web analytics

Russell (Russ) Ruffino of Clients on Demand & His Attorney Daniel (Dan) Warner of Kelly Warner: A Timeline of Crime

Russell (Russ) Ruffino of Clients on Demand & His Attorney Daniel (Dan) Warner of Kelly Warner: A Timeline of Crime

July 6, 2018

Russell (Russ) Ruffino of Clients on Demand & His Attorney Daniel (Dan) Warner of Kelly Warner: A Timeline of Crime

Part 1: Abusive companies are fraudulently filing a defamation lawsuits to illegally obtain a court-order to remove negative SEO from Google.

The story of how Killing My Career was unethically & illegally stolen from me came to my attention on January 12, 2017. I received an alarming email from GoDaddy saying the domain was being transferred to Russell (Russ) Ruffino.  Within minutes of receiving the email I contacted my Arizona attorneys at Jackson White. I knew who Ruffino was, I’d previously written about his fraudulent use of national media logos in his Clients on Demand marketing collateral, but what I couldn’t immediately reconcile is how this happened.

So began the story of a extortion and pathological abuse of legal process, that unbeknownst to me or my attorneys, began in late 2015 . This abuse includes, but is not limited to, filing a fraudulent defamation lawsuit in order to illegally obtain a court order for the purpose of Google-deindexing negative SEO about Ruffino and his company Clients on Demand while illegally quashing my First Amendment right.  All because I wrote something negative and truthful about Ruffino and his company. Negative truthful information is not defamation. The abuse of legal process was done complicity with self-proclaimed Arizona legal luminary, Daniel R. Warner of Kelly Warner Law Firm. Warner attended the nationally known predatory Thomas M. Cooley Law School, and is currently the subject of Arizona Bar proceedings.

The growing and disturbing trend of abusing the legal system just because someone doesn’t like what another wrote about them, and it’s only going to get worse.  Those in positions of power and with money will wield both hoping to exhaust the victims emotionally & financially into silence. The First Amendment is under attack.  Setting the tone for this tend, Donald Trump [1] famously attacks the media claiming “Fake News” on a daily basis whenever anyone challenges his position with facts. Interestingly enough, Trump’s former attorney Michael Cohen attended the same law school as Ruffino’s attorney Warner, Thomas M. Cooley Law School, which was named the worst law school in America. There are predictable patterns in fraud; and, if we can predict fraud, we can prevent fraud.


This dangerous societal trend where those that seek the truth or write about the truth are threatened & intimidated with the goal of silencing them is happening every day. Whether temporarily in my case (over a year) or most recently and alarmingly, CEO of Telsa, Elon Musk’s attack done via Twitter to his 22 million followers. Musk pathologically attacked former employee turned self-titled whistleblower[2] Martin Tripp and reporter Linette Lopez of Business Insider for exposing negative truthful information about the company. CEOs who are easily angered when confronted with facts and exhibit poor behavior control usually means it’s  #LightningRodToTheFraud and a #RedFlag warning to employees, consumer, and the public alike.

To the extreme, the Capital Gazette, where five people who worked for the paper, senselessly lost their lives at the hands of an abusive individual who fraudulently filed a defamation law suit against the paper for running a negative truthful story about the shooter.

The Sociopathic Business Model™ claims that abusive companies employ executives whose unethical behavior will continue to dangerously escalate to illegal activity unless they are met with #ForcedAccountability. Companies today are knowingly & willingly building fraud into their business model at inception,  something the courts & the government (SEC & DOJ) haven’t caught up to yet.  Employees, either knowingly or unknowingly, engaged in illegal activity on behalf of the company where that behavior is  encouraged, their actions are replicated and rewarded.  Those the expose the company’s negative truthful information are threatened, intimated, demeaned, insulted and ultimately terminated or eliminated. CEOs of corrupt companies will shift blame while not taking accountability, which includes manipulating the First Amendment. Illegal activity however is not a protected act under the First Amendment ; and, companies can’t fraudulently sue another for defamation as a means to silence their First Amendment rights.

Forced Accountability is two-fold:

  1. The public exposure of negative truthful
  2. Legal intervention

Public knowledge of negative truthful information affects profits and could possible lead to legal action.  This forces the otherwise unaccountable to be held accountable, creating positive sustainable change. Pathologically abusive people will who represent pathologically abusive companies will not change unless they are forced accountable.

As a former federally recognized whistleblower, there’s a name for people who don’t like what I do (or Twitter Block me), they’re usually called criminals. And these are the same people who hate to be reminded that a federal whistleblower has credibility, which is why you’ll see the phrase often.  Not out of arrogance, but rather it’s an annoyance to criminals.

Part 2: The timeline steps of abusing the legal system: Russell (Russ Ruffino) of Clients on Demand and Daniel (Dan) Warner of Kelly Warner Law Firm.

[1] This is not a political statement. Lokosky has publicly stated that she did not vote for Trump OR Clinton in the 2016 election. The goal and purpose of this website is to predict and prevent fraud while helping employees, consumers, patients, taxpayers and shareholders force accountability from pathologically abusive companies.

[2] Federal recognized whistleblower Melayna Lokosky author of this article and website, recognizes with very limited knowledge & correspondence with Tesla’s whistleblower Martin Tripp, does not meet requirement The United States Department of Justice’s guidelines of a whistleblower. She does recognize that abusive companies that have built fraud into their business model will unethically force employees into arbitration or leak information out of concern over public safety.

Disclosure: Lokosky did donate to Tripp’s legal expenses via Go Fund Me

No Comments

Post a Comment