Corrupt family courts thrive while big media stays willfully blind – betraying protective parents and abused children.
By Richard Luthmann with Julie Anderson Holburn, Michael “Thunder” Phillips, and Michael Volpe
Rigged System, Hidden Fraud – A Complicit Media
Family courts across the United States – and beyond – are rife with corruption, operating more like lucrative rackets than halls of justice. The system is rigged: judges, attorneys, and court-appointed guardians exploit procedural loopholes to stack the deck against families, often leaving no paper trail of their misdeeds. That lack of official evidence becomes a convenient cover for a complicit press that parrots the line that there’s “no evidence” of fraud.
But survivors of the family court gauntlet know better. In case after case, from New York to California, the pattern remains the same – a business model of fraud masquerading as law.
Insiders no longer mince words. As one exposé put it, “Family court is not a system in crisis. It is a system in control — by those profiting from our destruction.”
In other words, the system isn’t broken at all – it’s working exactly as designed: to generate fees by exploiting families in trauma. Proceedings are drawn out, “experts” are appointed at every turn, and parents are bled dry financially. Reform advocates argue this is no accident; the family court machine was built to be exploited.
Indeed, whistleblowers describe the entire apparatus “as an intentional, planned, fraudulent, heinous, conspiratorial, and criminal endeavor – by design.”
Rights are trampled behind closed doors, and vague doctrines like “the best interests of the child” are twisted into weapons to justify outrageous outcomes. With corruption baked into the system, it’s little wonder that mainstream journalists who take officials at their word see “no wrongdoing” – precisely as the racket intends.
The evidence of widespread fraud is there for those willing to look: thousands of parents have detailed the pattern of collusion, perjury, and profiteering in family courts nationwide. Yet big media has largely given this scandal a pass. By failing to investigate or even acknowledge rampant graft in family courts, mainstream outlets have become part of the problem.
As famed reporter and publisher Frank Parlato bluntly noted, “The system is not there to help families. It’s there to bill them.”
When the press overlooks that reality – or dismisses it with willful blindness – it betrays the very public it claims to serve. This abdication of journalistic duty has allowed a criminal enterprise to flourish in our courts, unchecked and in the shadows.
In the eyes of furious parents, the media’s silence is nothing short of treason against truth. It is the mainstream media’s journalistic treason.
Mainstream Media’s Journalistic Treason: Fraud Warriors Fight Back
While establishment news outlets stay mum, a band of muckrakers and whistleblowers has stepped up to expose the rot. They call themselves family court fraud warriors, and they are turning personal pain into public proof.
David Weigel – a Wall Street financier turned activist – is one such crusader. After experiencing a nightmare divorce in Manhattan, Weigel began compiling evidence of systemic wrongdoing. He’s now leading a project to “turn pain into proof” by crowdsourcing records and data from court victims in “blockchain style.” Using a Facebook page as a “public permanent record,” Weigel and his fellow warriors are mapping out exactly how family courts operate as scams. For the first time, they’re quantifying the fraud that thousands have long alleged.
Their findings are explosive. In case after case, the same playbook emerges: court insiders blatantly use children as pawns for profit, holding kids hostage from one parent until that parent gives in and pays up. This extortionate “pay-to-play” justice is carried out under the thinnest guise of law – often invoked with the talismanic phrase “the best interests of the child.”
It’s a cruel irony, as those “best interests” are precisely what the scheme subverts. Family court judges routinely ignore even the most basic legal safeguards. (Legally, a parent’s rights can’t be terminated without “clear and convincing evidence” of unfitness – but fraud warriors have documented courts flouting that precedent for the sake of leverage and cronyism.)
Weigel has a blunt name for this racket: “designer child trafficking.” In the FCFWP’s view, family court players “blatantly use children for profit, often holding them hostage from one parent unless that parent submits and pays money… under the guise of ‘best interests of the child.’” This, they say, is nothing less than organized child trafficking by the courts – custom-tailored (“designed”) to evade detection. And so far, they note, “no one in the Family Court–Industrial Complex” has ever faced prosecution for it.
Weigel’s crusade has shed stark light on what insiders call “the divorce industry.” From coast to coast, a network of lawyers, guardians, evaluators, and even judges benefit from drawn-out custody fights and manufactured conflicts.
“It’s much more than a den of thieves,” Weigel said of the cabal running the courts. “They are the coordinators and designers of this system, serving only to destroy families, traffic children, rob money from honest people, and silence anyone with the courage to call them out.”
In other words, the fraud is deliberate and coordinated. The law itself has become their weapon: by exploiting vague standards and wielding contempt powers, these court actors act as if they are “immune to consequences and beyond reproach.”
But the fraud warriors are fighting back. They are naming names and publicizing evidence that would make any honest prosecutor’s blood boil. Crucially, they’re also calling out the enablers beyond the courthouse: the regulators, politicians, and yes, the media, whose inaction permits this “criminal enterprise” to continue.
As Weigel and allies expose the family court racket in article after article, they are effectively building the case that mainstream journalists have refused to make. The truth is coming out – thanks to independent reporters and parents-turned-whistleblowers determined to blow the lid off what one father calls “Family Court’s business model of fraud.”
Crusader Turned Turncoat: The Susan Bassi Betrayal
Not all truth-tellers have lived up to their billing. A civil war has erupted within the family court reform movement, centered on what activists are calling “Susan Bassi’s Journalistic Treason.”
Susan Bassi, a California investigative reporter, built a name for herself over the past decade by exposing family court injustices. She earned a following as a tenacious court watchdog unafraid of powerful judges. But now Bassi stands accused by her former allies of committing the cardinal sin of journalism: betraying a source and burying the truth.
In the words of one critic, Bassi “committed a cardinal sin of journalism. She ‘torpedoed the play.’” Her alleged betrayal has turned a one-time crusader into the movement’s public enemy number one.
The flashpoint was an inexplicable case of corruption in Bassi’s own backyard. Orange County journalist Julie Anderson Holburn – herself a protective mother fighting to expose her ex-husband’s abuse of their children – begged Bassi to report on her case.
Holburn’s story had all the ingredients Bassi normally championed: allegations of officials covering up child abuse, police stonewalling public records, and court players behaving corruptly. Bassi had even followed Holburn’s ordeal for years and seen video evidence of the children’s suffering. Yet when Holburn asked for help, Bassi shocked everyone: she flatly refused to cover the story.
Hiding behind a “standing policy,” Bassi claimed she won’t report on individual litigants or ex-spouses, insisting such coverage “serves no legitimate purpose” and could invite defamation suits.
Holburn was stunned – as were other advocates. Here was a celebrated “court transparency” reporter walking away from a clear-cut case of court-enabled abuse. To Holburn and her supporters, it felt like a treasonous betrayal of vulnerable children.
And soon, motive came into question: it emerged that Bassi is friends with a woman who had infiltrated Holburn’s camp and leaked information to Holburn’s ex’s attorney. Despite being warned, Bassi stayed cozy with this friend – and kept Holburn’s story in the shadows.
The breaking point came when Holburn was fighting to obtain police records that could prove her children’s abuse. Fellow journalist Richard Luthmann jumped in to help Holburn, firing off emails to pressure the police. Bassi was copied on the correspondence, presenting a united front of reporters demanding transparency.
Then Bassi did the unthinkable: she interjected to sabotage the effort. Replying to all the police, Bassi disavowed Holburn and the records request. “Please take me off this thread. I am not associated with… Julie Holburn. I have no idea who this is… It is not how we do records requests,” Bassi wrote.
In that moment, she effectively blew up the play – signaling to authorities that one of the journalists ostensibly pushing for transparency actually wanted out. Her public wash-your-hands act undercut Holburn’s last hope of prying loose the evidence.
Luthmann and others were livid. “She’s much worse than a cock-blocker because children’s lives are at stake. She is the Benedict Arnold of the family court reform movement.”
Seasoned investigative reporter Michael Volpe likened Bassi’s move to a near-disaster in journalism history: in the 1880s, trailblazing reporter Nellie Bly went undercover in an insane asylum; when a fellow journalist spotted Bly, she stayed silent to let Bly finish her exposé. Susan Bassi, by contrast, did the opposite – she “torpedoed the play” mid-investigation.
“When another journalist has a story in motion, you don’t blow it up,” Volpe scolded, calling Bassi’s interference a betrayal of basic press solidarity.
The fallout has been scorched-earth. Holburn felt muzzled and betrayed, emailing Bassi that she “violated the most precious and delicate nature of trust… your conduct & disregard for victims… is disgraceful and heinous.”
Luthmann unloaded on Bassi in public forums, branding her “a self-righteous, elitist trollop” and even joking that “she’s a bigger bitch than Kyle’s mom on South Park.”
The colorful insults underscore the depth of outrage. To Luthmann and others, Bassi is a sellout who pretended to be a watchdog but secretly chose alliances over truth.
“She went out of her way to bury Holburn’s story,” Luthmann fumed, accusing Bassi of “selling out the truth for her own ego and alliances.”
Even more damning, Luthmann exposed Bassi’s conflicts of interest. She serves on the board of a non-profit news site and wields influence over donor-funded journalism. Internal emails show Bassi demanded that the site scrub an unfavorable article about Holburn, calling the piece “irresponsible” and threatening legal action on behalf of “our advertisers and donors.” In other words, donor money – some from powerful legal circles – appeared to dictate Bassi’s editorial decisions.
Luthmann quipped that Bassi seemed to run a “pay-to-play” operation, even telling sources to contribute “donations” if they wanted their stories told. The upshot is a portrait of a journalist who sold her soul: publicly posturing about ethics and transparency while privately protecting cronies and funding sources. Bassi’s one-time allies now cast her as a traitor to the cause.
Dave Weigel was even more direct: Bassi’s retreat, he said, was treason against desperate parents.
“We will not accept this journalistic treason,” Weigel declared, vowing to hold “turncoats” like her accountable. “Journalists who refuse to stand up for warrior parents and protective families are complicit in the fraud model. They hand abusers and officials a victory by silence and sabotage.”
In the reformers’ eyes, Susan Bassi crossed an unforgivable line – and became the very type of journalistic Judas she once ostensibly fought against.
For her part, Bassi remains defiant. She refuses to apologize or retract a word.
“You will get no retraction. See you in court,” she snapped at Luthmann, effectively daring her critics to sue. The feud shows no signs of cooling. But beyond the personal drama, it has cast a harsh light on a bigger issue: the role of the media itself in the family court crisis.
If even an “independent” court reporter can be co-opted by ego, alliances, and funding pressures, what does that say about the mainstream press?
Mainstream Media’s Journalistic Treason: Media Silence & Sabotage
The Susan Bassi saga may be the reform movement’s internal war, but it speaks to a broader failure in American journalism. For decades, the mainstream media has virtually ignored the rampant corruption in family courts. Major newspapers and networks have offered only occasional, superficial coverage – usually centered on high-profile tragedies or celebrity divorces, without ever acknowledging the systemic fraud underneath.
Protective parents, mostly mothers, who plead for media attention are often met with indifference or skepticism. In some cases, they’re painted as “disgruntled exes” or conspiracy cranks. This media apathy – or outright bias – has real consequences: it enables the corrupt court cartel to continue operating in darkness. As Weigel warned, reporters who stay silent are “complicit in the fraud model,” effectively handing abusers a victory through their silence.
By abdicating their watchdog role, mainstream outlets have become enablers of the very abuse and injustice they are supposed to expose.
Why the silence? Critics point to the “swampy” ties between big media and the legal establishment. Family court corruption is not a comfortable beat – it implicates judges, lawyers, and even politicians. Many media organizations rely on legal advertisers or are funded by wealthy donors connected to the bar. Challenging the family court system means upsetting powerful interests.
As the Bassi incident highlighted, even a non-profit news outlet can be pressured by “advertisers and donors” to quash a story. It doesn’t take a detective to suspect that major outlets face similar pressures. Trial lawyer associations and influential law firms pour money into campaigns and media sponsorships, cultivating a public image of the court system that omits its dirty secrets.
The result is a kind of willful blindness. National newscasts devote hours to political drama and petty scandals, but have scarcely mentioned that American family courts separate children from fit parents for profit. Even when confronted with ironclad evidence – parents jailed without due process, court officers caught taking bribes, children handed to abusers – the big outlets largely look away or couch the issue as “he said, she said.” This negligence has not gone unnoticed.
Advocates have begun openly accusing mainstream journalists of “journalistic treason” for failing to tell the truth. They argue that by protecting the racket (through inaction or dismissive reporting), the media is betraying not just individual parents but the very ideals of transparency and accountability.
It’s not just a U.S. issue, either. Around the world, from the U.K. to Canada to Australia, family courts have been engulfed in similar scandals – and often, a similar media hush follows. The United States, with its vaunted free press, should be leading the charge to expose such an egregious violation of public trust. Instead, American news outlets by and large have shown willful blindness.
Only independent voices on Substack blogs like Julie Anderson Holburn and Michael “Thunder” Phillips, and niche outlets, such as Frank Report or The Family Court Circus, consistently shine a light on the fraud. Meanwhile, prestigious “non-profit” investigative organizations (some of which are funded by establishment donors) remain strangely quiet. This collective silence amounts to a cover-up by omission.
In the words of one frustrated reformer, the mainstream press has engaged in “willful blindness to Family Court fraud” – effectively shielding abusers and corrupt officials by refusing to report on their misdeeds.
But cracks are starting to appear in the facade. The fierce backlash against Susan Bassi is one sign that activists will no longer tolerate gatekeepers who pretend to seek truth while actually concealing it. Social media groups and grassroots networks are bypassing the traditional media to share documents, court recordings, and horror stories – forcing the issue into public consciousness.
Lawmakers in several states have begun proposing family court reforms, thanks largely to relentless pressure from parents and independent journalists. Arizona State Rep. Rachel Keshel and Senator Mark Finchem have demanded accountability for family court corruption, calling the system an “unaccountable tribunal.” Finchem warned that custody figures resemble election anomalies: “When the numbers don’t add up, it’s fraud—plain and simple.”
In Idaho, Rep. Tammy Nichols blasted what she called “unending temporary orders” and vowed to end profiteering on children’s suffering.
Change is also being pushed in the federal courts. Colorado Rabbi Jacob Bellinski and St. Louis attorney Matt Grant have filed sweeping civil RICO and civil rights claims. Their lawsuits argue that family courts operate as coordinated enterprises that deprive parents and children of constitutional protections. If successful, these cases could expose the machinery of fraud and force nationwide reform.
The mainstream media, for its part, is increasingly on trial in the court of public opinion. Parents ask: Where were CNN, The New York Times, or NPR when children were being legally trafficked under their noses? Why did it fall to a ragtag team of bloggers and whistleblowers to expose what should be a national scandal? These questions hang like a cloud over the credibility of establishment journalism.
Ultimately, the media’s failure to confront family court corruption is a betrayal as profound as the courts’ own betrayal of justice. This is, at its core, a human rights crisis happening in our neighborhoods – children taken without cause, parents bankrupted and broken, all under color of law.
Sunlight is the best disinfectant, but the mainstream press left this darkness untouched. By doing so, they betrayed countless families who desperately needed their story told.
As one reform advocate put it, journalists who stay silent or side with the corrupt have “violated the most precious trust” of the public. It is nothing less than mainstream media’s journalistic treason – a treason against the truth, against vulnerable children, and against the very notion of a free press as a guardian of the people.
The hope now is that this shameful cover-up will crack, and courageous reporting will finally drag the family court scandal into the light. The families destroyed by this system deserve nothing less than the whole truth – and the media’s complete reckoning for keeping that truth buried for so long.
