|
----------
Forwarded message ----------
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell <supremelawfirm@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 11:17 AM
Subject: Private Attorney General discloses DOJ and DHS corruption to
Sheriff Joe Arpaio, Maricopa County, Arizona, USA
To: j_arpaio@mcso.maricopa.gov (bouncing)
Cc: r_rampy@mcso.maricopa.gov,
MediaRequest@mcso.maricopa.gov
Greetings
Sheriff Arpaio, Deputy Sheriffs and All Staff:
Please allow us to itemize for your official consideration
a small sampling of reasons why the U.S. Department of Justice
and Department of Homeland Security are corrupt and
motivated to retaliate corruptly against your office:
(1) our ongoing investigation of
missing credentials required of
all Federal government officers has confirmed that counterfeit
OPM Standard Form 61 APPOINTMENT AFFIDAVITS are
circulating widely among recently hired Federal "employees";
see 5 U.S.C. sections 2903, 2906 and 3331:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/5/3331.html
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/5/2906.html
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/5/2903.html
http://www.supremelaw.org/rsrc/commissions/evidence.folders.2004-03-16.htm#DAZ
(2) that "bootleg" form is
a counterfeit because it lacks the OMB control number
that is absolutely required by the Paperwork Reduction Act
("PRA");
it also lacks
the
paragraph at the bottom which cites 5 U.S.C. 2903 supra
defining the persons who are authorized to administer Standard Form 61
("SF-61");
in such cases, the Public Protection Clause of that PRA is rather explicit:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/44/3512.html (b)
(b) 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.
(3) in line with our ongoing
investigation described above,
you are hereby formally notified that the SF-61 APPOINTMENT AFFIDAVITS
for Eric H. Holder, Jr. are also fatally defective, for the same
reasons:
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/sebelius/holder/letter.2010-06-09/affidavit.refused.JPG
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/sebelius/holder/letter.2010-06-09/affidavit.GIF
Here are our original Freedom of Information Act ("FOIA")
Requests for Holder's SF-61:
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/sebelius/holder/foia.request.holder.opm.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/sebelius/holder/foia.request.holder.htm
In addition to the counterfeit credential above, the related correspondence
we received
is archived here:
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/sebelius/holder/letter.2010-04-28/page01.GIF
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/sebelius/holder/letter.2010-04-28/page02.GIF
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/sebelius/holder/letter.2010-06-09/page01.GIF
Accordingly, the existence of valid credentials for Eric H.
Holder, Jr.
assumes facts not in evidence and, therefore, he is not and cannot
be
a duly authorized Attorney General of the United States, nor can he
as such delegate any authority to any subordinates within
DOJ.
(Frankly, I have more authority than he does at present.
See
18 U.S.C. 1964; Rotella v. Wood.)
(4) Janet Napolitano has already
been charged with multiple Federal offenses
in connection with a Federal Grand Jury "subpoena" which the late
U.S. District Judge John M. Roll authorized my office to litigate
in defense
of
the Arizona trust which had been served with same:
http://www.supremelaw.org/copyrite/predicate.acts.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/roll/
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/roll/nadappea.htm#napolitano1512
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/roll/nadappea.htm#napolitano1510
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/azvmitch/crossco4.htm
[begin excerpt]
Ms. Janet Napolitano with:
(1) aiding and
abetting the obstruction of correspondence
transmitted via first class, certified,
and registered
United
States mail, under color of law, in violation of 18
U.S.C. 2 and
1702 (twenty-five (25) counts);
(2) aiding and abetting
the act of tampering with a federal
grand
jury, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 2 and 1512 (twenty-
five (25)
counts);
(3) aiding and abetting
obstruction of criminal investigations,
in
violation of 18 U.S.C. 2 and 1510
(twenty-five (25)
counts);
(4) deprivation of
fundamental Rights under color of law,
specifically
the Right to Petition a lawfully
convened
federal
grand jury for a formal investigation, in violation
of 18 U.S.C. 242
(twenty-five (25) counts);
(5) conspiracy to commit
all of the above, in violation of 18
U.S.C. 241 and
371 (twenty-five (25) counts);
(6) impersonating an officer
of the United States, in violation
of 5 U.S.C. 3331 and 18 U.S.C. 912 (one (1) count each).
[end
excerpt]
We
also have reasons strongly to suspect that Ms. Napolitano was also
complicit
for failing to do anything but obstruct and stonewall our part-time
investigation into the
whereabouts of 2,500 missing children -- and young adults -- who had
reportedly
"disappeared" into Arizona's Child Protective Services:
http://www.supremelaw.org/press/rels/kidnaps.htm
(cf.
42 U.S.C. 1986: action for neglect
to prevent and/or failure to remedy)
(5) lastly, and arguably of equal or
greater severity, for many years DOJ
has been commencing ALL civil and criminal lawsuits in the U.S. District
Courts
on behalf of one or the other of 2 defunct Delaware corporations named
"UNITED STATES OF AMERICA" [sic]; when we brought this fact to the
attention of the Delaware Secretary of State, both corporate charters
were promptly REVOKED!
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/usa.inc/
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/usa.inc/registered.agent.2007-02-12.gif
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/usa.corp/
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/usa.corp/registered.agent.2007-02-12.gif
We recommend that you make official contact with the Arizona Secretary of
State
to confirm that neither defunct corporation has ever registered to do
business
inside the State of Arizona, as we have already confirmed with the
Secretaries of State for California and several other large States of the
Union:
http://www.supremelaw.org/sos/ (e.g. New York State = the heart
of "The Conspiracy")
We elaborate the all important differences between the "United
States"
and the "United States of America" here:
http://www.supremelaw.org/letters/us-v-usa.htm
(read "NOT a corporation":
U.S. v. Cooper Corp.)
If we can be of any further assistance to your offices in this matter,
please direct one of your capable Staff to initiate contact with me here,
via email,
and we can take it from there.
We are standing by, Sheriff Arpaio.
Bcc: Arizona Attorney General,
Crime, Fraud and Victim Resource Center
--
Sincerely yours,
/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Private Attorney General, 18 U.S.C. 1964
http://www.supremelaw.org/decs/agency/private.attorney.general.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/reading.list.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/index.htm
(Home Page)
http://www.supremelaw.org/support.policy.htm
(Support Policy)
http://www.supremelaw.org/guidelines.htm
(Client Guidelines)
http://www.supremelaw.org/support.guidelines.htm
(Policy + Guidelines)
All Rights Reserved without Prejudice
|
