Time: Wed Aug 06 19:19:20 1997
by usr10.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id TAA29179;
Tue, 5 Aug 1997 19:16:00 -0700 (MST)
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 1997 19:15:02 -0700
To: sew@valint.net
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
Subject: SLS: Where are Janet Reno's credentials? (fwd)
References: <33D90868.4015D3E0@prodigy.net>
<33D90868.4015D3E0@prodigy.net>
Paul Mitchell's comments infra:
At 10:21 PM 8/2/97 -0700, you wrote:
>Fri, 25 Jul 1997 15:11:21 -0500
> Brooks Martin <haze11@PRODIGY.NET> wrote:
>
>>Some of you may find this interesting. Those of you who have spoken to
>>Mr. Mitchell know he is _very_ passionate about his beliefs. I took
>>the
>>time to verify some of this story myself. Especially the part about
>>redirecting the FOIA request for Janet Reno's credentials etc. from the
>>Dept. of Justice to the PUBLIC LIBRARY(?) This is true folks, if you
>>submit a FOIA request to the Dept. of Justice for a copy of Janet Reno's
>>sworn oath of office and her other credentials you will be refered to
>>the
>>Public Library. Don't ask why. I don't have that info yet.
>
>Here's my guess.
>
>The FOIA officer is _interpreting_ the Mitchell's request to be
>a request for the _text_ of the oath, rather than a copy of the
>Reno's executed oath. That information will be found in the US
>Code, available in the public library.
Not true. We have received many copies of
executed Appointment Affidavits from the
Department of Justice. We have found all
of them to be unacceptable, because our
FOIA requests specifically required
_certified_ copies of said Affidavits.
DOJ now refuses to certify these crucial
documents. Therefore, the photocopies
which they do send out, are not admissible
and, for this reason, are essentially worthless.
The end result is being litigated right now,
as I write this, before the 8th Circuit,
because a failure to produce evidence of a
proper oath of office is grounds for ouster
by Quo Warranto. The 8th Circuit now
knows this, because we have told them so.
/s/ Paul Mitchell
http://www.supremelaw.com
>
>Because _part_ of the information is available elsewhere under
>this _interpetation_, they are using it as a slimy excuse to can
>the entire request.
>
>Just a guess, which is not as interesting as some thoeries.
Nice guess, but we are way beyond "guessing"
at this stage of the game.
One of the main reasons why I believe they
are now stalling in the face of these
FOIA requests for credentials, is that
we took the next step in the Grand Jury
case in Arizona last year. Once an
Appointment Affidavit is entered into
evidence, using Rule 201(d) of the
Federal Rules of Evidence, for example,
the Constitution and its exact provisions
become a matter of evidence, and of equity.
I have made no secret of my intentions to
sue out the exact provisions of the
Constitution which is mentioned in the
language of 5 U.S.C. 3331, which language
is repeated on these Appointment Affidavits.
Here is the question we plan to put to a
competent and qualified jury, for example:
"Do the facts support a legal conclusion
that the 16th amendment was not lawfully
ratified?"
A jury can be convened to issue declaratory
relief on this subject, but the jury should
be one convened under state law, because
28 U.S.C. 2201 has a bar against declaratory
judgments, when the subject matter is federal
income taxes. The state courts have original
jurisdiction, pursuant to the explicit Reservations
which Congress attached to the two human Rights
treaties now on the books. Treaties are supreme
Law, pursuant to the Supremacy Clause.
/s/ Paul Mitchell
http://www.supremelaw.com
But
>it's important to sytematically eliminate the possibilities in
>this FOIA game, as I understand it.
>
>A more specific and limited request might turn the trick. At
>least they could not refer you to the library.
>
>Bureaucrats have difficulty answering more than one question at
>a time, in my experience.
>
>Steve Washam
>
>###
>
>
>>
>>Just a thought, what if items 1-5 of the Freedom of Information Act
>>Request, contained below, don't exist. Why is the Dept. of Justice
>>stating that the request designated organizations OUTSIDE of the
>>Depatment of Justice? Why does the reply from the Dept. of Justice
>>also state that the FOIA/PA request apply only to the records and
>>agencies within the Executive Branch of the Federal Government?
>>Are we to conclude that Janet Reno is part of an agency outside
>>of the Executive Branch of the Federal Government?
>>
>>
>>Brooks Martin
>>
>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>Paul Andrew Mitchell wrote:
>>
>>> Brooks,
>>>
>>> Yes, I faxed to her, and to the White House,
>>> a NOTICE OF SPECIFIC INTENT TO EXECUTE
>>> CITIZEN'S ARREST, AND DEMAND FOR IMMEDIATE
>>> RESIGNATION, several weeks ago.
>>>
>>> /s/ Paul Mitchell
>>> http://www.supremelaw.com
>>>
>>> At 01:32 PM 7/25/97 -0500, you wrote:
>>> >Paul,
>>> >
>>> >I was wondering if you had followed up on this already. BTW, the
>>> >MIME encoding works fine on my end.
>>> >
>>> >Regards,
>>> >Brooks Martin
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>
>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>Submitted to the LRT list by a member of that list. These were
>>originally
>>sent by Paul Mitchell to another list I believe. I'm not sure.
>>
>>> >>
>>> >> I have executed FOIA requests for the official credentials
>>> >> of the alleged Attorney General of the United States, Janet
>>> >> Reno. My original request was dated May 2, 1997; appeal
>>> >> dated May 17, 1997 and Courtesy Notice dated May 27, 1997.
>>> >>
>>> >> The following letter was posted to me on May 29, 1997.
>>> >> This constitutes the respect our Just-Us Department has
>>> >> for *their own* federal laws. Pay careful notice to where
>>> >> they directed me to "resubmit" the FOIA request.
>>> >>
>>> >> ---
>>> >>
>>> >> U.S. Department of Justice
>>> >> Washington, D.C.
>>> >>
>>> >> May 28, 1997
>>> >>
>>> >> [my name]
>>> >>
>>> >> Dear [me]:
>>> >>
>>> >> Your Freedom of Information Act/Privacy Act (FOIA/PA)
>>> >> request was received by this office which serves as the
>>> >> receipt and referral unit for FOIA/PA requests addressed
>>> >> to the Department of Justice.
>>> >>
>>> >> The Freedom of information and Privacy Act apply only to
>>> >> the records of agencies within the Executive Branch of
>>> >> the Federal Government.
>>> >>
>>> >> Your request designated organizations outside of the
>>> >> Department of Justice and will have to be resubmitted by
>>> >> you directly to them.*
>>> >>
>>> >> Sincerely,
>>> >>
>>> >> /s/ Betty S. Clark for
>>> >> Benjamin F. Burrell, Director
>>> >> Facilities and Administrative
>>> >> Services Staff
>>> >> Justice Management Division
>>> >>
>>> >> *Public Library
>>> >> Tucson, Arizona 85719
>>> >>
>>> >> ---end of letter---
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> [This text is formatted in Courier 11, non-proportional spacing.]
>>> >>
>>> >> -----------------------------cut here----------------------------
>>> >>
>>> >> c/o 2509 N. Campbell
>>> >> Tucson [zip code exempt]
>>> >> ARIZONA REPUBLIC
>>> >>
>>> >> May 2, 1997
>>> >>
>>> >> FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT REQUEST
>>> >>
>>> >> Disclosure Officer
>>> >> Office of the Attorney General
>>> >> Department of Justice
>>> >> 10th and Constitution, N.W.
>>> >> Washington [zip code exempt]
>>> >> DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
>>> >>
>>> >> Subject: Credentials of Janet Reno [sic]
>>> >> "Attorney General" [sic]
>>> >> Department of Justice
>>> >> Washington, D.C.
>>> >>
>>> >> Dear Disclosure Officer:
>>> >>
>>> >> This is a request under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C.
>>> >> 552 et seq., and regulations thereunder. This is My firm promise
>>> >> to pay fees and costs for locating, duplicating, and mailing to
>>> >> Me certified copies of the records requested below.
>>> >>
>>> >> If some of this request is exempt from release, please furnish Me
>>> >> with those portions reasonably segregable. I am requiring
>>> >> certified copies of the documents requested, in lieu of personal
>>> >> inspection of same.
>>> >>
>>> >> Admissible documents requested:
>>> >>
>>> >> 1. Certified copy of the solemn oath of office of one
>>> >> named Janet Reno, as required by 5 U.S.C. 3331 and by
>>> >> Article VI, Clause 3, of the Constitution for the
>>> >> United States of America, as lawfully amended.
>>> >>
>>> >> 2. Certified copy of her fidelity bond or surety bond.
>>> >>
>>> >> 3. Certified copy of her Appointment Affidavit, signed and
>>> >> witnessed, for the position she currently claims to
>>> >> occupy. (This is an OMB-approved form.)
>>> >>
>>> >> 4. Certified copy of the formal delegation of authority,
>>> >> beginning with the President, linking all officials in
>>> >> the chain of command between him and the position she
>>> >> currently claims to occupy.
>>> >>
>>> >> 5. Certified copy of her license to practice law in the
>>> >> District of Columbia, if any.
>>> >>
>>> >> The requested records are not exempt from disclosure because
>>> >> they:
>>> >>
>>> >> [Please see next page.]
>>> >>
>>> >> -----------------------------cut here----------------------------
>>> >>
>>> >> (A) could not reasonably be expected to interfere with law
>>> >> enforcement proceedings;
>>> >>
>>> >> (B) would not deprive a person of a right to a fair trial
>>> >> or an impartial adjudication;
>>> >>
>>> >> (C) could not reasonably be expected to constitute an
>>> >> unwarranted invasion of personal property;
>>> >>
>>> >> (D) could not reasonably be expected to disclose the
>>> >> identity of a confidential source;
>>> >>
>>> >> (E) would not disclose techniques and procedures for law
>>> >> enforcement investigations or prosecutions, and would
>>> >> not disclose guidelines for law enforcement
>>> >> investigations or prosecutions;
>>> >>
>>> >> (F) could not reasonably be expected to endanger the life
>>> >> or physical safety of any individual.
>>> >>
>>> >> [see Exemption 7 in FOIA]
>>> >>
>>> >> If you are not the correct person to whom this Freedom of
>>> >> Information Act Request should be directed, kindly forward it to
>>> >> the correct person.
>>> >>
>>> >> Time is of the essence. If you have any questions about your
>>> >> rights and obligations under 5 U.S.C. 552, may we recommend that
>>> >> you contact the office of the Attorney General in Washington,
>>> >> D.C., for immediate assistance.
>>> >>
>>> >> Please see U.S. Postal Service Publication #221 for addressing
>>> >> instructions.
>>> >>
>>> >> Thank you very much for your consideration, and for your timely
>>> >> obedience to the controlling laws in this matter, specifically
>>> >> the Freedom of Information Act and the Constitution for the
>>> >> United States of America, as lawfully amended.
>>> >>
>>> >> Respectfully submitted,
>>> >>
>>> >> /s/ [me]
>>> >>
>>> >> Citizen of Arizona state
>>> >> all rights reserved without prejudice
>>> >>
>>> >> copy: Janet Reno
>>> >> Department of Justice
>>> >> 10th and Constitution, N.W.
>>> >> Washington
>>> >> DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
>>> >>
>>> >> # # #
>>> >>
>>> >> -----------------------------cut here----------------------------
>>> >>
>>> >> c/o 2509 N. Campbell
>>> >> Tucson, Arizona state
>>> >> zip code exempt
>>> >> May 17, 1997
>>> >>
>>> >> FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT APPEAL
>>> >>
>>> >> Disclosure Officer
>>> >> Office of the Attorney General
>>> >> Department of Justice
>>> >> 10th and Constitution, N.W.
>>> >> Washington [zip code exempt]
>>> >> DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
>>> >>
>>> >> Dear Disclosure Officer:
>>> >>
>>> >> This is an appeal under the Freedom of Information Act.
>>> >>
>>> >> On May 2, 1997, I requested documents under the Freedom of
>>> >> Information Act (see attached). To date, the requested documents
>>> >> have not been produced.
>>> >>
>>> >> I hereby appeal your failure to produce the requested documents.
>>> >>
>>> >> The documents that were withheld must be disclosed under the FOIA
>>> >> because the original Thirteenth Amendment prevents government
>>> >> officials from exercising privileges of a nobility class, such as
>>> >> being exempt from the principles of open government and freedom
>>> >> of information. Evidence of the original Thirteenth Amendment
>>> >> has been filed with the Foreperson of the Grand Jury and with the
>>> >> Clerk of the United States District Court in Tucson, Arizona
>>> >> state (a Republic). See also Colorado Records Custodian.
>>> >>
>>> >> Disclosure of the documents which I requested is in the public
>>> >> interest because the information, and the procedure for obtaining
>>> >> the information, are likely to contribute significantly to public
>>> >> understanding of the operations and activities of government and
>>> >> are not primarily in My commercial interest.
>>> >>
>>> >> Moreover, the information requested will help to improve public
>>> >> confidence in the integrity of the United States (federal
>>> >> government), or to confirm that there are persons attempting to
>>> >> exercise executive and judicial branch powers in America without
>>> >> any authority or jurisdiction whatsoever. See U.S. v. Lopez.
>>> >>
>>> >> Thank you for your careful consideration of this appeal.
>>> >>
>>> >> Respectfully submitted,
>>> >>
>>> >> /s/ [me]
>>> >>
>>> >> Citizen of Arizona state
>>> >> all rights reserved without prejudice
>>> >>
>>> >> # # #
>>> >>
>>> >> -----------------------------cut here----------------------------
>>> >>
>>> >> c/o 2509 N. Campbell
>>> >> Tucson [zip code exempt]
>>> >> ARIZONA REPUBLIC
>>> >>
>>> >> May 27, 1997
>>> >>
>>> >> COURTESY NOTICE
>>> >>
>>> >> Janet Reno
>>> >> U.S. Department of Justice
>>> >> 10th and Constitution, N.W.
>>> >> Washington [zip code exempt]
>>> >> DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
>>> >>
>>> >> Subject: FOIA request and appeal
>>> >> for your credentials
>>> >>
>>> >> Dear Ms. Reno:
>>> >>
>>> >> This is a courtesy notice to you, and to all of those government
>>> >> officers, employees, and agents who rely upon formal delegation
>>> >> of authority from the office of the U.S. Attorney General to
>>> >> perfect their actions under authority of the United States
>>> >> (federal government), that the final deadline for production of
>>> >> your official credentials will fall on Monday, June 2, 1997,
>>> >> at 5:00 p.m. Notice to principals is notice to agents.
>>> >>
>>> >> Our original request for your credentials was submitted to you
>>> >> via first class United States Mail on May 2, 1997 pursuant
>>> >> to the Freedom of Information Act ("FOIA"), 5 U.S.C. 552 et seq.
>>> >> Our administrative appeal for said credentials, given your
>>> >> failure to produce same in response to Our proper request dated
>>> >> May 2, 1997, was submitted to you via first class United
>>> >> States Mail on May 17, 1997.
>>> >>
>>> >> The final deadline for production of your official credentials
>>> >> falls officially on June 2, 1997 at end of the working day
>>> >> (5:00 p.m., Eastern Standard Time). Beyond that deadline, Our
>>> >> administrative remedies will have been exhausted, and the
>>> >> doctrine of estoppel by acquiescence will be activated formally,
>>> >> finally, and forever.
>>> >>
>>> >> If I need to explain to you the far-reaching implications that
>>> >> will issue from your failure to produce, among other things, the
>>> >> Oath of Office required of you by Article VI, Clause 3, in the
>>> >> Constitution for the United States of America, as lawfully
>>> >> amended, then Our nation is in much worse shape than I ever
>>> >> thought possible heretofore.
>>> >>
>>> >> Respectfully submitted,
>>> >>
>>> >> /s/ [me]
>>> >>
>>> >> Citizen of Arizona state
>>> >>
>>> >> # # #
>>> >>
>>> >> -----------------------------cut here----------------------------
>>> >>
>>> >> ================================================================
>>> >>
>>> >> All Rights Reserved Without Prejudice FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS GROUP
>>> >> For Privacy: social security number rescission and consultation;
>>> >> pure contractual trusts; gold-backed banking; offshore banking;
>>> >> International Business Company formation; resident agent service
>>> >> mailto:grscott@primenet.com
>>> >> ================================================================
>>> >>
>>> >> "Hey, YOU, don't even *think* about pickin' my pocket!"
>>> >>
>>> >> "Privacy is a fundamental Right. Assert it."
>>> >>
>>> >> =============================================
>>> >> ==========================
>>> >> To subscribe: send a message to the LRT_list@sportsmen.net
>>> >> with the word SUBSCRIBE in the subject/topic field. Use
>>> UNSUBSCRIBE
>>> >> to
>>> >> remove yourself from the list. Questions/comments/problems?
>>> >> email: Not Moderated@sportsmen.net or listmgmt@sportsmen.net
>>> >> For info about this system and its lists email: info@sportsmen.net
>>> >>
>>> >> ==================================================================
>>> >> =====
>>> >> via: Sportsman's Paradise~~Online 602-922-1639 - www.sportsmen.net
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>> =
>>> ======================================================================
>>>
>>> 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.]
>
>
>
>
========================================================================
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