuff isn't clear, call me and if I'm here I certainly
will try to... I tried to summarize this quickly, but you know,
we're "documentors", you know what I mean?
And I tend to immediately supply highly detailed answers that...
well, would take...
...It would lengthen the thing out.
Let's just say, I don't make idle statements. Let's put it that
O.K. And the documents, I told ya that, you know, I had made
copies of some of your commentaries and transcribed 'em. I sent
those out in the mail to ya. Like I said, you should be gettin'
'em Friday or Saturday.
What is happening? In other words, some of the others on
Internet are getting back to you with interesting questions, huh?
Yeah! Yeah. And actually, I've *routinely* gotten these
questions, and I've been in a position of not really *knowing*,
you know? Sometimes I have *some* knowledge, myself, that I
Understand what our problem is: I operate without a secretary.
And my associates are scattered all over. So we don't have a
"secretarial staff" to speak of. And I have a listed phone
number and address, and were I to get a lot of mail to my
address, I don't think I could, you know, answer it. In other
words, if questions came to me, how would I answer all these
letters? Do you see what I mean?
So if they come to you, I'll... You ask your questions and I'll
do my best to answer 'em.
O.K. And when I get done with this, transcribin' this interview
and sendin' it out, I'll send ya a copy. Just so you know that
I'm representing you *verbatim* and I'm not...
Right. And we welcome more questions about the Barings Bank. We
are in touch with the most knowledgeable people on various
continents about it. We've... We know a great deal about it.
So we will have further messages, and I'll be glad to share the
information with you.
O.K. Thanks a lot for your time.