Donald E. Wishart, Sui Juris
Citizen of California State,
Federal Witness and Victim
c/o 5150 Graves Avenue, Suite 12-C
San Jose [ZIP code exempt]
CALIFORNIA, USA
In Propria Persona and
by Special Appearance Only
All Rights Reserved
without Prejudice
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA [sic],
) Case Number CR-00-20227-JF
)
Plaintiff [sic], ) NOTICE OF
MOTION AND
) MOTION TO STRIKE SIX
v. )
GOVERNMENT PLEADINGS
)
DONALD E. WISHART [sic], )
)
Defendant [sic]. ) Date: _______ Time: _________
________________________________)
COMES NOW Donald E. Wishart, Sui Juris, Citizen of California State, expressly not a “citizen of the United States” [sic], and Defendant in the above entitled matter (“Defendant”), to move this honorable Court for an ORDER striking six (6) recent pleadings filed on October 2, 2000 A.D. by persons alleging falsely to have power(s) of attorney to represent the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA in the instant case, and to provide formal Notice to all Proper Parties of same.
Messrs. Robert S. Mueller III, Thomas S. DiLeonardo, and Gregory S. Gordon do not have any lawful powers of attorney to represent the Plaintiffs UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. See caption supra.
The United States and the United States of America are not one and the same. See 28 U.S.C. 1746, for example.
None of these persons can demonstrate any specific delegations of authority from each and every one of the 50 States of the Union.
None of their respective Attorneys General has yet made a single proper appearance in this case.
Accordingly, the following six (6) pleadings were never properly filed in the official docket of the instant case, and are not properly before this Court:
(1) GOVERNMENT’S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS COUNTS ONE AND TWO OF INDICTMENT;
(2) GOVERNMENT’S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO CLARIFY DETAILS OF RECIPROCAL DISCOVERY;
(3) GOVERNMENT’S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT’S NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR BILL OF PARTICULARS ON COUNTS THREE THROUGH SEVEN;
(4) GOVERNMENT’S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT’S NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO DISCLOSE INDICTING PANEL’S RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS;
(5) GOVERNMENT’S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT’S NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO CONTINUE PROCEEDINGS FOR 60 DAYS; and,
(6) GOVERNMENT’S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT’S SECOND THROUGH TWELFTH NOTICES FOR MANDATORY JUDICIAL NOTICE.
Defendant also wishes to go on record as objecting to the manner in which said persons withheld the above pleadings, until a single batch of same could be filed and served on the same day.
It is obvious from the hand-writing correcting “September” to “October” that said persons did, in fact, commence to prepare said pleadings during the month of September 2000 A.D.
This allowed Defendant and His Counsel barely enough time to reply to a single pleading (the seventh one), on the very same day as all seven pleadings were received by Defendant, via U.S. Mail.
Defendant chose to reply timely to what He considered to be the most important document yet received from the above persons.
See this Court’s ORDER SETTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE FOR ALL PENDING MOTIONS, filed on September 20, 2000 A.D., i.e. “Oppositions to all motions shall be filed and served on or before October 3, 2000.” [emphasis added]
Defendant also wishes to inform this Court that He still has not received certified copies of the Oaths of Office required of said persons by Article VI, Clause 3, in the U.S. Constitution.
Said Oaths of Office were properly requested by Defendant under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552.
It is a fraud upon this Court to attempt any appearance(s) without lawful powers of attorney and without Oaths of Office.
Transmitting pleadings via U.S. Mail, without lawful powers of attorney, and without Oaths of Office, are overt acts which constitute probable cause to charge the responsible persons with mail fraud.
REMEDY REQUESTED
Due to their obvious bad faith, to their lack of Oaths of Office, and also to their demonstrable lack of lawful powers of attorney to represent the named Plaintiffs UNITED STATES OF AMERICA in the instant case, Defendant respectfully requests an ORDER from this honorable Court, striking all six (6) of the pleadings itemized above, and sanctioning all three (3) persons for alleging falsely to represent the Plaintiffs UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and for acting in bad faith -- by deliberately imposing an unnecessary and prejudicial burden upon Defendant with their “batch” of pleadings, which said persons were not authorized to file in the first instance.
I, Donald E. Wishart, Sui Juris, hereby verify, under penalty of perjury, under the laws of the United States of America, without the “United States” (federal government), that the above statement of facts and laws is true and correct, according to the best of My current information, knowledge, and belief, so help Me God, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1746(1). See Supremacy Clause in pari materia with all provisions of Title 28, U.S.C. (Constitution, Laws and Treaties of the United States are supreme Law of the Land).
Dated: October 3, 2000 A.D.
Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Donald E. Wishart
Donald E. Wishart, Sui Juris
Citizen of California State,
Federal Witness and Victim (18 U.S.C. 1512, 1513)
(expressly not a “citizen of the United States” [sic])
See Pannill v. Roanoke, 252 F. 910, 914; 42 USCS 1983;
and Wadleigh v. Newhall, 136 F. 941 (CC Cal, 1905)
All Rights Reserved without Prejudice
I, Donald E. Wishart, 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):
NOTICE OF MOTION
AND
MOTION TO STRIKE
SIX
GOVERNMENT
PLEADINGS
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:
Office of the U.S. Attorney Office of the U.S. Attorney
280 South First St., Ste. 371 312 North Spring Street
San Jose [ZIP code exempt] Los Angeles [ZIP code exempt]
CALIFORNIA, USA CALIFORNIA, USA
Department of Justice, Tax Div. Department of Justice, Tax Div.
West. Criminal Enforcement Sec. West. Criminal Enforcement Sec.
600 “E” St., N.W., Room 5712 600 “E” St., N.W., Room 5712
Washington [ZIP code exempt] Washington [ZIP code exempt]
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, USA DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, USA
Federal Public Defender’s Office Internal Revenue Service
160 W. Santa Clara St., Ste. 575 55 South Market Street
San Jose [ZIP code exempt] San Jose [ZIP code exempt]
CALIFORNIA, USA CALIFORNIA, USA
Paul Camacho Don Hallenbeck
Internal Revenue Service Internal Revenue Service
55 South Market Street 55 South Market Street
San Jose [ZIP code exempt] San Jose [ZIP code exempt]
CALIFORNIA, USA CALIFORNIA, USA
Mel Steiner Colbert Tang
Internal Revenue Service Internal Revenue Service
55 South Market Street 55 South Market Street
San Jose [ZIP code exempt] San Jose [ZIP code exempt]
CALIFORNIA, USA CALIFORNIA, USA
Brian
Watson Ken
Whitmore
Internal Revenue Service Internal Revenue Service
55 South Market Street 55 South Market Street
San Jose [ZIP code exempt] San Jose [ZIP code exempt]
CALIFORNIA, USA CALIFORNIA, USA
Dan Sutherland Solicitor General
Internal Revenue Service U.S. Dept. of Justice
55 South Market Street 10th & Constitution, N.W.
San Jose [ZIP code exempt] Washington [ZIP code exempt]
CALIFORNIA, USA DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, USA
Bay View
Federal Bank Chief Counsel
Attention: Legal Department Internal Revenue Service
2121 South El Camino Real 1111 Constitution Ave., N.W.
San Mateo [ZIP code exempt] Washington [ZIP code exempt]
CALIFORNIA,
USA DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,
USA
Executed on October 3, 2000 A.D.
/s/ Donald E. Wishart
Donald E. Wishart, Sui Juris
Citizen of California State,
Federal Witness and Victim (18 U.S.C. 1512, 1513)
(expressly not a “citizen of the United States” [sic])
All Rights Reserved without Prejudice