Question 1:
Is judicial reviewability of a trial attorney's failure to impeach a key prosecution witness with regard to the most critical and material aspect of the case with perjurious and exculpatory sworn prior statements reasonably debatable among jurists of reason to warrant granting a Certificate of Appealability, where counsel investigated the law and facts surrounding an accused's case but the course of action chosen was so woefully deficient to the point of depriving the accused of his Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel and a fair trial?

Question 2:
Part A. Are an accused's First and Fifth Amendment rights of access to the courts and Due Process violated when a court clerk refuses to docket a tendered motion to reconsider said clerk's adverse action/decision in order to avoid judicial review even though the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure and the 6th Circuit Local Rules expressly permit judicial review of adverse decisions of a court clerk?

Part B. Did the court clerk err when she returned a timely filed petition for en banc rehearing of an order denying a Certificate of Appealability as "successive" when the only previously filed petition sought rehearing before the original panel and both the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure and the 6th Circuit I.O.P. Rules expressly permit a separately filed petition for en banc review of an order denying COA?

Is judicial reviewability of a trial attorney's failure to impeach a key prosecution witness with regard to the most critical and material aspect of the case with perjurious and exculpatory sworn prior statements reasonably debatable among jurists of reason to warrant granting a Certificate of Appealability, where counsel investigated the law and facts surrounding an accused's case but the course of action chosen was so woefully deficient to the point of depriving the accused of his Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel and a fair trial?