++++++++++++++++++ EBAY ITEMS 4 SALE ++++++++++++++++++

WikiLeaks Stratfor Emails Contain Malware Finds System Administrator, Requests Help

http://eeng.net/index.php/14-system-administrator-finds-wikileaks-stratfor-emails-contain-malware-requests-help

August 1, 2015 in Current Affairs | Permalink

IRS Must Verify Assessments: see IRC 6065, 6330(c)(1)

http://taxcourthelp.net/irs-must-verify-assessments/

IRS Must Verify Assessments

By Lysander on 28 May 2011

Tax Court ruled that IRS Appeals officers must verify that a proper assessment was made in a CDP hearing. 

Even if the taxpayer doesn’t raise the issue until he is in Tax Court, the IRS must verify the assessment.

This is the Case: Hoyle v. Commissioner, 131 T.C. No. 13 (12-3-2008)(2008-12-02)

SUMMARY: The Tax Court claimed jurisdiction over whether an assessment was properly made 

even though the taxpayer didn’t raise the issue at his CDP hearing.  

IRC 6330(c)(1) requires the IRS to show that an assessment was properly made 

even if the taxpayer doesn’t bring it up at the hearing.

 

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/6330  (c)(1)

(c) Matters considered at hearing
In the case of any hearing conducted under this section—

(1) Requirement of investigation
The appeals officer shall at the hearing obtain verification from the Secretary 
that the requirements of any applicable law or administrative procedure have been met.

THANKS!

I've been saying that for YEARS now!!

http://supremelaw.org/letters/FOIA.Request.template.htm

(3)     the procedurally proper Assessment Certificatedated and signed under the penalties of perjury by a duly authorized Assessment Officer, which corresponds to each “Assessment” alleged above, and which demonstrates full compliance with the federal statutes at IRC §§ 6212-6213(c) (“deficiency ... shall be assessed”), IRC §§ 6201-6203 (“Secretary is required”, “Secretary shall”), and IRC § 6065, the court decision in Brafman v. U.S., 384 F.2d 863 (5th Cir. 1967), the implementing federal regulation at 26 CFR 301.6203-1, and all pertinent provisions of the Internal Revenue Manual (“IRM”) now rendered enforceable by the IRS Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998 (“RRA98”);


/s/ Paul


Sincerely yours,
/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Private Attorney General, 18 U.S.C. 1964

http://supremelaw.org/crowd.funding.option.htm  (Join Us!)
http://supremelaw.org/support.guidelines.htm (Policy + Guidelines)

All Rights Reserved (cf. UCC 1-308 https://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/1/1-308)

On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 7:14 PM, <ezrider909@safe-mail.net> wrote:

___

See also:

http://supremelaw.org/cc/gakoumis/notice.of.intervention.htm


The relevant Federal court decisions that bear on the facts as summarized above are sampled as follows (emphases added infra):

 

Even if a taxpayer waives right to prepayment litigation in Tax Court by not acting within 90-day period after deficiency notice and taxpayer does not voluntarily pay tax, government must first send notice and demand letter and then wait ten days before it levies on taxpayer’s property in the normal, as opposed to jeopardy case.

 

[Schreck v. U.S., 301 F.Supp. 1265]

[USDC/D. Maryland 1969]

 

Appropriate remedy for federal government’s error in assessing tax deficiency without first issuing a required notice of deficiency to taxpayers was order voiding tax assessment itself, and not merely the government’s tax lien.

 

[Snyder v. IRS, 337 B.R. 542]

[USDC/D. Maryland 2005]

 

Where IRS disallowed certain miscellaneous itemized deductions claimed on income tax return and made assessment based thereonwithout issuing notice of deficiency, such assessment was invalid, and levy could not proceed.

 

[Freije v. C.I.R., 125 T.C. 14]

[U.S. Tax Court 2005, unreported]

 

Taxpayer could sue to enjoin IRS from seizing his wages, until it had first complied with statutory notice of deficiencyrequirements, under exception to Anti-Injunction Act authorizing injunction to prohibit assessment or levy when taxpayer has not received notice of deficiency.

 

[Heun v. Williams, 864 F.Supp. 169]

[USDC/W.D. Oklahoma 1994]

 

Unless government has first pursued formal deficiency procedures, no income tax deficiency can be assessed and no levy or court proceeding for collecting income tax deficiency may be begun or prosecuted, and if government essays to do so, the making of such assessment or levy may be enjoined by a proceeding in proper court ....

 

[U.S. v. Bonaguro, 294 F.Supp. 750]

[USDC/E.D. New York 1968]

 

Where no tax deficiency has been asserted against one whose property is seized, a suit against the government for injunctive relief seems peculiarly appropriate, for the aggrieved party, not being an alleged tax delinquent, would have no opportunity in the ordinary channels of tax litigation to contest the validity of the government’s assessment.

 

[Floyd v. U.S., 361 F.2d 312]

[(4th Cir. 1966)]
 
[end quote]


Sincerely yours,
/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Private Attorney General, 18 U.S.C. 1964

http://supremelaw.org/crowd.funding.option.htm  (Join Us!)
http://supremelaw.org/support.guidelines.htm (Policy + Guidelines)

All Rights Reserved (cf. UCC 1-308 https://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/1/1-308)

August 1, 2015 in Current Affairs | Permalink

Private Attorney General re: The State Bar of California operates like a criminal enterprise.

Truth vs. NEW$, Inc.: Pastor Don interviews Private Attorney General re: The State Bar of California operates like a criminal enterprise.

  e.g.:
LIST OF AUTHORITIES
 
Plaintiff cites the following authorities in support of His VERIFIED CRIMINAL COMPLAINT, to wit:  Powell v. Alabama, 287 U.S. 45, 73 (1932) (“attorneys are officers of the court”);  Malautea v. Suzuki Motor Co., 987 F.2d 1536, 1546 (11th Cir 1993) (“All attorneys, as officers of the court ....”);  Pumphrey v. K.W. Thompson Tool Co., 62 F.3d 1128, 1130 (9th Cir. 1995) (see section “II.”);  “Let Us Be Officers of the Court,” by Hon. Marvin E. Aspen, 83 ABA Journal 94 (1997);  and FRCP Rule 1, Advisory Committee Notes, 1993 Amendments (“as officers of the court, attorneys share ....”).


Sincerely yours,
/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Private Attorney General, 18 U.S.C. 1964

http://supremelaw.org/crowd.funding.option.htm  (Join Us!)
http://supremelaw.org/support.guidelines.htm (Policy + Guidelines)

All Rights Reserved (cf. UCC 1-308 https://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/1/1-308)

August 1, 2015 in Current Affairs | Permalink

Doris Kearns Goodwin had sexual relations with the Murderer of John Kennedy: Lyndon Baines Johnson

Doris Kearns Goodwin has Fucked the Murderer of John Kennedy: Lyndon Baines Johnson

From Robert Morrow     512-306-1510

So sick of seeing Doris Kearns Goodwin constantly on Charlie Rose and glorifying Lucifer Before Jesus: http://www.charlierose.com/search

On the last show in July 2015, glorifying Lyndon Johnson over passing Medicare, Charlie Rose kept asking a grinning, flushed red-faced Doris Kearns Goodwin “What was the nature of your relationship with Lyndon Johnson?” Doris would not say how acquainted she was with “Jumbo,” as she squirmed about in her seat.

Phil Nelson does a good job of covering this in his fabulous book LBJ: From Mastermind to the Colossus in the section “Lyndon Johnson’s Odd Relationship with Doris Kearns:”

Phil Nelson: https://books.google.com/books?id=k7VfBgAAQBAJ&pg=PT289&dq=phil+nelson+on+doris+kearns+goodwin&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CCcQ6AEwAGoVChMIvO6cqoeHxwIVDemACh1diwV4#v=onepage&q=phil%20nelson%20on%20doris%20kearns%20goodwin&f=false

Google image of LBJ and cum bucket Doris Kearns: https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&authuser=0&site=imghp&tbm=isch&source=hp&biw=985&bih=636&q=lyndon+johnson+doris+kearns&oq=lyndon+johnson+doris+kearns&gs_l=img.3...2469.9180.0.9369.33.13.0.19.4.0.124.1057.9j4.13.0....0...1ac.1.64.img..17.16.1017.7iYTgWqKM-g

 

Sycophantic LBJ biographer Doris Kearns Goodwin was having an affair with Lyndon Johnson

LBJ pressured Kearns for sex, later asked her to MARRY him!

Was LBJ biographer Doris Kearns having an affair with Lyndon Johnson? Here is the response of a well known JFK assassination researcher when I posed that question to him: “No doubt about that one ….” Sally Quinn had said some rather provocative things about Doris Kearns-Goodwin's relationship with LBJ in those "final years."  Here is a reference to that in a Wash Post article (“A Tale of Hearts and Minds, 8/24/75) alluded to in the LA Times in 2002:

Goodwin's first dip in the waters of infamy came in 1967, when, having received a White House fellowship, she was photographed dancing with Lyndon Johnson at a reception. The story turned on the fact that the president's dance partner, then Doris Kearns, had just co-written a piece for the New Republic under the headline: "How to Remove L.B.J. in 1968."

Later, in the early 1970s, Kearns and Richard Goodwin, lovers but not yet married, set off a literary scandal that attracted national media attention. It involved a "psychobiography"  that Kearns was writing about Johnson, based in part on intimate conversations they'd had on his ranch in Texas, and a decision to bring Goodwin aboard as a co-author.

Their plan was to expand what had begun as a scholarly work--intended to help secure for her a tenured professorship at Harvard University--break with a smaller publishing house and sell the book elsewhere, for about five times the money. As the dispute grew, the story oozed outward to include speculation in print about whether Kearns might have had an affair with Johnson.

Sally Quinn, flying at her highest as a feature writer in the Washington Post's Style section, wrote a lively, at times almost embarrassingly explicit, account of the chaos that had come to Kearn's love and literary life. The piece ran for what seemed like forever, and it included a rather tart summation:

"  Kearns has always gotten what she wanted--and made it look as if she didn't even try. She got elected student-body president at Colby College in Maine, got the best grades, got the best beaux, got into Harvard, got a White House fellowship, got Lyndon Johnson, got her Ph.D, got her professorship at Harvard, got her book, got author Richard Goodwin and got Goodwin to collaborate with her on the book. Those are all things she wanted, or thought she wanted when she got them."

At one point in the story, the then-32-year-old Kearns is quoted as saying: " I really believe that Johnson was picking a person he wanted to write about him. People say he was in love with me and things like that. Partly that's true. But it was much more serious than that."

Here is another excerpt from Sally Quinn’s 1974 article

"Johnson was terribly possessive of her time, more and more as he came closer to death. She was seeing many men at this point in her life but had no real attachments until she met Richard Goodwin six months before Johnson's death."

One time Doris Kearns gave a lecture and said that Lyndon Johnson had compared her to his mother. [LBJ's mother was quite the enabler of him; as was Lady Bird.] When Kearns comments became public and appeared in print, LBJ said:

"So I'll just take the knife out of my heart and close up the wound, and we'll have you back here and we won't look back in pride or shame. We'll just start from here and we'll go on with your book without Parade. We're both still alive and that's what counts.”

Kearns has later admitted that Lyndon Johnson used to crawl into bed with her and just talk, but with nothing else going on....

As for me, I am not buying that nothing else went on. The Doris Kearns case is just another example of Lyndon Johnson's ability to manipulate people and even turn them into sychophants protecting his legacy decades later. Jack Valenti would be another good example.

Doris Kearns Goodwin: "I got to know this crazy character [Lyndon B. Johnson] when I was only 23 years old.... He's still the most formidable, fascinating, frustrating, irritating individual I think I've ever known in my entire life.” [Academy of Achievement June 1996 interview, p.1]

Doris Kearns also told authors Richard Harwood and Haynes Johnson about her relationship with LBJ in an interview that Sally Quinn refers to:

"They both took copious notes. In the interview Kearns told the reporters that her relationship with President Johnson was extraordinarily complicated, that she was still having trouble placing it in perspective, that she was troubled about how to handle her personal relationship with Johnson when she published her own book.

“She told them that the essence of their relationship was that LBJ was in love with her, that he ‘pressed me very hard sexually the first year,’ that he courted her aggressively, that he asked her to marry him, that he was jealous of other men in her life."

[Sally Quinn, Washington Post, 8/24/75 "A Tale of Hearts and Minds"]

My comment: Really, this kind of behavior from Lyndon Johnson was typical. It is how he behaved his whole life, and I don't just mean sexually. I am referring to his narcissism, neediness, ability to manipulate people, ability to turn folks into sycophants and slaves and have them do things they would not normally do.

I guess this just reproves the old saying that women love power; even if power is an old bloated, craggy man and a paranoid, mendacious, delusional nut job.

Here is an email to me from a Harvard alum and a nationally known author:

“Robert,
I was a graduate student at Harvard in the Political Science Department when Kearns was writing her LBJ book — the gossip at Harvard was always that she was LBJ’s lover — Kearns was first and foremost an opportunist — if sleeping with LBJ advanced her career, I doubt she hesitated.

 

1.      Mark Groubert says:

February 1, 2013 at 10:20 pm

Mr. Morrow is correct. Doris Kearns Goodwin told a mutual friend of ours that she had sex with Lyndon Baines Johnson. Her husband Richard Goodwin was in the throws of his own self-admitted alcoholism at the time.
Two good books on LBJ’s dysfunction and his alcoholism: Power Beyond Reason: The Mental Collapse of Lyndon Johnson by D. Jablow Hershman and Lyndon B. Johnson: A Memoir by George Reedy.

 

Web link: http://jfkfacts.org/assassination/quote/dick-goodwin-we-know-the-cia-was-involved-and-the-mafia-we-all-know-that/#comments

 

Doris Kearns  told Legs McNeil that she had sex with Lyndon Johnson

Source a friend of Legs McNeil; email to me 4/25/12

August 1, 2015 in Current Affairs | Permalink

Robotics and AI researchers call for ban on Killer Robots

http://eeng.net/index.php/13-robotics-and-ai-researchers-call-for-ban-on-killer-robots

July 29, 2015 in Current Affairs | Permalink

The State Bar of California sinks deeper, colludes with California Supreme Court (also infiltrated: no compliance with the State Bar Act)

A Private Attorney General in California made this routine inquiry

of a "member" of The State Bar of California, doing business as a

County Counsel for the County of Trinity:


http://supremelaw.org/cc/guenette/cole/letter.2012-07-30/dpcole.pdf


A Supervising Deputy Clerk of the California Supreme Court
tried to "pass the buck" to The State Bar of California:

http://supremelaw.org/cc/guenette/cole/letter.2012-10-10/Superior.Court.pdf

... even though this one "license" was clearly issued by that Supreme Court:

http://supremelaw.org/cc/rainmaker/azar/State.Bar.License.1.landscape.JPG


Then, a Senior Administrative Supervisor of The State Bar of California
stated that "they do not give out copies of oaths to the public":

http://supremelaw.org/cc/guenette/cole/letter.2012-10-15/State.Bar.Oath.Cole-1.pdf


What that Senior Administrative Supervisor failed to mention
is that The State Bar of California are already IN CONTEMPT 
of a proper SUBPOENA IN A CIVIL CASE:

http://supremelaw.org/cc/statebar/subpoena.statebar.1.gif
http://supremelaw.org/cc/statebar/delivery.instructions.htm
http://supremelaw.org/cc/statebar/subpoena.statebar.3.gif
http://supremelaw.org/cc/statebar/subpoena.statebar.4.gif

http://supremelaw.org/cc/statebar/letter.2003-12-15/
http://supremelaw.org/cc/statebar/letter.2005-01-13/


More details are available in this live Internet broadcast outline:

http://supremelaw.org/cc/statebar/pastor.don.broadcast.outline.htm


Remember also that the "credential investigation" already confirmed
that all "robes" seated on the California Supreme Court -and- on all
California Courts of Appeal likewise failed to produce licenses to practice law
with certificates of oath duly indorsed "on the back" of their licenses:

http://supremelaw.org/rsrc/calcourts/  (ALL are IN DEFAULT)


To say that the Courts in California have become organized criminal enterprises
is a painfully obvious understatement.


This problem reaches all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, where
Sandra Day O'Connor, Anthony M. Kennedy and Stephen G. Breyer 
also turned up without valid licenses to practice law when
they first joined The State Bar of California:

http://supremelaw.org/rsrc/commissions/evidence.folders.2004-03-16.htm  (see "SBN" links)

http://supremelaw.org/copyrite/oconnor/
http://supremelaw.org/copyrite/kennedy/
http://supremelaw.org/copyrite/breyer/


Breyer also failed to produce the all-important PRESIDENTIAL COMMISSION:

http://supremelaw.org/copyrite/breyer/nad.missing.credentials.htm  (IN DEFAULT)
http://supremelaw.org/copyrite/breyer/letter.2004-02-12.gif

... as did Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Clarence Thomas:

http://supremelaw.org/copyrite/ginsburg/letter.2004-02-12.gif
http://supremelaw.org/copyrite/thomas.clarence/letter.2004-02-12.gif


Note well that the latter admissions were made on 
U.S. Department of Justice letterhead!  DOJ are the
legal custodians of the PRESIDENTIAL COMMISSIONS,
designated as such by 5 U.S.C. 2902(c):

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/5/2902  (c)

"
The commissions of judicial officers and United States attorneys and marshals, appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate ... shall be made out and recorded in the Department of Justice under the seal of that department and countersigned by the Attorney General."
 
WHAT A HUGE MESS!


See also all the authorities cited and quoted here:

http://supremelaw.org/rsrc/commissions.htm

e.g. this one is my favorite:

Without taking the oath prescribed by law

one cannot become a judge either de jure or de facto, and 

such an individual is without authority to act and 

his acts as such are void until he has taken the prescribed oath.

[French v. State, 572 S.W.2d 934]

[Brown v. State, 238 S.W.2d 787]

 

 

Clearly, CBPC section 6067 identifies an oath prescribed by law
namely, to support two (2) Constitutions:

http://supremelaw.org/ref/cbpc/6067.htm

("an oath to support the Constitution of the United States and 
the Constitution of the State of California")



Sincerely yours,
/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Private Attorney General, 18 U.S.C. 1964

http://supremelaw.org/crowd.funding.option.htm  (Join Us!)
http://supremelaw.org/support.guidelines.htm (Policy + Guidelines)

All Rights Reserved (cf. UCC 1-308 https://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/1/1-308)

July 29, 2015 in Current Affairs | Permalink

Illinois Attorney General: "serving the public interest is established as the paramount obligation of the Attorney General"

http://www.illinoisattorneygeneral.gov/about/history.html


"Representation of the Crown [of England] is translated in our system to representation of the People 
thus, serving the public interest is established as the paramount obligation of the Attorney General."

...

In considering the powers of the Attorney General, the [Illinois] supreme court, in Fergus v. Russel, noted:

" * * *

* * * Under our form of government all of the prerogatives which pertain to the crown in England under the common law 
are here vested in the people ....


cf. Fergus v. Russel, 270 Ill. 304 (1915)


http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/showthread.php?357-Crown-as-the-People

e.g.:

"I thought it was common sense that the political powers of the King fell upon the People after kicking off the yolk of King George III."

___

When there is no adequate Federal remedy,
a State's common law is the rule of decision
PROVIDED and insofar as the same is NOT
inconsistent with the Constitution and laws

of the United States (federal government):


https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/1988

... but in all cases where they are not adapted to the object, or are deficient in the provisions necessary to furnish suitable remedies and punish offenses against law, the common law, as modified and changed by the constitution and statutes of the State wherein the court having jurisdiction of such civil or criminal cause is held, so far as the same is not inconsistent with the Constitution and laws of the United States, shall be extended to and govern the said courts in the trial and disposition of the cause, and, if it is of a criminal nature, in the infliction of punishment on the party found guilty. 


Thus, the above statute also contemplates modifications
and changes to the common law, "as modified and changed
by the constitution and statutes of the State".

___



Sincerely yours,
/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Private Attorney General, 18 U.S.C. 1964

http://supremelaw.org/crowd.funding.option.htm  (Join Us!)
http://supremelaw.org/support.guidelines.htm (Policy + Guidelines)

All Rights Reserved (cf. UCC 1-308 https://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/1/1-308)

July 15, 2015 in Current Affairs | Permalink

Confederate Flag removal / censorship topic and Congress' continued perpetration of racism in Federal law

"The Congress of Racism 1866"

 

by

 

Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.

 

Private Attorney General

 

 

With all of the talking heads in overdrive about Confederate flags

and other irresistible topics for the big media boys and girls,

it's useful to put the magnifying glass on each Congress

for perpetuating racism smack dab in the midst of Federal laws

even now codified in the U.S. Code.

 

Cases in point:  42 USC 1981 and 1982:

 

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/1981

 

the same right ... as is enjoyed by white citizens

 

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/1982

 

the same right ... as is enjoyed by white citizens

 

Gee, and you thought at least one Congress

might have repealed such repugnant comparisons

long before now?

 

WRONG!

 

The very origins of federal citizenship do

prove that the Congress of 1866 intended

to treat freed blacks differently -- by creating

a federal municipal franchise domiciled in D.C.:

 

http://supremelaw.org/authors/mitchell/citizenship.for.dummies.htm

 

http://www.supremelaw.org/authors/mitchell/comments.on.citizenship.for.dummies.htm

 

Forget equal protection:  this cunning distinction is all about

maintaining two classes -- not equal, and not separate either!

 

And so, as the wagging tongues out-duel each other

in relevant and contemporary rhetoric, try to remember

that Congress could have proposed a much simpler solution:

 

after slavery was finally outlawed by the Thirteenth Amendment,

Congress could and should have allowed those Americans

to declare themselves States Citizens -- by registering as such

with their County Courts of general jurisdiction.

 

Do ya think a committee of bureaucrats could have designed a

form to facilitate same?  Do ya think?

 

Occam's Razor:  the simplest solution is always the best solution.

 

Don't expect Congress to propose simpler solutions

any time soon, however, because the majority of

federal lawmakers started their legal careers as

attorneys, and there's piles of money to be made

from extraordinarily complex legislation, and regulation,

like the Internal Revenue Code and its implementing rules

-- all growing by leaps and bounds.

 

Heck, we've even reached an historical high water mark,

now that both Houses of Congress routinely vote

on proposed laws without even reading them beforehand!

 

Didn't that lunatic from San Frantasia recently say

that she would read the law only after it was enacted?

 

"Mirror, mirror, on the wall, who's the fairest of them all?"

 

You know the nation is facing hard times when

narcissism saturates the Capitol Rotunda.

 

To ATTORN is to supervise the transfer of an estate

from the old lord to the new lord:  it is a term from

feudal law, circa the Middle Ages.

---

http://supremelaw.org/press/rels/congress.of.racism.htm

http://supremelaw.org/cc/knudson/judnot09.htm#dyett

http://supremelaw.org/authors/lyon/tdocws.htm

---

/s/ Paul

Sincerely yours,
/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Private Attorney General, 18 U.S.C. 1964

http://supremelaw.org/crowd.funding.option.htm  (Join Us!)
http://supremelaw.org/support.guidelines.htm (Policy + Guidelines)

All Rights Reserved (cf. UCC 1-308 https://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/1/1-308)
 
___
 
 
 
On Sun, Jul 12, 2015 at 5:52 AM, JS wrote:
Is there anything to be able to point to re: the recent confederate flag removal madness that anyone would like to counter with information that can be brought to others attention when they search re: confederate flag on the internet? I don't recall seeing the topic discussed here.

July 12, 2015 in Current Affairs | Permalink

Independence? Paul Andrew Mitchell, (Private Attorney General [P.A.G.]), on Truth vs. NEW$, Inc.

See and hear Paul speak @ http://seattlecommunitymedia.org/series/truth-vs-new-inc/episode/tvni-july-2-independence-paul-andrew-mitchell-pag

and all links at the end e.g.:

http://www.supremelaw.org/authors/mitchell/comments.on.citizenship.for.dummies.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/rsrc/twoclass.htm


Sincerely yours,
/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Private Attorney General, 18 U.S.C. 1964

http://supremelaw.org/crowd.funding.option.htm  (Join Us!)
http://supremelaw.org/support.guidelines.htm (Policy + Guidelines)

All Rights Reserved (cf. UCC 1-308 https://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/1/1-308)

July 11, 2015 in Current Affairs | Permalink

Former International Court of Justice judge: Dick Cheney should face prosecution

from: Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S. <supremelawfirm@gmail.com>
reply-to: supremelaw@googlegroups.com
to: tbuergen@law.gwu.edu
cc: efield@law.gwu.edu,
SupremeLaw <supremelaw@googlegroups.com>
date: Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 1:28 AM
subject: Former International Court of Justice judge: Dick Cheney should face prosecution
mailing list: supremelaw.googlegroups.com
TO:
Hon. Thomas Buergenthal, Professor
George Washington University
 
Greetings Your Honor:

Thank you very much for your comments reported above.

FYI:  as part of our pro bono assistance to U.S. Coast Guard Investigations
at San Diego Harbor, we filed and served the following VERIFIED CRIMINAL COMPLAINT,
ON INFORMATION, formally charging Bush / Cheney / Rumsfeld:

http://supremelaw.org/cc/gwbush/vcc.htm
(see all Exhibits, in particular)

http://supremelaw.org/cc/libby/grand.jury.demand.htm
(no response(s) from Mr. Fitzgerald, however)


p.s. For your classes on comparative law and jurisprudence,
please also see our recent work formally challenging the

U.S. Senate's ratification of the ICCPR:

http://supremelaw.org/cc/hill/civil/iccpr/

http://supremelaw.org/cc/hill/civil/iccpr/draft/first.draft.htm
http://supremelaw.org/cc/hill/civil/iccpr/Executive.Order.13107.pdf
http://supremelaw.org/cc/hill/civil/iccpr/Executive.Order.13132.pdf

http://supremelaw.org/authors/buergenthal/
http://supremelaw.org/authors/buergenthal/Modern.Constitutions.and.Human.Rights.Treaties.page01.png
http://supremelaw.org/authors/buergenthal/page220.gif
http://supremelaw.org/authors/buergenthal/page221.gif
http://supremelaw.org/authors/buergenthal/page222.gif
http://supremelaw.org/authors/buergenthal/page223.gif


Sincerely yours,
/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Private Attorney General, 18 U.S.C. 1964

http://supremelaw.org/support.guidelines.htm (Policy + Guidelines)

All Rights Reserved (cf. UCC 1-308 https://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/1/1-308)

___

See also:

http://supremelaw.org/authors/buergenthal/

http://supremelaw.org/authors/seibert-fohr/

http://supremelaw.org/authors/carter/



---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell <supremelawfirm@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, May 3, 2012 at 4:08 PM
Subject: FYI: Please Forward to Judge Thomas Buergenthal: "The Petition Clause is violated by the non-self-executing Declaration of U.S. ICCPR Ratification"
To: pennyh@uw.edujafrank@uw.edu
Cc: lawdean@uw.edulawgroup-ACScompetition@law.upenn.educhallen@uw.edu

July 9, 2015 in Current Affairs | Permalink