Time: Tue Nov 12 19:06:38 1996 To: Liberty Law From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar] Subject: Richard Ginn, applicant Cc: Richard Ginn <ginn@cornell.edu> Bcc: Dear Liberty Law, I wish to sponsor Richard Ginn to the Liberty Law email list. Richard and I met when he responded to one of my broadcasts, and we quickly discovered lots of common interests. He then helped me extensively with the White House Constitution, which we obtained from the President's Assistant Counsel, in response to a FOIA request. Richard and I were able to divide up the labor with great ease, and he did follow through promptly, and with great ease. He is very familiar with Pretty Good Privacy (PGP), and he encrypted the White House Constitution to guarantee integrity before making it available generally to the Internet. Since then, he has asked me to help develop a private email list to discuss some important legal research which he is currently doing. Without going into details, I can say that it is something which Liberty Law would do very well to consider. I will leave it to Richard to fill in the rest of the details. I can forward to you a summary, if he will provide it to me here. Richard, are you listening? My only condition here is that we admit Richard, and begin to grapple with the major questions he will bring to the list, by raising our standards of discourse a little bit higher than they have been heretofore. "Contention before Substance" is a recent criticism of our style, and we will do well to take that criticism to heart. I believe it is well deserved. So, I wish to request that we admit Richard, and discuss his issues, but only on condition that we do so with the highest level of discourse possible. This means no ad hominems, at the very least, okay? Tom Clark, take it away. /s/ Paul Mitchell Copy: Richard Ginn At 06:32 PM 11/12/96 -0500, you wrote: >Paul, > >Thankyou for offering to sponsor me to the libertylaw mailing list, I >would like to join to see what it is about, and to ask if the other list >members would be interested in carrying the conversation I am having with >a few other people regarding the matter of constitutional jurisdiction >and its application to ending the war on drugs, traffic courts, and other >abuses. > >There are 2 other main people who are interested in having me start a >list for this purpose, but we could also hold the conversation on llaw if >that works for everyone. > >We plan to cover theory and practice, and also the origins of the problem >back to the Titles of Nobility Amendment (rediscovered by one of the 2 >who want to start a list with me). > >What do you think? If we start a separate list I would like to invite >you to join us, if we join llaw we may have either a bigger audience >(participating) or more people just listening... > >Richard. > >
Return to Table of Contents for
Supreme Law School: E-mail