Time: Fri Aug 01 05:54:14 1997
by primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id FAA15300;
Fri, 1 Aug 1997 05:52:40 -0700 (MST)
by usr10.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id FAA02728;
Fri, 1 Aug 1997 05:51:22 -0700 (MST)
Date: Fri, 01 Aug 1997 05:50:36 -0700
To: ignition-point@majordomo.pobox.com
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
Subject: SLS: How to sue a federal judge.
References: <Pine.SV4.3.94.970729133411.28054C-200000@capital.net>
<3.0.3.16.19970729113106.310743b4@pop.primenet.com>
#1: allege that the judge is paying taxes on his
pay, in violation of Article III, Section 1.
We have this on authority of C.J. Rehnquist,
when he spoke to the Law School of the
University of Arizona in January of 1997.
His statements there constitute probable cause.
See "The Lawless Rehnquist" in the Supreme
Law Library at URL:
http://www.supremelaw.com
#2: demand that the judge rescind his (her) W-4,
and replace it with an Affidavit of Exemption
from Withholding in Lieu of W-4, deadline of
21 days hence.
#3: if the judge refuses, recuse him (her) for cause,
in light of the holding in Lord v. Kelley (federal
judges are subject to the undue influence of the IRS);
taxpayer judges have an adverse conflict of interest,
in violation of 28 U.S.C. 455; we also have good reason
to believe they are accepting illegal kickbacks from IRS,
in violation of 41 U.S.C. 51 et seq. IRS is an alias for
Trust #62 domiciled in Puerto Rico; they are NOT a
bureau within the U.S. Department of the Treasury; see
all of Title 31, U.S.C., for proof.
#4: submit a FOIA request for a certified copy of the judge's
oath of office; this is normally protected by the blanket
exemption in FOIA for the entire judicial branch, but
such a blanket exemption is overly broad, particularly as
regards the Oath of Office, which is required by a
provision in the supreme Law, which is governed by the
Supermacy Clause.
#5: follow the FOIA request with an administrative NOTICE AND
DEMAND for same, to the Clerk of Court and to the
Administrative Office of the United States Courts;
if nobody produces the judge's Oath of Office, within
the deadlines established by FOIA, then sue the judge
in the District Court of the United States ("DCUS") via a
COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF, just
as Gilbertson did in his case; this will definitely
recuse the judge for adverse conflict of interest,
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 455; failure to produce oath of
office is grounds for ouster by Quo Warranto.
#6: once the FOIA deadlines have passed without production
of the oath of office, their silence, in the face of
proper and lawful demands, activates estoppel by
acquiescence, pursuant to Carmine v. Bowen; so, you
are thereby in a position to PREVENT admission of the
required oath of office, after expiration of the deadlines;
in other words, they cannot enter it into evidence,
even if they DO have it, because estoppel prevents them
from doing so (you would not have had to sue, if they
produced it timely; the cost of an unnecessary suit
is a tort). See "equitable estoppel" and "collateral
estoppel" in Black's Law Dictionary.
#7: after that, you refuse each and every order or ruling
which is issued by that judge, because 28 U.S.C. 455
requires that he (she) recuse himself; this language
is mandatory, not discretionary. Your grounds for
doing so have been well established in the record above.
There! I hope this helps. We have already done all of these
steps in Gilbertson's civil case versus the United States,
Mr. Rosenbaum (alleging to be a federal judge), et al.
/s/ Paul Mitchell
http://www.supremelaw.com
At 08:07 PM 7/31/97 -0500, you wrote:
>OK, so how do we get judges to observe this ruling?
>
>Jon D.
>Associate Producer; The Derry Brownfield Show
>Editor in chief; USA Journal Online
>Co-host; JD Live!
>USA Features Media Company
>
>On Tue, 29 Jul 1997 11:31:06 -0700 Paul Andrew Mitchell
>[address in tool bar] writes:
>>U.S. v. Gaudin held in 1995 that juries
>>are empowered to determine relevance,
>>not the judge. Juries retain their common
>>law powers under the Tenth Amendment, because
>>they are institutions which pre-date the
>>ratification of the U.S. Constitution.
>>They had to exist prior to its ratification,
>>because they are mentioned in the Sixth and
>>Seventh Amendments.
>>
>>
>>/s/ Paul Mitchell
>>http://www.supremelaw.com
>>
>>
>>
>>At 06:24 PM 7/29/97 GMT, you wrote:
>>>********************************************
>>>>
>>>> White Supremacist Takes the Fifth
>>>>
>>>> 97-07-16 23:54:20 EDT
>>>> The Associated Press
>>>>
>>>> By PAUL QUEARY
>>>> OKLAHOMA CITY (AP) - A white supremacist said he took the
>>Fifth
>>>> Amendment when questioned Wednesday by a grand jury investigating
>>>> claims of a larger conspiracy in the Oklahoma City bombing.
>>>> Dennis Mahon, of Tulsa, who operates a Dial-a-Racist hot
>>line
>>>> and is a member of the White Aryan Resistance, has denied
>>>> involvement in the bombing.
>>>> But he said he refused to answer at least some questions
>>unless
>>>> granted immunity from prosecution, and was issued a new subpoena
>>>> requiring him to appear before the panel on Aug. 15.
>>>> ``It is my greatest desire to answer all their questions,
>>even
>>>> if it takes days,'' Mahon said in a telephone interview several
>>>> hours after his appearance.
>>>> Mahon's ex-girlfriend, former federal informant Carol Howe,
>>told
>>>> authorities after the bombing that she had overheard Mahon and
>>>> German national Andreas Strassmeir discuss bombing federal
>>>> buildings in the months before the attack. Mahon dismisses Ms.
>>Howe
>>>> as a pathological liar and a drug abuser.
>>>> Attorneys for Timothy McVeigh, who was convicted and
>>sentenced
>>>> to death for the bombing, tried to call Ms. Howe as a witness
>>>> during his trial, but the judge ruled her testimony irrelevant.
>>>>
>>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
>>>
>>>What a GEORGEOUS EXAMPLE! A TEXTBOOK CASE
>>>of PURE PRPPAGANDA!
>>>
>>>
>>>Observe: the article states:
>>>
>>>> Mahon dismisses Ms. Howe
>>>> as a pathological liar and a drug abuser.
>>>
>>>and continues
>>>
>>>
>>>> Attorneys for Timothy McVeigh, who was convicted and sentenced
>>>> to death for the bombing, tried to call Ms. Howe as a witness
>>>> during his trial, **** but the judge ruled her testimony
>>irrelevant. ***
>>>
>>>---------------------------------------
>>>
>>>What MUST BE ASKED: WHY DO WE ACCECPT SUCH TRIPE?
>>>
>>>this
>>>> Mahon dismisses Ms. Howe
>>>> as a pathological liar and a drug abuser.
>>>is a simple *ad hominum* : Mahon has to SHOW this.
>>>
>>>If she was a pathological liar and drug abuser WHY did the FBI
>>>put her on as an informant? This does not scour, as Abe Lincoln
>>>would've said.
>>>
>>>WHY don't people ask Mahon: "YEAH? WHAT MAKES YOU THINK THAT?"
>>>
>>>
>>>this
>>>> Attorneys for Timothy McVeigh, who was convicted and sentenced
>>>> to death for the bombing, tried to call Ms. Howe as a witness
>>>> during his trial, **** but the judge ruled her testimony
>>irrelevant. ***
>>>is obstruction of justice, and as done BY a JUDGE is MALFEASANCE.
>>>The JURY decides; not the judge, and We the People have a RIGHT
>>>to HEAR what is SAID.
>>>
>>> "It is error alone which requires the protection
>>> of government. The truth can stand by itself."
>>>
>>> (Thomas Jefferson).
>>>
>>> End
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>-----------------
>>>To subscribe or unsubscribe, email
>>>majordomo@majordomo.pobox.com with the message:
>>> subscribe ignition-point
>>> or
>>> unsubscribe ignition-point
>>> http://ic.net/~celano/ip/
>>>
>>>
>>
>>========================================================================
>>Paul Andrew Mitchell : Counselor at Law, federal
>>witness
>>B.A., Political Science, UCLA; M.S., Public Administration, U.C.
>>Irvine
>>
>>tel: (520) 320-1514: machine; fax: (520) 320-1256:
>>24-hour/day-night
>>email: [address in tool bar] : using Eudora Pro 3.0.3 on 586
>>CPU
>>website: http://www.supremelaw.com : visit the Supreme Law Library
>>now
>>ship to: c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776 : this is free speech, at its
>>best
>> Tucson, Arizona state : state zone, not the federal
>>zone
>> Postal Zone 85719/tdc : USPS delays first class w/o
>>this
>>
>>As agents of the Most High, we came here to establish justice. We
>>shall
>>not leave, until our mission is accomplished and justice reigns
>>eternal.
>>========================================================================
>>[This text formatted on-screen in Courier 11, non-proportional
>>spacing.]
>>
>>
>>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------
>>To subscribe or unsubscribe, email
>>majordomo@majordomo.pobox.com with the message:
>> subscribe ignition-point
>> or
>> unsubscribe ignition-point
>> http://ic.net/~celano/ip/
>>
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------
>To subscribe or unsubscribe, email
>majordomo@majordomo.pobox.com with the message:
> subscribe ignition-point
> or
> unsubscribe ignition-point
> http://ic.net/~celano/ip/
>
>
========================================================================
Paul Andrew Mitchell : Counselor at Law, federal witness
B.A., Political Science, UCLA; M.S., Public Administration, U.C. Irvine
tel: (520) 320-1514: machine; fax: (520) 320-1256: 24-hour/day-night
email: [address in tool bar] : using Eudora Pro 3.0.3 on 586 CPU
website: http://www.supremelaw.com : visit the Supreme Law Library now
ship to: c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776 : this is free speech, at its best
Tucson, Arizona state : state zone, not the federal zone
Postal Zone 85719/tdc : USPS delays first class w/o this
As agents of the Most High, we came here to establish justice. We shall
not leave, until our mission is accomplished and justice reigns eternal.
========================================================================
[This text formatted on-screen in Courier 11, non-proportional spacing.]
Return to Table of Contents for
Supreme Law School: E-mail