[On left margin written vertically:

Jurassic Park redux?]

Case 2:14-cr-00027-NDF Document 66 Filed 03/27/14 Page 1 of 4

Case No. #2:14-CR-00027-NDF

REPLY TO MOTION TO EXCLUDE 90 DAYS, AND

MOTION FOR ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE:

18 U.S.C. 241, 242, 1513, 1962(d), Guarantee Clause

TO: Hon. Alan B. Johnson, U.S. District Judge (DWY)

DATE: 3/24/2014 Anno Domini

Greetings Your Honor:

Re: “MICHAEL REESE” nom de guerre

The United States ex rel. Paul Andrew Mitchell, Private Attorney General, comes now to object emphatically to defamatory language in the “MOTION TO EXCLUDE 90 DAYS” filed by one Michael Reese, #5-1390 (3/20/2014).

On Page 3 of 7, find “tax protestor” [sic] and “anti-government ideology” [sic]. Ideology?

On Page 4 of 7, find “Mr. Mitchel’s [sic] strong anti-government ideology” [sic] and “anti-government / tax protestor conspiracy” [sic].

Perhaps all of us should immediately forgive Mr. Reese’s frequent misspellings, because he has already admitted that he is a “computer dinosaur” (see Page 3 of 7). Don’t we already know that dinosaurs can’t spell, or understand plain English? What are the chances that a computer dinosaur understands legalese? READ ON! (Perhaps Mr. Reese never got the “memo”.)

- 1 of 4 –

[On left margin written vertically:

See 5 USC 2104, 2903, 2906, 3331, 3332, 3333;

28 U.S.C. 453, 544, 951; 5 CFR 1320.5!]

Mr. Reese has, therefore, committed a very serious error by obviously confusing “government” with a large number of properly identified individuals, who have infiltrated various public offices, but without executing the OATHS OF OFFICE required of those public offices. Not only are such individuals categorically NOT “government”; they are more accurately described as impostors, and criminals, for violating Article VI, Section 3, in the U.S. Constitution, and 18 U.S.C. 241, 242, 912, 1513 and 1962(d), for starters.

At various times during the past 24 YEARS, the Undersigned has assisted active U.S. Military personnel, U.S. Coast Guard Investigations, the U.S. Marshals Service in 3+ States, and the U.S. Department of Justice Office of Information Policy, to name a few -– just a few, mind you.

As an “officer of the Court,” Mr. Reese should be likewise required to execute and honor a proper OATH OF OFFICE. See 4 U.S.C. 101 (re: judicial officer of a State). Compare 28 U.S.C. 530B.

- 2 of 4 –

What Lie School did Mr. Reese attend?

This Court will immediately confirm where the IRS Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998 (“RRA98”) expressly PROHIBITS IRS personnel from designating anyone as a “tax protester or any similar designation.” Ignorance of this law is no excuse! DUH.

Moreover, protest is absolutely protected by the First Amendment and, as such, protest is not a crime! Protest is also expressly authorized at UCC 1-308 (“under protest”).

More to the merits (or lack thereof), the Guarantee Clause guarantees a Republican Form of Government to all 50 States of the Union. In our Republic, we are thereby guaranteed the Fundamental Right to be governed by Law and not by arbitrary, or capricious, bureaucrats or their minions who claim to practice Law (but rarely do). Cf. “barratry”; “libel”.

The Undersigned has made a career of advocating the Rule of Law for at least 24 years and, as such, the insinuation that he is “anti-government” is false, and obviously defamatory, and vicious too.

- 3 of 4 –

In order to avoid rushing to judgments, or to any premature conclusions, about Mr. Reese here, he should be given a procedurally correct opportunity to show cause why his MOTION supra does not contain false, legally incorrect, and defamatory statements, e.g. libel.

- REMEDY REQUESTED -

In light of the probable damages already inflicted upon the good name and reputation of the Undersigned, this honorable Court is respectfully moved for an ORDER for Mr. Reese to show cause why his “MOTION TO EXCLUDE 90 DAYS” does not contain multiple statements that are false, legally incorrect, and defamatory, and is not an act of barratry, or libel, under the common law. See Seventh Amend.

Respectfully submitted under protest

by the United States ex relatione (“ex rel.”),

/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, Relator In Propria Persona

Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S., In Forma Pauperis

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

(see Rotella v. Wood re: private attorneys general)

p.s. Please serve promptly on “Mr. Dinosaur”, :-)

Mr. Hardee too, please.

- 4 of 4 -