Posted by Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S. on April 06, 1998 at 20:55:34:
In Reply to: Re: Forclosures posted by 89 Gladstone St. East Boston, MA 02128 on April 06, 1998 at 11:33:56:
: : : I am working with several groups in the Kingdom of Hawaii who are trying to fend off a de facto "government" wave of forclosures and property siezures which have swept through the Islands. Is there any remedy? We need help.
We always begin our legal foundation with
a demand that ALL government actors, who have
touched the case in any way, produce certified
copies of their requisite oaths of office,
transmitted via U.S. Mail (VERY IMPORTANT).
For state government officials, these oaths
are required by federal law (4 U.S.C. 101).
Thus, you can eventually remove your case
into the DCUS, on the federal question that
arises from their failure to produce a valid
oath of office. Now, listen carefully:
even IF they DO produce an oath of office, it is
fatally defective for exhibiting a commitment
to support non-existent provisions, e.g.
so-called 14th amendment is controverted by
the undisputed facts in Dyett v. Turner;
16th amendment was controvertedby undisputed
testimony in People v. Boxer.
So, as part of your demand for their oaths
of office, include also a demand that they
exhibit the exact provisions of the
U.S. Constitution which they have agreed
to support. Couple this strategy with all
other relief which you need, e.g. temporary
injunction pending discovery of valid oaths
of office. See Gilbertson's OPENING BRIEF
in the Supreme Law Library, which contains
the pertinent authorities for invoking
Quo Warranto, in the event that they fail to
produce any oaths of office whatsoever.
A 30-day deadline is reasonable, beyond
which you can invoke the Tweel fraud doctrine,
and the Carmine estoppel doctrine. In this
particular instance, the estoppel doctrine
will give you a basis for striking from the
court record, any and all oaths which are
proffered AFTER your resonable deadline.
Striking them from the record is tantamount
to showing that they DO NOT EXIST! Also,
all uncertified documents are inadmissible.
Couple this oath strategy with a demand
that these government "actors" produce
all competent waivers of your fundamental
Right to due process of law, pursuant to
the Fifth Amendment. You will know if
you ever waived such an important Right.
You very probably have NOT DONE SO!
"Waivers of fundamental rights must be
knowingly intelligent acts, done with
sufficient awareness of the relevant
circumstances and likely consequences."
Brady v. U.S. Finally, read the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights,
and the International Covenant on Civil
and Political Rights, for a ton of important
laws rendered supreme Law by the Supremacy
Clause in the U.S. Constitution.
For a quick intro into federal courts,
read "Karma and the Federal Courts" right
here in the Supreme Law Library.
Above all, DON'T FALTER!
/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Counselor at Law, Federal Witness
and Private Attorney General
p.s. The OPENING BRIEF has a great authority
from Hawaii concerning the consequences which
the oath of office has upon the legal force and
effect of constitutional guarantees, e.g.
due process of law.
Post a Followup