RESERVATION OF RIGHT TO INSPECT

U.S. OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT

STANDARD FORM 61 APPOINTMENT AFFIDAVITS

 

FROM:      Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.

           Private Attorney General, 18 U.S.C. 1964 and

           Agent of the United States as Qui Tam Relator

 

DATE:      September 13, 2016 A.D.

 

TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:

 

After extensive litigation and related experience acquired in connection with our ongoing investigation of missing and/or defective credentials that are required of all Federal personnel, we now find it necessary formally to notify all whom it may concern of the following:

 

(1)     the Oath of Office Clause at Article VI, Clause 3, in the Constitution for the United States of America, elevates that requirement to the level of our Fundamental Right;

 

(2)  the standing decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), held:  “Where rights secured by [that] Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them” [underlined emphasis added];

 

(3)     the Oath of Office Clause supra has been implemented by Acts of Congress including but not limited to the Federal statutes at 5 U.S.C. 2903, 2906, 3331, 3332, 3333, and 28 U.S.C. 453, 544, 951;

 

(4)     the Paperwork Reduction Act (“PRA”) at 44 U.S.C. 3501 effectively created a “Right to Inspect” all OPM SF-61 APPOINTMENT AFFIDAVITS for the required display of a valid OMB control number, and for compliance with all Regulations implementing that PRA;

 

(5)     whenever any such SF-61 fails to display a valid OMB control number, the legislative intent of that PRA authorizes private Citizens to enforce that Act by designating all such defective SF-61s as “bootleg requests” that belong in the nearest trash can (read “not admissible”);

 

(6)     moreover, after first enacting the PRA, Congress added greater strength to the PRA’s Public Protection Clause at 44 U.S.C. 3512, which now reads in pertinent part:  The protection provided by this section may be raised in the form of a complete defense, bar, or otherwise at any time during the agency administrative process or judicial action applicable thereto” [underlined emphasis added];  and,

 

(7)     a badge, business card, letterhead or any other claim that one is a duly authorized Federal officer or Federal employee can and should be regarded as evidence of felony impersonation violating 18 U.S.C. 912, insofar as that individual fails timely to produce a valid OPM SF-61 credential whenever challenged to do so e.g. via a proper Request submitted under the Freedom of Information Act at 5 U.S.C. 552, or by any other lawful REQUEST or DEMAND.


Accordingly, all Federal personnel who may wish to contact the Undersigned for any reason must first produce a true and correct copy of their valid OPM SF-61 APPOINTMENT AFFIDAVITS and deliver same to the physical address shown below for purposes of timely inspection.

 

Failure to do so will fully justify the Undersigned to refuse any further contact(s) with such individual(s), to refuse all written and/or verbal communications for one or more of the good causes partially itemized above, and return all such written communications to the sender(s) without any further responses.

 

The Undersigned hereby expressly reserved the Right to Inspect all such OPM SF-61 forms for full compliance with the PRA and all of its implementing Regulations, and to refuse same for any and all defects thereby confirmed in such forms e.g. missing cite to 5 U.S.C. 2903.

 

Correspondence transmitted via U.S. Mail without first producing valid OPM SF-61 APPOINTMENT AFFIDAVITS will constitute material evidence of felony mail fraud and/or wire fraud violating 18 U.S.C. 1341 and 1343.

 

In this context, you are hereby provided with ACTUAL NOTICE of the detailed documents now archived at the following Internet locations:

 

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/hedges/

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/hedges/United.States.Notice.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/hedges/opm/

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/hedges/omb/

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/hammond/United.States.Notice.htm

 

NOTICE TO PRINCIPALS IS NOTICE TO AGENTS.

NOTICE TO AGENTS IS NOTICE TO PRINCIPALS.

 

Thank you very much for your consideration, and respect, for the supreme Law of the Land throughout these United States of America, particularly the Oath of Office Clause and the Supremacy Clause at Article VI, Clauses 3 and 2 respectively.

 

 

Sincerely yours,

 

/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell

 

Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S., Damaged Party;

Private Attorney General, 18 U.S.C. 1964(c);  and,

Agent of the United States as Qui Tam Relator: 31 U.S.C. 3729 et seq.

(see U.S. ex rel. Madden v. General Dynamics Corp.)

 

U.S. Mail:

 

    Supreme Law Firm

c/o Trustee

    1224 N.E. Walnut, #257

    Roseburg 97470

    Oregon, USA


PROOF OF SERVICE

I, Paul Andrew Mitchell, Sui Juris, hereby certify, under penalty of perjury, under the laws of the United States of America, without the “United States” (Federal government), that I am at least 18 years of age, a Citizen of ONE OF the United States of America, and that I personally served the following document(s):

RESERVATION OF RIGHT TO INSPECT

U.S. OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT

STANDARD FORM 61 APPOINTMENT AFFIDAVITS

 

by placing one true and correct copy of said document(s) in first class United States Mail, with postage prepaid and properly addressed to the following:

 

Tracey V. Giannakoulias

c/o Complaint Management Team

Inspector General for Tax Administration

U.S. Department of the Treasury

1401 "H" Street, N.W., Suite 469

Washington 20005-2110

District of Columbia, USA

 

 

[Please see USPS Publication #221 for “addressing” instructions.]

 

 

Dated:   September 13, 2016 A.D.

 

 

Signed:  /s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell

         ____________________________________________________________

Printed: Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S., Damaged Party;

         Private Attorney General, 18 U.S.C. 1964(c);  and,

         Agent of the United States as Qui Tam Relator: 31 U.S.C. 3730

         (see U.S. ex rel. Madden v. General Dynamics Corp.)