Youngevity BTT 2.0 + Healthy Start Paks 2.0

Youngevity BTT 2.0 + Healthy Start Paks 2.0

Coffees from Youngevity

Coffees from Youngevity

Youngevity Be The Change

Youngevity Healthy Chocolate

GOFoods Youngevity

Join or Create a Ron Paul Meetup,.

Join or Create a Ron Paul Meetup,.

Ron Paul Forums

Ron Paul Forums

APFN Message Board

APFN Message Board

Leo Emil Wanta / Wantagate Links

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

« April 2014 | Main | June 2014 »

Paul Andrew Mitchell released from federal detention?

12/20/2014: Updated: Paul Andrew Mitchell is released from Federal incarceration.

Paul Andrew Mitchell released from Federal incarceration (case terminated) after US wisely decides not to open Sell v United States Pandora's box in his case after approx. 11 months of illegal detainment/torture

6.9.14 - Still no indication as to Paul's whereabouts.
Paul Andrew Mitchell released? See below. This needs confirmation. I would appreciate an e-mail ( confirming Paul’s release by anyone who can confirm it and if he has been completely released from federal detention. Teknosis


 7:24 AM (2 hours ago)

Roger Helbig <>

7:24 AM (2 hours ago)



to me


 Curious why you are a fan of this scam artist.  He belongs in jail
because he has been scamming for years, but I also wonder what
supposed jail that he is in and what he was sentenced for.  RumorMill
News is not known for being a news source so I would appreciate
knowing if you have sourced this with any original documents.  If you
have, I wonder if you are in California and have a way of knowing if
someone has been sentenced to jail for a felony in California.  If you
do, I am most interested in learning how to do this.  I would like to
know the particulars of the case against Dennis Kyne Jr of San Jose.
He was convicted of Felony Assault with a Deadly Weapon; that fact is
on the Insurance Commissioner's website, but I have not been able to
find any details on the case of or if Kyne was sentenced to a jail
term of any kind.

Thank you.



Roger Helbig <>

8:13 AM (1 hour ago)



to me


I see that PAM was released - RumorMill News did have some accurate
information - the BOP Registration Number

Register Number: 44202-086
Age: 65
Race: White
Sex: Male
Released On: 05/20/2014



pc93 <>

9:02 AM (1 hour ago)



to Roger


Good day Roger,


I have been following Paul efforts to expose corruption for many years. I know in my heart of hearts that Paul is not a scam artist and is sincere in his efforts in wanting to bring about a better world. In fact after listening to him via an interview many, many years later, for myself, my sentiments were confirmed. For one of the particular interviews in which you can hear for yourself:


As far as the records go as to Paul's detention I have been relying on the federal public court records via Pacer, information of which is not free but there is a browser plug-in which I did install called Recap which helps to make particular records that are accessed with that plug-in installed free for others who come afterwards to research, read them. [Note: I typed them up myself and posted them to my blog because I wanted them to be more in the public record via the internet, for the whole world to see.]


All the best,





US Government has settled with Paul Andrew Mitchell; or?

"Blowing Whistles at Hurricanes" / FROM: 44202086 – MODELESKI, MITCHELL PAUL* – Unit: SET-D-C

Paul Andrew Mitchell has been bundled away by the US Government



May 29, 2014 in Current Affairs | Permalink

NOTICE OF PROTEST: UCC 1-308 RE: #2:14-CR-00027-NDF-2, USA [sic] v. Hill et al. / Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.

NOTICE OF PROTEST: UCC 1-308                                                                    [i4-CR-27F]



Office of the Presiding Judge

District Court of the United States (“DCUS”)

2120 Capitol Avenue, Room 2131

Cheyenne 82001-3658

Wyoming, USA


RE: #2:14-CR-00027-NDF-2, USA [sic] v. Hill et al.

      (UNITED STATES OF AMERICA” is not a proper party, however)


Authorities: 18 U.S.C. 1504, 1702; Seventh Amendment common law


Greetings Your Honor:


I am hereby lodging a FORMAL PROTEST concerning my first NOTICE OF TERMINATION,

which was returned to sender (“RTS”) evidently by persons unknown and most probably in

Cheyenne, Wyoming:


(1) the annotated envelope was re-mailed with a second first class postage stamp, and it should

now be in the Docket records of the instant case supra;


(2) I have already mailed numerous other items to: Office of Chief Judge, U.S. District Court,

2120 Capitol Ave., Cheyenne 82001, Wyoming, USA; and, none was ever returned to sender

(“RTS”) for lack of a suite number;


(3) the mailed items at (2) above now appear in the Docket listing I was given on 3/21/2014, as

proof they were delivered as addressed; e.g. see Docket #53, Page 4 of 5;


(4) furthermore, my common law right to change my name is being repeatedly infringed by

Federal government personnel: see Doe v. Dunning, 87 Wn.2d 50, 549 P.2d 1 (1976) as quoted

in AGO 1985 No. 10; a copy of the latter AGO is enclosed and incorporated by reference, as if

set forth fully here;


(5) my NOTICE OF TERMINATION has been further complicated by the Docket error identifying me as “represented by Mark C Hardee” [sic];


(6) I am NOT now legally represented by Mr. Mark C Hardee; and, I have NEVER been legally represented by Mark C. Hardee; he attended the 3/21/2014 hearing and witnessed me

REPEATEDLY assert my right to appear In Propria Persona;




(7) I have always appeared In Propria Persona i.e. “personally” and NOT by counsel: see 28

U.S.C. 1654 (personally -OR- by counsel);


(8) consequently, I am being systematically punished in numerous ways i.e. BEFORE trial, for

doing what I had a right to do! In this context, please see 18 U.S.C. 1504, in particular

(last paragraph was added to eliminate the possibility that a proper request to appear before a

grand jury might be construed as a technical violation of Section 1504);


(9) “Punishing a person for doing what he had a right to do is a basic due process violation.”

U.S. v. Sanders, 211 F.3d 711;


(10) it is frankly ridiculous even to suggest that U.S. Postal Service personnel employed at

Cheyenne, Wyoming, do NOT know where the U.S. District Court is located, particularly when

“U.S. District Court” and “2120 Capitol Ave.” are both staring them in the face (???);


(11) see also U.S. Postal Service Publication #221 for the correct “foreign address” format: in

point of Law, the 50 States of the Union are legally “foreign” with respect to each other, for

purposes of Federal MUNICIPAL laws; and,


(12) for all of the reasons stated above, I now find it necessary to disagree politely with the

hand-written statements by Ms. C. Pirone, Unit Counselor at FDC SeaTac (copy is enclosed

and incorporated by reference, as if set forth fully here).


Sincerely yours,


Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S. (chosen name)

Co-Defendant, Relator In Propria Persona, and

Private Attorney General, 18 U.S.C. 1964,

Rotella v. Wood, 528 U.S. 549 (2000) (objectives of Civil RICO)

All Rights Reserved (cf. UCC 1-308)














Paul Andrew Mitchell released from federal detention by Hon. Nancy Freudenthal?

Paul Andrew Mitchell has been bundled away by the US Government

"Blowing Whistles at Hurricanes" / FROM: 44202086 – MODELESKI, MITCHELL PAUL* – Unit: SET-D-C

May 28, 2014 in Current Affairs | Permalink

NOTICE OF TERMINATION [OF MR. MARK HARDEE] (3/26/14) | Copy sent forth (5/15/14) and into the record (5/19/14) / TRULINCS 44202086 – MODELESKI, MITCHELL PAUL – Unit: SET-D-B [Case # 2:14-CR-00027-NDF-2]

TRULINCS  44202086 – MODELESKI, MITCHELL PAUL – Unit: SET-D-B [Case # 2:14-CR-00027-NDF-2]



FROM: 44202086

TO: Brown, Thomas; Guenette, Edward; Saccato, Larry


DATE: 04/17/2014 02:11:35 PM



Mr. Mark Hardee

dba Lee & Hardee Law Offices

Cheyenne 82001

Wyoming, USA

Telephone: (307) 433-0777



DATE: April 17, 2014 A.D.




Mr. Hardee:


I now find it necessary to terminate your services as “stand-by counsel”

for reasons including but not limited to gross negligence and all of the following:


(1) At the 2-hourhearing on 3/21/2014, in front of several witnesses e.g. USMS,

you agreed to file my 11-page MOTION TO DISMISS. I have heard nothing and

received nothing from you concerning the status of that MOTION TO DISMISS.

Claims made during that hearing call for the conclusion that the “government”

defaulted 15 days later i.e. on 4/5/2014. You told me that they had 20 days

to answer that MOTION, not 15 days. According to you, they defaulted on 4/10/2014.


(2) On 3/26/2014, while in Gering, Nebraska, I called your office and spoke with

your secretary long enough to request another private visit with you. To date,

I have heard nothing and received nothing from you in response to that

reasonable request. Are you still alive?


(3) I have also written to you with a list of reasonable tasks which I asked

you to perform for me. To date, I have heard nothing and received nothing

from you in response to that list of reasonable tasks.


(4) The “grand jury” transcripts were never served upon me. To date,

I have heard nothing and received nothing from you concerning

those transcripts.


(5) Discovery documentation was never served upon me either.

To date, I have heard nothing and received nothing from you

concerning that discovery documentation.


(6) The “government” MOTION FOR [a second] PSYCHOLOGICAL EVALUATION

was never served upon me, and I never received any Notice(s) of any hearing(s)

on said MOTION. To date, I have heard nothing and received nothing from you

concerning that MOTION.


(7) The so-called “ORDER” allegedly authorizing a [second] psychological

evaluation lacked a Clerk’s authorized signature and the Court’s official seal.

See 28 U.S.C. 1691 (for the 20th time!) To date, I have heard nothing and

Received nothing from you concerning that so-called “ORDER”.


(8) As you already know, or should know, Mr. Stephan Harris is IN DEFAULT







and, as such, the presence of his name on the latter “ORDER” is more evidence

of fraud and consequential Federal felonies e.g. 18 U.S.C. 912 (impersonation),

1519 (concealing records). Is he a real human being?


(9) To date, you have failed to acknowledge my MOTION to recuse Ms. Nancy

D. Freudenthal for obvious bias and prejudice manifested on 3/21/2014,

and you have failed to provide me with any confirmation copy(s).

The credential investigation is not a pathological obsession.


(10) To date, you have failed to acknowledge my written objections

to Mr. Reese’s defamatory statements about me in his MOTION for

90-day extension, and you have failed to provide me with any

confirmation copy(s). Defamation is a crime, Mr. Hardee.


(11) Mr. Reese does not legally “represent” me, and neither do you.

You appear to lack minimal understanding of proceeding In Propria Persona,

even though that term is clearly defined in Black’s Law Dictionary, 6th Edition,

and in other law dictionaries (“not by attorney,” The Law Dictionary (2002)).

See 28 U.S.C. 1654 (“personally or by counsel”).


(12) After being moved now a total of 27 TIMES (I’ve been counting),

you have done nothing to stop this ludicrous pattern of oppression,

sleep deprivation, solitary confinement, and painfully obvious denial

of due process of law e.g. “notice and hearing” (the bare essentials).

My legal research notes, and completed MOTIONs, have been confiscated

several times, resulting in obstruction of those MOTIONs and preventing

the mailing and filing of same with any Federal court(s).


(13) To date, you have failed to acknowledge my NOTICE OF PUBLIC-AUTHORITY

DEFENSE, properly filed under FRCrP Rule 12.3, and you have failed to acknowledge

the government’s obligation to reply in writing within 15 days. Rule 12.3(a)(3).


(14) You have been grossly negligent also by failing entirely to honor and obey

Article VI, Clause 3, in the U.S. Constitution, and all of its implementing

Federal statutes and Regulations: “The public has a right to DEMAND

that public officials perform all of their duties faithfully.” cf. 63C Am Jur 2d

(“Public Officers”). Instead, you have obviously fallen totally silent and

thereby you have given your tacit consent to the oppression and retaliation

which I continue to endure at the hands of your several colleagues, associates,

and accomplices in the “legal” profession, such as it is. Here, see

18 U.S.C. 241, 242.


CONCLUSION: You are hereby fired, effective 3/26/2014 nunc pro tunc. Goodbye.


Sincerely yours,

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

Private Attorney General

See 18 U.S.C. 1964; Rotella v. Wood, 528 U.S. 549 (2000)

All Rights Reserved (cf. UCC 1-308)


Copy: Dr. C. Low, Forensic Psychologist, SeaTac FDC









Paul Andrew Mitchell released from federal detention by Hon. Nancy Freudenthal?

"Blowing Whistles at Hurricanes" / FROM: 44202086 – MODELESKI, MITCHELL PAUL* – Unit: SET-D-C

Paul Andrew Mitchell has been bundled away by the US Government

May 28, 2014 in Current Affairs | Permalink



                                                                                            * given name [initialed PM]



FROM: 44202086

TO: Brown, Thomas; Guenette, Edward; Mullen, Jack; Saccato, Larry


DATE: 05/09/2014 09:21:12 PM



Presiding Judge (duly credentialed)

District Court of the United States (“DCUS”)

2120 Capitol Avenue

Cheyenne 82001

Wyoming, USA


DATE: May 10, 2014 A.D.



#2:14-CR-00027-NDF-2  (USDC/Cheyenne)

#MJ-14-00030-JPD       (USDC/Seattle)


Greetings Your Honor:


The following serious errors have also arisen in the instant cases:


(1) no litigation of Defendant’s Cross-Complaints has occurred

e.g. Habeas Corpus Relief, FOIA Enforcement, Civil RICO remedies

at both USDCs (Seattle and Cheyenne), and litigation records have

been concealed from the Defendant, all in violation of the Petition

Clause in the First Amendment and 18 U.S.C. 241, 242, 1513, 1519

(for starters): “The Petition Clause is the Right conservative of

ALL other rights” (see U.S. Supreme Court cases on this point);


(2) willful manipulation and violation of the Speedy Trial guarantee:

from 1/28/2014 to 5/10/2014 = 103 days (not 70);

from 1/15/2014 to 5/10/2014 = 116 days (not 70);

adding 10 full days for “transport” is ludicrous;

Seattle-to-Cheyenne takes 1 day by plane, maybe 2 days;

total number of moves to date = 28 TIMES

(see Defendant’s AFFIDAVIT); adding a full 30 days

for a second psychological evaluation was without basis

and without justification:


Defendant was provided no motion, no notice of any motion,

no notice of any hearing, and no hearing on any motion

for a second psychological evaluation; said “order”

as signed by Ms. Freudenthal violated 28 U.S.C. 1691 (again);


(3) venue was always proper in Seattle; Defendant last stepped

foot in Wyoming during a college ski trip in December 1968;

wrong venue violates FRCrP Rule 18;


(4) all Court “process” to date violated 28 U.S.C. 1691;

no credentials were produced for Clerks and Deputy Clerks

of Court at USDC/Cheyenne and USDC/Seattle i.e.

Messrs. McCool, Harris, Fisher, and Ms. Hilliker;


(5) Ms. Freudenthal must be recused nunc pro tunc for

obvious bias demonstrated during the hearing on 3/21/2014:

the credential investigation is NOT some king of deranged







“pathological obsession”; Freudenthal even apologized

to Defendant in open court i.e. on the record, and either knew

or should have known better than to insult Defendant;


(6) docket updates were apparently served on “stand-by counsel”

Mark Hardee, but Hardee has never legally represented Defendant

and Hardee does not now legally represent Defendant, who

has always appeared under protest In Propria Persona, 28 U.S.C. 1654:

cf. “In Propria Persona” in Black’s Law Dictionary, 6th Edition;


Hardee also failed to forward docket updates to Defendant,

or do any of the simple tasks requested by Defendant e.g.

obtain blank subpoenas, obtain Defendant’s USMS file to support


Under FRCrP Rule 12.3; Hardee also lacks client focus;


Hardee’s gross negligence violates the Sixth Amendment

guarantee of effective assistance of Counsel for a Party

appearing personally under 28 U.S.C. 1654 (NOT by counsel);

no REPLY(s) to Defendant’s two (2) MOTIONs TO DISMISS

were ever forwarded to Defendant by Hardee or by anyone else;

see Johnson v. Zerbst (Court is thus OUSTED of jurisdiction);


(7) all “diesel/jet fuel therapy” (28 moves to date)

violated the Eighth Amendment prohibiting cruel and

unusual punishment, as did ~15 days in solitary confinement

and several incidents of sleep deprivation, one lasting 72+ hours;


lack of OMB control numbers on BOP’s intake forms

did NOT justify any solitary confinement; see Public Protection

Clause in the Paperwork Reduction Act at 44 U.S.C. 3512 in chief

i.e. complete defense, bar or otherwise at any time during

judicial or administrative proceedings;


(8) during all hearings, administration of oaths to the

Defendant, and to one IRS “witness,” was not lawful under

28 U.S.C. 953, because courtroom “clerks” have also failed

to produce credentials i.e. SF-61 and second OATH required

by 28 U.S.C. 951; all such oaths have now been rescinded

by Defendant formally in writing,; see Defendant’s NOTICE



(9) the second psychological evaluation was compelled under duress

after moving Defendant a total of 28 times, but without assistance

of Counsel, without Miranda warnings re: self-incrimination,

without Defendant’s consent to waive Counsel, and without

tape-recording of any interviews;


as such, the Fifth and Sixth Amendments were violated;

see case law already provided to Dr. C. Low dba Forensic

Psychologist at FDC SeaTac; Defendant’s age also implies

elder abuse: Defendant will be 66 years old on 6/21/2014;


(10) missing Clerk’s credentials mean that Defendant cannot

obtain ANY lawful blank subpoenas under FRCrP Rule 17:

such blank subpoenas would also violate 28 U.S.C. 1691 per force

in any case due to all the missing credentials for Clerk’s Office












(11) Freudenthal practiced law from the bench, e.g. by

attempting to rule on a “motion” from the government but

without notice to Defendant of any such motion and

without notice to Defendant of any hearing on any

such motion either:


Hardee has aided and abetted this fraudulent practice

by not forwarding any such motions or notices to the

Defendant, even if they did exist; no PROOFs OF SERVICE

upon Defendant exist, nor any MINUTE ORDER(s) either;


no government motions to dismiss Defendant’s

Cross-Petitions were ever served on Defendant e.g.

for Habeas Corpus Relief, FOIA Enforcement and

Civil RICO remedies; and, all of Defendant’s MOTIONs

seeking relief in said Petitions were unopposed but then

were summarily “denied” by Freudenthal on 3/21/2014;

practicing law from the bench is a high misdemeanor

Federal offense;


(12) Freudenthal has developed irreparable conflicts

of interest, partially detailed in Defendant’s DEMAND

TO RECUSE Freudenthal: the arrest “warrant” violated

28 U.S.C. 1691, and was properly refused; Freudenthal’s

gross negligence failed to maintain proper supervision

of Clerk’s Office personnel who evidently all lack valid SF-61s

-and- the second OATH required by 28 U.S.C. 951;


such negligence affects all prior cases on which Freudenthal

has presided since being appointed on “day one,” and implicates

Freudenthal in multiple ongoing violations of 18 U.S.C. 2 and 3

(aiding and abetting, and accessory after the fact, respectively);

see all of Defendant’s VERIFIED CRIMINAL COMPLAINTs, in chief;


Freudenthal evidently did NOT read Defendant’s pleadings which cited

18 U.S.C. 1504 and specifically requested timely INTERLOCUTORY

JUDGMENT on the last paragraph re: proper “request to appear”;

the clarification in the LexisNexis version of the U.S.C.S. controls: the

last paragraph was added to eliminate the possibility that a proper request

to appear [in writing] might be a technical violation of 18 U.S.C. 1504;


(13) full credentials for Clerk’s Office personnel and

all “government attorneys” were never produced and

now assume facts not in evidence: see FRCrP Rules 1, 6, 7;

5 U.S.C. 2104, 2903, 2906, 3331, 3332, 3333, 5507; and,

FREV Rule 201(c)(2): mandatory judicial notice

(NOT discretionary judicial notice under 201(c)(1));


(14) many of Defendant’s 28 moves left Defendant

totally and deliberately stranded and without any adequate

law library resources e.g. at the Scotts Bluff County

Detention Center in Gering, Nebraska;


(15) Defendant’s right of judicial review under 5 U.S.C. 702

was deliberately infringed, chiefly concerning the official written

admissions -- by OPM -and- OMB -- that no OPM Application exists

for periodic review and approval of the electronic SF-61

published at OPM’s internet website; 5 U.S.C. 702 expressly

waives sovereign immunity, to wit:







“The United States may be named as a defendant in such an

action, and a judgment or decree may be entered against

the United States ….”


(16) further serious errors were already well documented in

Defendant’s two (2) MOTIONs TO DISMISS.




I, Paul Andrew Mitchell, Citizen of Washington State,

qualified Federal Witness, and Private Attorney General,

hereby verify under penalty of perjury, under the laws of

the United States of America, without the “United States”

(federal government), that the above statement of facts and

laws is true and correct, according to the best of my

current information, knowledge, and belief, so help me God,

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1746(1). See Supremacy Clause

(Constitution, Laws and Treaties of the United States

are the supreme Law of the Land).


Dated: May 10, 2014 A.D.


Signed: [Paul Mitchell (chosen name)]


Printed: Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S., Relator in Propria Persona (NOT “Pro Se”)

(expressly NOT a “citizen of the United States” aka federal citizen: Pannill v. Roanoke), and

Private Attorney General, 18 U.S.C. 1964, Rotella v. Wood (objectives of Civil RICO)

All Rights Reserved (cf. UCC 1-308)






























Paul Andrew Mitchell released from federal detention by Hon. Nancy Freudenthal?


Paul Andrew Mitchell has been bundled away by the US Government


"Blowing Whistles at Hurricanes" / FROM: 44202086 – MODELESKI, MITCHELL PAUL* – Unit: SET-D-C

May 28, 2014 in Current Affairs | Permalink


Current list of Participants – Status 26 May 2014

FRA Castries, Henri de Chairman and CEO, AXA Group

DEU Achleitner, Paul M. Chairman of the Supervisory Board, Deutsche Bank AG
DEU Ackermann, Josef Former CEO, Deutsche Bank AG
GBR Agius, Marcus Non-Executive Chairman, PA Consulting Group
FIN Alahuhta, Matti Member of the Board, KONE; Chairman, Aalto University Foundation
GBR Alexander, Helen Chairman, UBM plc
USA Alexander, Keith B. Former Commander, U.S. Cyber Command; Former Director, National Security Agency
USA Altman, Roger C. Executive Chairman, Evercore
FIN Apunen, Matti Director, Finnish Business and Policy Forum EVA
DEU Asmussen, Jörg State Secretary of Labour and Social Affairs
HUN Bajnai, Gordon Former Prime Minister; Party Leader, Together 2014
GBR Balls, Edward M. Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer
PRT Balsemão, Francisco Pinto Chairman, Impresa SGPS
FRA Baroin, François Member of Parliament (UMP); Mayor of Troyes
FRA Baverez, Nicolas Partner, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP
USA Berggruen, Nicolas Chairman, Berggruen Institute on Governance
ITA Bernabè, Franco Chairman, FB Group SRL
DNK Besenbacher, Flemming Chairman, The Carlsberg Group
NLD Beurden, Ben van CEO, Royal Dutch Shell plc
SWE Bildt, Carl Minister for Foreign Affairs
NOR Brandtzæg, Svein Richard President and CEO, Norsk Hydro ASA
INT Breedlove, Philip M. Supreme Allied Commander Europe
AUT Bronner, Oscar Publisher, Der STANDARD Verlagsgesellschaft m.b.H.
SWE Buskhe, Håkan President and CEO, Saab AB
TUR Çandar, Cengiz Senior Columnist, Al Monitor and Radikal
ESP Cebrián, Juan Luis Executive Chairman, Grupo PRISA
FRA Chalendar, Pierre-André de Chairman and CEO, Saint-Gobain
CAN Clark, W. Edmund Group President and CEO, TD Bank Group
INT Coeuré, Benoît Member of the Executive Board, European Central Bank
IRL Coveney, Simon Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine
GBR Cowper-Coles, Sherard Senior Adviser to the Group Chairman and Group CEO, HSBC Holdings plc
BEL Davignon, Etienne Minister of State
USA Donilon, Thomas E. Senior Partner, O’Melveny and Myers; Former U.S. National Security Advisor
DEU Döpfner, Mathias CEO, Axel Springer SE
GBR Dudley, Robert Group Chief Executive, BP plc
FIN Ehrnrooth, Henrik Chairman, Caverion Corporation, Otava and Pöyry PLC
ITA Elkann, John Chairman, Fiat S.p.A.
DEU Enders, Thomas CEO, Airbus Group
DNK Federspiel, Ulrik Executive Vice President, Haldor Topsøe A/S
USA Feldstein, Martin S. Professor of Economics, Harvard University; President Emeritus, NBER
CAN Ferguson, Brian President and CEO, Cenovus Energy Inc.
GBR Flint, Douglas J. Group Chairman, HSBC Holdings plc
ESP García-Margallo, José Manuel Minister of Foreign Affairs and Cooperation
USA Gfoeller, Michael Independent Consultant
TUR Göle, Nilüfer Professor of Sociology, École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales
USA Greenberg, Evan G. Chairman and CEO, ACE Group
GBR Greening, Justine Secretary of State for International Development
NLD Halberstadt, Victor Professor of Economics, Leiden University
USA Hockfield, Susan President Emerita, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
NOR Høegh, Leif O. Chairman, Höegh Autoliners AS
NOR Høegh, Westye Senior Advisor, Höegh Autoliners AS
USA Hoffman, Reid Co-Founder and Executive Chairman, LinkedIn
CHN Huang, Yiping Professor of Economics, National School of Development, Peking University
USA Jackson, Shirley Ann President, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
USA Jacobs, Kenneth M. Chairman and CEO, Lazard
USA Johnson, James A. Chairman, Johnson Capital Partners
USA Karp, Alex CEO, Palantir Technologies
USA Katz, Bruce J. Vice President and Co-Director, Metropolitan Policy Program, The Brookings Institution
CAN Kenney, Jason T. Minister of Employment and Social Development
GBR Kerr, John Deputy Chairman, Scottish Power
USA Kissinger, Henry A. Chairman, Kissinger Associates, Inc.
USA Kleinfeld, Klaus Chairman and CEO, Alcoa
TUR Koç, Mustafa Chairman, Koç Holding A.S.
DNK Kragh, Steffen President and CEO, Egmont
USA Kravis, Henry R. Co-Chairman and Co-CEO, Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co.
USA Kravis, Marie-Josée Senior Fellow and Vice Chair, Hudson Institute
CHE Kudelski, André Chairman and CEO, Kudelski Group
INT Lagarde, Christine Managing Director, International Monetary Fund
BEL Leysen, Thomas Chairman of the Board of Directors, KBC Group
USA Li, Cheng Director, John L.Thornton China Center,The Brookings Institution
SWE Lifvendahl, Tove Political Editor in Chief, Svenska Dagbladet
CHN Liu, He Minister, Office of the Central Leading Group on Financial and Economic Affairs
PRT Macedo, Paulo Minister of Health
FRA Macron, Emmanuel Deputy Secretary General of the Presidency
ITA Maggioni, Monica Editor-in-Chief, Rainews24, RAI TV
GBR Mandelson, Peter Chairman, Global Counsel LLP
USA McAfee, Andrew Principal Research Scientist, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
PRT Medeiros, Inês de Member of Parliament, Socialist Party
GBR Micklethwait, John Editor-in-Chief, The Economist
GRC Mitsotaki, Alexandra Chair, ActionAid Hellas
ITA Monti, Mario Senator-for-life; President, Bocconi University
USA Mundie, Craig J. Senior Advisor to the CEO, Microsoft Corporation
CAN Munroe-Blum, Heather Professor of Medicine and Principal (President) Emerita, McGill University
USA Murray, Charles A. W.H. Brady Scholar, American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research
NLD Netherlands, H.R.H. Princess Beatrix of the
ESP Nin Génova, Juan María Deputy Chairman and CEO, CaixaBank
FRA Nougayrède, Natalie Director and Executive Editor, Le Monde
DNK Olesen, Søren-Peter Professor; Member of the Board of Directors, The Carlsberg Foundation
FIN Ollila, Jorma Chairman, Royal Dutch Shell, plc; Chairman, Outokumpu Plc
TUR Oran, Umut Deputy Chairman, Republican People’s Party (CHP)
GBR Osborne, George Chancellor of the Exchequer
FRA Pellerin, Fleur State Secretary for Foreign Trade
USA Perle, Richard N. Resident Fellow, American Enterprise Institute
USA Petraeus, David H. Chairman, KKR Global Institute
CAN Poloz, Stephen S. Governor, Bank of Canada
INT Rasmussen, Anders Fogh Secretary General, NATO
DNK Rasmussen, Jørgen Huno Chairman of the Board of Trustees, The Lundbeck Foundation
INT Reding, Viviane Vice President and Commissioner for Justice, Fundamental Rights and Citizenship, European Commission
USA Reed, Kasim Mayor of Atlanta
CAN Reisman, Heather M. Chair and CEO, Indigo Books & Music Inc.
NOR Reiten, Eivind Chairman, Klaveness Marine Holding AS
DEU Röttgen, Norbert Chairman, Foreign Affairs Committee, German Bundestag
USA Rubin, Robert E. Co-Chair, Council on Foreign Relations; Former Secretary of the Treasury
USA Rumer, Eugene Senior Associate and Director, Russia and Eurasia Program, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
NOR Rynning-Tønnesen, Christian President and CEO, Statkraft AS
NLD Samsom, Diederik M. Parliamentary Leader PvdA (Labour Party)
GBR Sawers, John Chief, Secret Intelligence Service
NLD Scheffer, Paul J. Author; Professor of European Studies, Tilburg University
NLD Schippers, Edith Minister of Health, Welfare and Sport
USA Schmidt, Eric E. Executive Chairman, Google Inc.
AUT Scholten, Rudolf CEO, Oesterreichische Kontrollbank AG
USA Shih, Clara CEO and Founder, Hearsay Social
FIN Siilasmaa, Risto K. Chairman of the Board of Directors and Interim CEO, Nokia Corporation
ESP Spain, H.M. the Queen of
USA Spence, A. Michael Professor of Economics, New York University
FIN Stadigh, Kari President and CEO, Sampo plc
USA Summers, Lawrence H. Charles W. Eliot University Professor, Harvard University
IRL Sutherland, Peter D. Chairman, Goldman Sachs International; UN Special Representative for Migration
SWE Svanberg, Carl-Henric Chairman, Volvo AB and BP plc
TUR Taftalı, A. Ümit Member of the Board, Suna and Inan Kiraç Foundation
USA Thiel, Peter A. President, Thiel Capital
DNK Topsøe, Henrik Chairman, Haldor Topsøe A/S
GRC Tsoukalis, Loukas President, Hellenic Foundation for European and Foreign Policy
NOR Ulltveit-Moe, Jens Founder and CEO, Umoe AS
INT Üzümcü, Ahmet Director-General, Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
CHE Vasella, Daniel L. Honorary Chairman, Novartis International
FIN Wahlroos, Björn Chairman, Sampo plc
SWE Wallenberg, Jacob Chairman, Investor AB
SWE Wallenberg, Marcus Chairman of the Board of Directors, Skandinaviska Enskilda Banken AB
USA Warsh, Kevin M. Distinguished Visiting Fellow and Lecturer, Stanford University
GBR Wolf, Martin H. Chief Economics Commentator, The Financial Times
USA Wolfensohn, James D. Chairman and CEO, Wolfensohn and Company
NLD Zalm, Gerrit Chairman of the Managing Board, ABN-AMRO Bank N.V.
GRC Zanias, George Chairman of the Board, National Bank of Greece
USA Zoellick, Robert B. Chairman, Board of International Advisors, The Goldman Sachs Group

AUT Austria GRC Greece
BEL Belgium HUN Hungary
CAN Canada INT International
CHE Switzerland IRL Ireland
CHN China ITA Italy
DEU Germany NLD Netherlands
DNK Denmark NOR Norway
ESP Spain PRT Portugal
FIN Finland SWE Sweden
FRA France TUR Turkey
GBR Great Britain USA United States of America


Infowars analysis note: The official list ends above. What’s important to understand is that there are always members who will be attending, but who don’t want to be included in the list.

Yesterday, Bilderberg put out a press release detailing the official talking points to be addressed at this year’s meeting. From our research, this is not their primary agenda, but usually one put out to appease the media:

Copenhagen, 26 May 2014 – The 62nd Bilderberg meeting is set to take place from 29 May until 1 June 2014 in Copenhagen, Denmark. A total of around 140 participants from 22 countries have confirmed their attendance. As ever, a diverse group of political leaders and experts from industry, finance, academia and the media have been invited. The list of participants is available on

The key topics for discussion this year include:

• Is the economic recovery sustainable?
• Who will pay for the demographics?
• Does privacy exist?
• How special is the relationship in intelligence sharing?
• Big shifts in technology and jobs
• The future of democracy and the middle class trap
• China’s political and economic outlook
• The new architecture of the Middle East
• Ukraine
• What next for Europe?
• Current events




May 28, 2014 in Current Affairs | Permalink

Complaint against Mr. Mark Hardee | RE: proceeding In Propria Persona, not “Pro Se” and not “represented” / TRULINCS 44202086 – MODELESKI, MITCHELL PAUL* – Unit: SET-D-C * given name


           * given name



FROM: 44202086

TO: Brown, Thomas; Guenette, Edward; Mullen, Jack; Saccato, Larry

SUBJECT: Complaint against Mr. Mark Hardee

DATE: 05/11/2014 07:46:31 PM



Wyoming State Bar

P.O. Box 109

Cheyenne 82003

Wyoming, USA


RE: proceeding In Propria Persona, not “Pro Se” and not “represented”


Greetings Wyoming State Bar:


Please supplement my formal Complaint against attorney Mark Hardee

with all of the following:


I am writing to explain, once again, and to all whom it may concern,

that I have been proceeding In Propria Persona, not “Pro Se” and

not “represented by” any licensed attorney(s).


“Se” is a neuter Latin pronoun which means “it” in English. Thus,

“Pro Se” means “For It” in English. I am not an “it”; I am a human being.


Neuter Latin pronouns are never appropriate to refer to human beings:

I studied Latin for 5 1/2 years, so I know what I am talking about here.


I am not now legally represented, and I have never been legally represented,

by anyone else in the case of USA v. Hill et al., #2:14-CR-00027-NDF-2,

USDC/DWY (Cheyenne, Wyoming).


I have always appeared “In Propria Persona” in that case. In English,

this means “In my Proper Person”. Proceeding in this manner is

my right under 28 U.S.C. 1654 (“personally or by counsel”).


In light of the above, a serious error occurs in the docket records

where that docket incorrectly identifies me as “represented by”

Mr. Mark C. Hardee. This error must be corrected immediately,

because it is now causing many serious problems.


Please allow me to elaborate:


Pleadings being filed by the “government” are being forwarded electronically

to Mr. Hardee, but he has failed to forward any of those pleadings on to me:

as such, I have had absolutely no opportunity to review ANY of the pleadings

that may have been filed in response to my two (2) MOTIONs TO DISMISS.


Similarly, during the second “psychological evaluation”, I was shown what

appeared to be a court “order”; but, I was never provided with any motion,

any notice of any motion, any notice of any hearing, nor was I allowed to

attend any hearing on any such motion, for an order authorizing a second

“psychological evaluation”.


There can be no doubt that Mr. Hardee already knew I have been proceeding

In Propria Persona, chiefly because he attended the 2-hour hearing on 3/21/2014,

at which Ms. Freudenthal tried repeatedly to persuade me to change my mind

and retain a licensed attorney, but I did not budge.







Nevertheless, Mr. Hardee neglected to provide me with any copies

of any such pleadings which have been docketed AFTER Docket Entry #55

on 03/20/2014.


Moreover, because of unusually long delays in receiving my records --

no doubt due to the 28 moves I have had to endure since 1/28/2014 --

I did confirm the docket error described above for the first time

on 5/10/2014.


Similarly, also on 3/21/2014, I did ask Mr. Hardee to file my second

MOTION TO DISMISS, but he never confirmed the filing of same, and

he never served me with any courtesy copy(s) of same, for my records.


As of today (5/11/2014), I STILL have no idea how many docket entries

were added after #55 filed on 03/20/2014.


Making matters much worse, I recently contacted a law firm

to explore the possibility of legal representation. An attorney

at that firm examined the docket and concluded -- wrongly --

that I was already “represented” by Mr. Hardee.


As a consequence of that error, said attorney concluded, wrongly,

that he would need to apply to the Federal Court for specific

authorization to replace Mr. Hardee.


Such an application is totally unnecessary because, on 3/21/2014

I expressly reserved my right to change my mind about formal

legal representation, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1654.


At a minimum, someone needs to notify the Clerk’s Office at the

USDC in Cheyenne, Wyoming, of the docket error identifying me

as “represented by” Mr. Hardee.


Mr. Hardee has never “represented” me, particularly after

I formally terminated his services as “stand-by counsel” in my

NOTICE OF TERMINATION: a copy of the latter NOTICE

has already been mailed to you by me.


I have not received minimally adequate “assistance of Counsel”

from Mr. Hardee, as the latter term occurs in the Sixth Amendment.

“Assistance” in that Amendment does NOT necessarily mean legal

“representation” nor does it necessarily imply “licensed attorney”

or “law clerk” [sic].


“Assistance” still has the same meaning which that term had when

the Bill of Rights i.e. first ten Amendments were originally ratified by

three-fourths of the several States that existed in the year 1791 A.D.


Thank you for your cooperation and assistance in this matter.


Sincerely your,

Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S. (chosen name)

Co-Defendant, Relator In Propria Persona, and Private Attorney General:

18 U.S.C. 1964, Rotella v. Wood, 528 U.S. 549 (2000)

All Rights Reserved (cf. UCC 1-308)


[signed Paul Mitchell]





Paul Andrew Mitchell has been bundled away by the US Government

Blowing Whistles At Hurricanes

May 27, 2014 in Current Affairs | Permalink

Objections and Possible Settlement(s) / FROM: 44202086 – MODELESKI, MITCHELL PAUL* – Unit: SET-D-C * given name (also a “nom de guerre”)

TRULINCS  44202086 – MODELESKI, MITCHELL PAUL* – Unit: SET-D-C * given name

                                                                                  (also a “nom de guerre”)



[Re: #2:14-CR-00027-NDF-2]


FROM: 44202086

TO: Brown, Thomas; Guenette, Edward; Mullen, Jack; Saccato, Larry

SUBJECT: Objections and Possible Settlement(s)

DATE: 05/06/2014 09:21:26 AM



Dr. C. Low

dba Forensic Psychologist

      FDC SeaTac


DATE: 5/5/2014 A.D.


RE: Objections and Possible Settlement(s)


Hello Dr. Low:


I hereby acknowledge all your time again this morning.


I was pleased we had an opportunity to discuss all the

efforts I have made to pursue graduate work in

computer science at the University of Washington, and

the serious obstacles which were deliberately and repeatedly

placed in my way by several UW faculty and administrators.


As far as I know, my utility patent application is still pending

for the very high-speed solid-state data storage device

of which I am the sole inventor. However, since 1/28/2014,

I have been unable to receive, nor respond to, any written

correspondence mailed to me by the U.S. Patent and Trademark

Office in Washington, D.C.


I am also writing to make you aware that a box of my court papers

and legal research was recently mailed to me by my legal assistant,

NOT yet been delivered to me, as of today.


My assistant addressed it to my chosen name, because that is

how I was registered the last time I was detained at FDC SeaTac.

Concerning the basic common law regarding one’s chosen name,

please see the enclosed “AGO 1985 No. 10,” which quotes the

Washington State Supreme Court as follows:


“… a person is free to adopt and use … any name he or she

 sees fit, as long as it is not done for any fraudulent purposes

 and does not infringe upon the rights of others …”

Doe v. Dunning, 87 Wn.2d 50, 549, P.2d 1 (1976)


As a Citizen of Washington State, I assert a right to stand upon

that State Supreme Court decision with total impunity.


If my incoming U.S. Mail is being, or has been returned to the sender

-- because it was addressed to my chosen name -- and if I am moved

yet again, FDC’s “policy” will require that I surrender all contents

of that mailed box, and witness it being shipped back to the sender

once again, a third time!


I should also take this opportunity to point out what I consider to be

a harsh inconsistency and double standard in your statements about

the Speedy Trial guarantee. You argued that the Speedy Trial clock







is tolled during the 30-day period reserved for psychological evaluations.

However, at our prior meeting, I demonstrated to you how and why

Ms. Freudenthal’s “order” violated 28 U.S.C. 1691.


At today’s meeting, I emphasized further how:


(a) I was never served with any MOTION or any NOTICE of any MOTION

requesting such a Court ORDER;


(b) I was never served with any NOTICE of any hearing on any such MOTION;


(c) I was never allowed to file any timely opposition to any such MOTION; and,


(d) I was never allowed to attend any hearings on any such MOTION.


If any DOJ personnel with whom you work do consider such blatant omissions

to qualify in any way as “due process law,” THEY are the ones who need

psychological evaluation, not me! Notice and hearing are the bare minimum

essentials of due process law, as I am quite sure you can confirm for

yourself by reading any published treatises on that Fifth Amendment guarantee.


More to the merits, why are you trying to enforce one Speedy Trial exception,

while ignoring all of the other laws that have been violated, and continue to

be violated, in my case? Where I come from, we call that “Cherry Picking”

(read “not good methodology in any field of research”).


Another even more blatant due process violation is evident in the fact that

you now possess an updated docket listing, and I do not. And, you seem

to find nothing wrong, and nothing out of place, with such fraudulent

concealment. Allow me to recommend that you telephone Stephan Harris,

Zachary Fisher and Tammy Hilliker at the USDC/Cheyenne, and ask them

yourself to produce evidence of their 2 Oaths of Office. For example,

see 28 U.S.C. 951 (duties).


The American Indians have a saying:


“Do not criticize a man, until you have walked a mile in his moccasins.”


The charges are false, Dr. Low, and you are hereby invited to experience

the proof yourself. Maybe then you will believe me. As of this moment,

I am having great difficulty understanding how you could earn a Ph.D.,

work at DOJ for 17 years, and STILL know so little about due process of law.

This I find shocking, quite shocking, to be perfectly honest with you.


I think you will at least understand the prudence of my position, even if

you do not agree with me, whenever I insist upon:


(1) effective assistance of competent Counsel during any settlement

negotiations; and,


(2) full disclosure of all required credentials of all “attorneys for the

government" who may participate in any such settlement negotiations

and/or sign any related settlement agreements.


In this context, please see the applicable definitions of key terms,

as used in Rules 1, 6 and 7 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure; and,

the published decision in U.S. v. Pignatiello, USDC/DCO (~1985),

Judge Matsch presiding (indictment was dismissed because

an SEC lawyer conducted grand jury hearings for 3 weeks







withOUT the OATH required by 28 U.S.C. 544).


The actual and consequential damages to me continue to mount

as a result of criminal defamations, tortious interference e.g.

with business plans and patent research, and multiple violations

of my Fundamental Rights and of applicable Sections of the

Federal Criminal Code e.g. 18 U.S.C. 241, 242, 912, 1513, 1519

and 1962(d) – for starters.


Rehabilitating me, and “making me whole” again, will require

MAJOR concessions and SUBSTANTIAL compensations to me

by the United States (federal government) and ALL of its

responsible officers, employees and ALL non-credentialed “agents,”

of whatever description and irrespective of whatever de facto

positions they claim to occupy.


For your information, last February I did transmit a Bona Fide Offer

in Compromise to the Office of the U.S. Attorney in Cheyenne,

Wyoming; but, I now suspect it was mostly MISunderstood by

personnel in that Office. For example, the U.S. Marshal for that

District did not know what a UCC FINANCING STATEMENT is (!); and,

Mr. L. Robert Murray openly attempted to disparage the one I have

already registered against a major defendant in my complex copyright

lawsuit, commenced in Sacramento, California in late August 2001.

See U.S. v. High Country Broadcasting (re: when default judgment

is proper).




As fair compensation for all cumulative damages I have suffered

to date, I will now accept $100 Million USD, tax-free, a public

written apology, dismissal of the “indictment” with prejudice

retroactive ab initio, and a return of all my personal properties

and belongings seized during the illegal raid on my apartment

on June 11, 2013. The $100 Million will be paid in U.S. Dollars

to the client trust account maintained by the law firm(s) of

my own choosing.


And, a Settlement will not prejudice any other rights which

I have acquired as a result of four (4) “Qui Tam” complaints

duly lodged with DOJ under the Federal Civil False Claims Act,

two (2) INVOICEs payable to the Treasury of the United States

(for $6.9T and $1.8T respectively), additional UCC FINANCING

STATEMENTS against 128 other named copyright defendants, and

any IRS Whistleblower awards I have earned from any of the



You have my permission to forward true and correct copies

of this memo to other persons whom it may concern.


Thank you very much for your consideration.


Sincerely yours,

/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S. (chosen name)

Private Attorney General, 18 U.S.C. 1964, Rotella v. Wood

All Rights Reserved (cf. UCC 1-308), In Propria Persona,

28 U.S.C. 1654 (personally or by counsel)

[signed Paul Mitchell]
















Paul Andrew Mitchell has been bundled away by the US Government

Blowing Whistles At Hurricanes

May 27, 2014 in Current Affairs | Permalink

case law: Fifth and Sixth Amendments / FROM: 44202086 – MODELESKI, MITCHELL PAUL* – Unit: SET-D-C * given name (also a “nom de guerre”)

TRULINCS  44202086 – MODELESKI, MITCHELL PAUL* – Unit: SET-D-C * given name

                                                                                  (also a “nom de guerre”)


 [Re: #2:14-CR-00027-NDF-2]

FROM: 44202086

TO: Brown, Thomas; Saccato, Larry

SUBJECT: case law: Fifth and Sixth Amendments

DATE: 04/26/2014 03:10:35 PM



Dr. C. Low

dba Forensic Psychologist

FDC SeaTac


Dr. Low:


I have located the following court decisions in order

to demonstrate the sincere good faith of my position

concerning the second “psychological examination”

which you are endeavoring to conduct allegedly

on the basis of an invalid Federal Court “order”:


“If defense counsel is not present at [a] psychiatric examination,

defendant should be asked by examiner whether he understands

that counsel is entitled to be present and if he consents to be

examined in absence of counsel; defendant should further be

informed that examination is conducted on behalf of prosecution

and its results will be available for use against defendant

without confidentiality of doctor-patient relationship.”

-- State v. Mains, 295 Or 640, 669 P.2d 1112 (1983)


“Statements made during course of [a] court ordered psychiatric

examination are “testimonial” in nature; thus, compelled

utterances during course of examination must be viewed

as implicating [the] privilege against self-incrimination;

statements obtained under compulsion of court ordered

examination are not available to prosecution even for

limited impeachment purposes.”

-- Blaisdell v. Commonwealth, 372 Mass 753, 364 NE.2d 191 (1977)


“Protection of defendant’s constitutional privilege against

self-incrimination and right to assistance of counsel

at [a] pre-trial court-ordered psychiatric examination requires

that [a] tape-recording of entire interview be given to his

and government’s lawyer, and [an] in camera suppression hearing

be held to guarantee that court-ordered psychiatrist’s testimony

will not contain any incriminating statements.”

-- State v. Jackson, 171 W VA 329, 298 SE.2d 866 (1982)


For the record, you have NOT informed me that

Your “examination” has been and is being conducted

on behalf of the prosecution, and that its results

will be available for use against me without the

confidentiality of a doctor-patient relationship.


Your apparent ignorance of the Law in this matter

has also resulted in your having given me what

amounted to “bad legal advice” i.e. you did NOT

at any time ask me if I understood that counsel

is entitled to be present and if I consented to be

examined in the absence of counsel.







On the contrary, I do specifically remember saying to you that

I am being detained here at FDC SeaTac UNDER DURESS

of a fraudulent “search warrant” -and- a fraudulent

“arrest warrant” (chiefly: no compliance with 28 U.S.C. 1691;

missing credentials confirmed for several Clerk’s Office personnel;

COUNTERFEIT OPM Standard Form 61 published at;

no OPM Application for OMB review and approval of that SF-61).


See further elaborations in my NOTICE OF TERMINATION [to Mr. Mark Hardee]


copies of which I have already transmitted to your attention, and

which are hereby incorporated by reference as if set forth fully here.




I do NOT consent to be examined in the absence

of competent and qualified assistance of Counsel:

see Fifth and Sixth Amendments, U.S. Constitution;

18 U.S.C. 241, 242, 912, 1513, 1519, 1962(d), 1964;

Miranda v. Arizona (re: Rights secured by the Constitution);

44 U.S.C. 3512; 5 CFR 1320.5, and Rotella v. Wood infra

(re: objectives of Civil RICO).


Thank you for honoring all of my Fundamental Rights

e.g. Rights secured by the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and

Eighth Amendment, for starters.


Sincerely yours,

Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S. (chosen name)

Private Attorney General, 18 U.S.C. 1964, Rotella v. Wood, 528 U.S. 549 (2000)

All Rights Reserved (cf. UCC 1-308)




























Paul Andrew Mitchell has been bundled away by the US Government

Blowing Whistles At Hurricanes

May 27, 2014 in Current Affairs | Permalink

FORMAL OBJECTIONS TO “PSYCHOLOGICAL EVALUATION” #2 / FROM: 44202086 – MODELESKI, MITCHELL PAUL* – Unit: SET-D-C * given name (also a “nom de guerre”)

TRULINCS  44202086 – MODELESKI, MITCHELL PAUL* – Unit: SET-D-C * given name

                                                                                   (also a “nom de guerre”)



FROM: 44202086

TO: Brown, Thomas; Guenete, Edward; Mullen, Jack; Saccato, Larry


DATE: 04/19/2014 01:22:11 PM



Dr. C. Low

dba Forensic Psychologist

FDC SeaTac


Dr. Low:


By now you should have received a Courtesy Copy of my

NOTICE OF TERMINATION to attorney Mark Hardee.

I am writing to expand upon the points of fact

itemized in paragraphs numbered (6) thru (9)

in that NOTICE.


The Federal statute at 28 U.S.C. 1691 is obviously

very important in my case: If you have not received it yet,

that law requires the Clerk’s authorized signature -AND-

the Court’s official seal on all Federal Court “process”.


On the Internet, try:


The term “process” embraces everything a Federal Court

issues, such as subpoenas, orders, writs, warrants,

summonses, and so on. Sec. 1691 was enacted on

June 25, 1948 (4 days after I was born), and it has

never been amended by any Act(s) of Congress.


The case law at 28 USCA and 28 USCS 1691

all agree that failing to satisfy its two (2) simple requirements

results in depriving a Federal Court jurisdiction

in personam (over Persons).


I am proceeding In Propria Persona (in my Proper Person).

See also 28 U.S.C. 1654.


USCA = United States Code Annotated

USCS = United States Code Service


As I have already confirmed to you, in your private office

this past week, the so-called “order”, allegedly authorizing

a [second] “psychological evaluation” of me, clearly violated

Sec. 1691 because it was not signed by any Clerk of Court,

and it did not exhibit any official Court seal.


The machine-generated date-and-time stamp is NOT

the official seal of the United States District Court

for the District of Wyoming.


Moreover, as summarized in paragraph (8) of my


cannot legally sign any such “order”, even if he tried,

because he has chosen to conceal the U.S. Office of

Personnel Management Standard Form 61 (“SF-61”)








Article VI, Clause 3 in the U.S. Constitution, and

by the Federal statutes at 5 U.S.C. 2104, 2903, 2906,

3331, 3332, 3333 and 5507.


Because Mr. Harris has failed to produce his own SF-61

for more than six (6) YEARS now, he has been formally

charged with violating 18 U.S.C. 1519 (a FELONY Federal

offense). He is IN DEFAULT and now legally ESTOPPED

by his silence for such a long period of time.


On the Internet, try:


Here, I should emphasize that 5 U.S.C. 2906 expressly

designates the “court” as the legal custodian of the SF-61

required of Mr. Harris and of ALL other Court officers:

that means he must have custody of his own SF-61.

See also 28 U.S.C. 951 (re: duties of Clerks).


Moreover, such a Court “officer” cannot even get paid until

and unless the second AFFIDAVIT required by 5 U.S.C. 3332

is timely executed by each such “officer”. See 5 U.S.C. 5507.


Ms. Nancy D. Freudenthal is also implicated in all the above

violations. She is now personally liable to me chiefly because

the U.S. District Court in Cheyenne, Wyoming, was never

able to prove jurisdiction in personam: it CAN’T, as long as

Clerk’s Office personnel neglect, or refuse, to produce their own



“Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved,

there can be no rule making or legislation which would

abrogate them.” Miranda v. Arizona (re: Miranda warnings).

Article VI, Clause 3, guarantees such a “fundamental” Right!


Moreover, failure to ensure effective assistance of Counsel

has necessarily resulted in OUSTING her Court of jurisdiction.

See Johnson v. Zerbst. As you should already know by now,

Mr. Mark Hardee has totally abandoned me. Of course,

a Federal court cannot be “ousted of jurisdiction”

if it never had jurisdiction in the first place!


Two (2) other Federal Public Defenders were also terminated

in my case, for obvious incompetence and gross negligence.

See the Sixth Amendment here re: assistance of Counsel

(NOT representation by a licensed attorney). The Framers

knew the difference between Counsel and licensed attorney.


Now, I must address the legal risks to which you are being

exposed, insofar as you are, or may be, aiding and abetting

any of the violations mentioned above, or merely being an

accessory after the fact to those same violations. Here,

see 18 U.S.C. 2 and 3, respectively.


Because I have now proven to you that Freudenthal’s “order”

is not valid, I am under no obligations to submit to a second

psychological evaluation allegedly authorized by that invalid “order”.







In conclusion, therefore, I decline to answer any more of your

questions unless I am accompanied by a capable and qualified

stand-by counsel who can provide me with timely, and reliable,

legal advice about possible attempts to induce me to be a witness

against myself, in obvious violation of the Fifth Amendment.

Here, see 18 U.S.C. 241, 242, and 1513 in particular.


Thank you for your professional consideration in this matter.


Sincerely yours,

/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S. (my chosen name)

Private Attorney General

See 18 U.S.C. 1964; Rotella v. Wood, 528 U.S. 549 (2000)

All Rights Reserved (cf. UCC 1-308)


[Signed Paul Mitchell]




































May 27, 2014 in Current Affairs | Permalink

New Evidence in JFK Assassination: More Mystery Deaths

U.S. Archives Building, Washington DC by Lance Moore (self)


New Evidence in JFK Assassination: More Mystery Deaths

by Dr. Lance Moore

By 1990, our government and the mainstream media had been forced by a preponderance of evidence to quietly concede that a second gunman conspired to kill President John F. Kennedy. After the report of the House Select Committee on Assassinations, the official storyline changed from "A lone-nut gunman did it," to "Maybe Mafia members were also involved... but we'll never know for sure." The new myth was really no better than the first: the public could not put a dead Lee Harvey Oswald on trial, and similarly, we cannot indict nameless, nebulous "Mafia figures." Undaunted, conspiracy researchers continued to press ahead, finding more proofs of government complicity, especially when the Assassination Records Review Board (ARRB) was empowered by Congress in 1992 to subpoena and assemble government documents from the CIA, FBI, etc. So the mainstream establishment turned to a young, enterprising attorney, Gerald Posner, to create yet another lone-gunman counter-myth in his 1993 book,Case Closed. An aggressive ad hominem attack on "conspiracy buffs" began, and we have been in a defensive posture ever since.

Debunking the Debunker

Posner's book shrewdly deconstructed our strong case by shattering the mosaic of conspiracy into a thousand shards, then sniping at each piece one at a time, using selective quotes, twisted facts, and strained logic. Like the Warren Commission before him, he used the mantra "Not a credible witness" with abandon. "Not credible" vs. "credible" is his oscillating standard based on whether or not the witness agreed with the official cover story. Posner's involvement with a plot to steal Harper Lee's copyright to To Kill a Mockingbird, and his serial plagiarism, have been widely reported, and several books have since been published that make mince-meat of Posner's JFK work. He has even been dubbed the world record-holder for plagiarism by The Gawker. Yet, his book of lies has never been removed from publication, and no mainstream publisher has promoted our truth-filled rebuttals the way that Random House and CBS boosted the hyperbolically-titled Case Closed.


This article is too brief to replay the full debunking of Posner, but new evidence has come to me that refutes two major Posner arguments: 1. His claim that Oswald was not involved with U.S. intelligence operatives in New Orleans. 2. That the mysterious deaths of witnesses and other key figures in the assassination were incidental and meaningless. Both his claims are demonstrably absurd. A new source independently confirms the Oswald/CIA/mysterious deaths connection.

Oz in NOLA: In the company of The Company

First, some background. When we agree with Oswald's self-assertion that he was a "patsy," that is not to say he was uninvolved with those who executed the plot. Documents prove "Ozzie" had ties in New Orleans to the FBI, Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI), and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA, also known as The Company). NOLA District Attorney Jim Garrison prosecuted the only criminal trial of the JFK-assassination conspiracy. He famously pointed out (as dramatized in the movie, JFK) that offices for these agencies were within a four block area concentric with Oswald's hangouts. But our case only begins with what might be shrugged off as a geographic coincidence. The nexus is vast. We now see how close Garrison was to breaking the case, having discovered the mutual ties among Oswald, Guy Banister (FBI and Naval Intelligence) and David Ferrie (CIA). Ferrie was a contract pilot for the CIA, involved in a variety of nefarious activities including gun-running to Cuba and training of anti-Castro exiles--a key witness in Garrison's case, until his untimely death. Those ties, once scoffed at, have now been proven, starting with governmental acknowledgement in the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) report. See Section XIII, pp. 126-137 here:

Here is a partial list of people who claim to have seen Oswald and Banister together: Dr. Michael Kurtz, CIA deputy Hunter Leake, Delphine Roberts (Banister's secretary), Bill Nitschke, Dan Campbell, Vernon Gerdes, Judyth Baker, William Gaudet, and Jack Martin (Banister's partner).2

The list of those who can connect Oswald and Ferrie is even longer, plus I have uncovered a new witness, never before reported (more on that, below).

Posner downplays the HSCA report and dismisses these as "not credible witnesses," based on specious reasoning. Yes, some were shady characters, and some had a few inconsistencies in their testimony... but when so many people say the same thing, it is absurd to dismiss them en masse. Imagine if a Mafia gunman killed someone in cold blood, and the case went to trial, and a dozen witnesses all said they saw him do it. No jury would disregard that much commonality of testimony, even if some of the witnesses had nefarious backgrounds or stuttering testimony. In many criminal cases the witnesses are themselves criminal, so it is disingenuous for debunkers Posner and Vincent Bugliosi, both being attorneys, to scratch testimony on that basis. Even more damning is that our case does not rest solely on the words of so-called "unreliable" witnesses; we also have the hard evidence of photographs of a young Oswald in David Ferrie's Civil Air Patrol group (prior to that, the government had ignored a half-dozen of his fellow cadets who adamantly stated that Oswald was part of their group), AND Oswald's "pro-Castro" leaflets on which he had stamped 544 Camp Street--the corner of Guy Banister's office building. We could cite many more examples like this, in which the "conspiracy buffs and their wild theories" have been vindicated. No matter how shrill the debunkers' denial, eye-witnesses and paper evidence cross-confirm the Oswald/Banister connection. HSCA and the ARRB documents provide similar cross-confirmation of a quadruple connection among Oswald/Ferrie/Banister/Clay Shaw. Researchers William Davy and Jim DiEugenio both have proven this with a mountain of documentation.

Another strand of the web is that Ferrie worked part-time with Banister's detective agency and even hired Banister to help him with his lawsuit against Eastern Airlines. Eastern was infiltrated with CIA contract agents, mostly pilots, as we shall see in a moment.1 Like the net of a spider web, the entanglements are multiple. We also know that Banister had a connection to the William B. Reily Coffee Company on Magazine Street, not too many steps away from Banister's office, and one of Oswald's employers. D.A. Jim Garrison had good reasons to believe that Reily and his coffee company were part of the U.S. intelligence apparatus, and this association is documented in William Davy's book, Let Justice Be Done (see Chapter Four).

Ralph Schoenman wrote, in a substantiated letter to the Rockefeller Commission, that the "seemingly innocuous company called Reily Coffee... proved less than innocent. Virtually all the co-workers of Lee Harvey Oswald at the Reily Coffee Company were hired by defense and military contractors... shortly after [their] association with Oswald."

CIA contract employee Gerry Patrick Hemming confirmed that "William Reily had worked for the CIA for years." That quote is from the book, JFK And The Unspeakable (p. 62), written by my friend Jim Douglass, who adds: "When Oswald went to work in Reily's Coffee company, he was in the company of the Company."

The Suspicious Deaths List

Here we begin our list of three more "mysterious deaths" which have not been previously reported,2 even as we add Eastern Airlines to the cross-connected nexus of Oswald, NOLA intelligence circles (CIA/ONI), and suspect deaths. One of the most suspicious airline crashes in Eastern Airline history was Flight 304 out of New Orleans just a few months after the assassination. A passenger on board, Jules Charles Robert (sometimes misspelled... there is no "S" on his last name, "Robert"), had been an Executive with the William B. Reily Coffee company at the same time Lee Oswald worked there--the summer prior to the JFK assassination. Just after the assassination, Mr. Robert was killed in a mysterious crash toward the north side of Lake Pontchartrain. See The Times-Picayune, April, 2014, here:

The "crash" was mysterious because it was more likely an explosion, as in a bomb, not an accident. It happened shortly after take-off, just as the plane reached altitude. Airline bombs can work that way: triggered by a simple pressure-altimeter when a plane hits cruising altitude. The accident report does cite a minor mechanical problem with the pitch trim compensator, but the pilots were aware of it before take-off, and knowing how to compensate for it, took off with apparently no great concerns. The best reports show that turbulence was moderate and the plane was only three years old with a flawless safety record. The four-engine jumbo jet had a light load of just 51 passengers. No distress call was given by the veteran pilots, the flight recorder was blank, and most strangely of all, half of the plane and passengers were never recovered--the pieces that were recovered were just that: pieces. The debris was scattered over a wide area. The plane hit water, and the passengers had been seat-belted into their padded seats... yet their bodies were found in shreds. A Coast Guard officer observed the plane "explode" either before or after it hit the water. Eleven witnesses on the north shore heard an explosion--not just the sound of a plane hitting water, as it was accompanied with a huge flash of light. Again: according to news reports, only "bits and pieces" of the bodies were found, despite crashing into just 20 feet of water in an easily-searched lake.3

This would not be the only crash involving Eastern Airline pilots during the sixties and early seventies. I have new, never-published testimony from the son of a pilot who flew with Eastern based out of New Orleans area in the early sixties. His dad was a fellow pilot with David Ferrie, and he also flew with Eastern Airlines pilot James Aubrey "Tex" Kilcrease. Tex later crashed at the controls of a private Cessna 182, N869TX, lost en route to Mexico City on Dec 7, 1973.

A New Source

My confidential, highly-credible military source gives this account:

"My father was on the periphery of the JFK scenario and rarely talked about it until near to his death. He was scared, and that man feared few things! In early 1957, my dad got out of the Navy, having served as a pilot in the Korean conflict, and went to work for Eastern Airlines as a junior copilot, based in New Orleans. Back then, whoever was your Captain called the shots and you had to "party" with your boss. [While I was a toddler,] we were living in Covington, across Lake Pontchartrain. [Covington is in Saint Tammany Parish, where Ferrie and Oswald were seen together at a CIA training camp.] According to my dad, a whole parcel of "cowboys" were based out of [Eastern Airlines in] New Orleans... many needed extra cash. Enter the CIA and private businessmen. New Orleans was easy to fly in and out of back then [to Cuba and Mexico City]. Much easier than Florida. Once you did one run [for the CIA], they had their hooks in you. My dad said he was approached more than once but steered clear. He knew David Ferrie as Dave, an Eastern Airlines Captain... my dad flew with him a number of times. Ferrie pressured my dad to come to some of the parties he hosted at his French Quarter residence. It was there that my dad met Lee Harvey Oswald. Dad's impression of Oswald was that this was a weird enlisted Marine who tried (but failed) to fit in with the rest of the fly boy party crew. Obviously, he did not think much about it until Oswald hit the news in '63. After that, Ferrie supposedly died of a heart attack [sic: coroner deemed it a stroke] and my dad was very circumspect regarding the cause of death. It was rumored that Ferrie had significant ballistics and trajectory research/data in his residence that never came to light. My dad also said that the cowboy "moonlighters" ceased the secret flying trips right around the time the assassination took place. By the Spring of 1965 all the pilots had been transferred to other bases.


"No less than four of his colleagues that flew for Eastern in NOLA died under questionable circumstances. Two names I recall, besides Ferrie, were Steve Pegram and Tex Kilcrease. Both quit flying for EAL after the shooting, and both died prematurely. [After the assassination,] Pegram moved to Newnan, Georgia, and told my dad that he was being watched and didn't leave his basement for over a year. I have no details about Pegram's untimely death, but I recall inferring from my parents' words and attitude it might have been suicide."

My source is highly-credible because I know his personal history and his integrity (I've known him for over 30 years), but also because everything he told me is consistent with history... and he was no JFK-conspiracy buff. He had no idea that Tex Kilcrease was a minor character named in Jim Garrison's files (and never mentioned in popular JFK-assassination books). Garrison had sent his investigator to nose around in St. Tammany Parish (site of the anti-Castro training camp run by David Ferrie). The investigator inquired with local law enforcement about any area pilots (because of the Ferrie/Eastern Airline connection). Garrison's file contains this report: "The following information was received from Lt. Hudgeons [of St. Tammany Parish]. Airline pilots that he personally knows of that live in that area: Tex Kilcrease [of] Covington. Also has private detective agency... Lt. Hudgeons says he does not trust this subject."

Kilcrease's mysterious plane crash further confirms my source's story of mysterious deaths. The crash happened during the Watergate investigation, which subpoenaed Watergate burglar and CIA agent E. Howard Hunt. Hunt had his own NOLA connections, and confessed on his deathbed to involvement in the Kennedy assassination.

So we find, again, reports of mysterious plane crashes and suicide, all with similar motifs, the too-familiar ending for many JFK-case witnesses, especially those entangled with the CIA. Exactly one year before Tex disappeared in his Cessna, Congressman Hale Boggs, also in a Cessna, mysteriously disappeared in Alaskasilencing his dissent on the Warren Commission\. Like Kilcrease, Bogg's plane wreckage was never found despite an intensive, widespread, 39-day search. Unlike the recent Malaysian 370 airline disappearance into the unending oceans "down under," the Cessna's were lost over land in a finite search area.

Two Oswalds in Paradox

Without even going as far as some do in proposing that Oswald literally had a lookalike double, we know there were, figuratively-speaking, "two Oswalds": the Solitary Lee and the widely-networked Entangled Lee. The official Lee Harvey Oswald portrait is of an isolated, friendless misfit; a solitary, dysfunctional nut; a communist with no community. In sharp contrast, the other Lee is a young man with a hundred connections: in the Cuban anti-Castro movement; in the underbelly of New Orleans; in Miami, Cuba, Mexico and Russia; in the CIA and the FBI. ThisEntangled Lee was a paradox: 1. Most everywhere he went, Lee strangely associated withboth left-wingers and right-wingers, lawbreakers and law enforcers. 2. Entangled Lee used a score of aliases, also inconsistent with the official Lee, whose motive for killing JFK is said to be for the purpose of making his name famous.

Any politician or author who painted a portrait of Solitary Lee became enriched; any witness to the Entangled Lee ran a statistically-high chance of dying young! I cannot overstate this point: we have uncovered the reality of the Entangled Leedespite the reward/punishment factors working against us and despite the death of key witnesses.

Posner expended his entire Appendix B to ridicule the topic of a hundred "Mysterious Deaths" that conspiracy researchers have catalogued. Start at the top: his flippant denial of the significance of Oswald's murder betrays Posner's bias. The most suspicious death of all was the silencing of the scape-goat, which Posner "explains" as the work of yet another "crazy lone-gunman," Jack Ruby. If Ruby was so crazy, why did the Dallas police allow him repeated access to Oswald, inside their police station? They knew him as a sane, successful businessman, otherwise they surely would not have let their guard down around such a shady character (Ruby ran a strip joint, and with known criminal ties, looked the part of a gangster.) Posner lies by claiming Ruby did not make any phone calls to the Mafia, when records unearthed by the HSCA and ARRB show plenty. Ruby also made good use of untraceable phone booth calls. But the icing on this death cake is that Ruby himself later admitted to a high-reaching conspiracy. Oswald's death at the hands of Ruby is indeed "mysterious," (i.e. "suspicious"), and for many of us it is a literal "smoking gun" because it silenced the key witness. This is how conspiracies are kept quiet. Corpses make great co-conspirators; you can count on mummies to stay mum.

There are so many more corpses, where do we start? Ferrie and Banister were both dead before Garrison could drag them into court. Several witnesses that would have been problematic for the Warren Commission had "accidents" by the time the Report was released. By the end of the House Investigation in the 70's, over a hundred of the people connected to the "lone Oswald" nexus were dead--most by accident, suicide, murder or plane crash.4 Here again, Posner and other debunkers ridicule this claim, cherry-picking to highlight any names that, frankly, were natural deaths that should not have been listed in the first place. Given space, I would argue with Posner's ridicule on some points, but agree with him on many others... nevertheless, we would still be left with an irrefutable core of violent deaths. I do the math this way: the longest lists contain over 120 suspicious deaths. I remove 30 who seem to be natural or coincidental, but add the three new names in this article, plus add Oswald and Kennedy's names, and we still arrive at 100 persons with legitimate connections to the case who truly had violent or questionable deaths. 100! That's a record number of strange deaths surrounding anyperson, much less a "loner," if you wish to call Oswald that. The statistics strain credulity.One statistical study puts the odds in the trillions.

Let's just say that involvement with JFK or LHO proved to be very bad for a person's health.

The Valley of the Shadow of Death

Ignoring literally thousands of actual hard documents in the hands of the ARRB and the AARC, debunkers still continue to whimper that this is all just "hearsay" from "unreliable witnesses."

Study The Assassination Archives and Research Center here:

In the fifty years since the JFK tragedy, despite a concerted effort by our government to cover-up the facts. We know for a fact the FBI and CIA have hidden, shredded and blacked-out documents -- see Doug Horne's books about his work with the ARRB -- the overwhelmingly one-sided trend grows toward conspiracy proof, not toward Oswald did it. This article has presented another new witness. With every new witness who comes forward and with every newly-discovered document, a government conspiracy is being "more proved," and the debunking is, itself, debunked. Posner, Bugliosi, McAdams and their ilk are turning out to be the ones with a credibility problem.

The punchline? The relevance of all this is that our decision-makers and media-shapers continue to lie to us. Despite our journey up a mountain of increasing evidence of a conspiracy, the mainstream media has headed in the opposite direction, down into the valley of darkness and denial. There's a shadow still cast over our political system and media that has grown darker in recent years. That should make us tremble for the future of our democracy.



-Dr. Moore's recently-released book contains substantiation for his assertions here. In addition to hyperlinks above, some specific Endnotes for this article follow:

1. Authors Jefferson Morley, William Davy and James DiEugenio have all documented Ferrie's connection to the CIA, beginning with Davy's interview of CIA operative Carl McNabb, who confirmed that he and Ferrie were both CIA-contracted pilots. My new source has now independently confirmed this.

2. To the best of my knowledge/research, three deaths I identify herein have never previously been examined or added to any "JFK/Oswald mysterious deaths" list.

3. The New York Times, February 26, 1964 and "ICAO Aircraft Accident Digest No.16, Circular 82-AN/69 (39-60)"

4. Note: I don't find all the deaths on these lists to be mysterious, but an amazing number were either suspicious in the violent method of death, or in the timing of the death, or in aquestionable autopsy conclusion regarding cause of death. Moreover, of the various lists out there, I can't find any that are truly comprehensive, including, for example, all those left in LBJ's path, and none have the three new names listed here.

*For another 50 reasons to suspect our leaders are still lying to us, read: Killing JFK: 50 Years, 50 Lies--From the Warren Commission to Bill O'Reilly, A History of Deceit in the Kennedy Assassination. Excerpts from it are used with permission of Sky-Fy Publishing, at


Dr. Lance Moore is an ordained United Methodist minister and author of Killing JFK: 50 Years, 50 Lies--From the Warren Commission to Bill O'Reilly, A History of Deceit in the Kennedy Assassination.




May 26, 2014 in Current Affairs | Permalink