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

« May 2014 | Main | July 2014 »

House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform informed about new information re: IRS / US Gov targeting scandal

ToOGR, Report 

Jun 24 (2 days ago)
to me

Thank you for submitting information to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. If further information is needed we will contact you.

To House Committe on Oversight and Government Reform:

Dear Committee Members,

This communication is re: Paul Andrew Mitchell, a currently targeted and unlawfully detained individual.

This man was targeted and is being held political prisoner by a federal judge, Nancy D. Freudenthal, and other IRS / US officials who are causing him to be given diesel therapy and I strongly believe that this is happening and is directly connected to the current IRS scandal but is yet an unaddressed issue in regards to it. I also strongly believe the principals don't want anyone to know about it so they can get away with all that they are doing to Paul to silence him.

The judge has left in the Docket of Paul’s case (Case Title: 2:14-CR-00027-NDF-2, 1-15-2014) the impression, through an extant Docket entry (#43), that Paul has received a jury trial on a particular date in April, jury trial of which never occurred.

See the following information I posted about it. I did not know how I could get the information to those in government who could see what is going on. What is happening to Paul is unacceptable and I do not think should be left unaddressed in this scandal.

See the following for starters:

For anyone that cares (and should care) This is genuinely related and goes way deeper in re: IRS / US Gov targeting scandal and is more serious than just what is being covered here and about a corrupt Obama appointed Wyoming judge (and other IRS/US Gov officials), presiding & chief Judge Nancy D. Freudenthal who is misrepresenting that current political prisoner Paul Andrew Mitchell was given a jury trial (which never happened), while at the same time giving him diesel therapy


Blowing Whistles at Hurricanes

I sincerely hope that you will look into this and that it will be addressed.

June 26, 2014 in Current Affairs | Permalink

New evidence shows 2012 particle discovery is the Higgs boson

New evidence shows particle found in 2012 is the Higgs boson


What is the Higgs Boson? 

What is a Higgs Boson?

June 23, 2014 in Current Affairs | Permalink

Re: FBI murder of Franklin pedophile ring investigator Gary Caradori 7/11/90 by placing a bomb on his plane

Teknosis needs your help and has found a great way to help that includes yourself at the same time. Please support Teknosis:


also.. http://vitafit.my90forlife.com/


Wayne Madsen: the FBI murdered Franklin pedophile ring investigator Gary Caradori on July 11th, 1990 by placing a bomb on his plane

From Robert Morrow  512-306-1510   Austin, TX 

Summary: Wayne Madsen has a key source who has confirmed to him that the FBI murdered Franklin pedophile ring investigator Gary Caradori on July 11th, 1990 by placing a bomb in his plane. The Franklin pedophile ring was a mainly a homosexual pedophile ring that was run for about 10 years by Lawrence E. King, a rising star in the Republican party. Lawrence E. King sang the national anthem at the 1984 Republican national convention. At the time King was one of the nastiest pedophilic pimps in the USA: a Satanist, child molesting pedophilic pimp, a sadist and a child pornographer. And some of Lawrence E. King’s friends were some of the most powerful people in the USA - especially high level Republicans.


Note: although the inner core of Franklin were sadist Satanists based in the Omaha area, it does not mean all or even most of their well-heeled pedophilic clients were Satanists. These Satanists took a sick, evil joy in sexually, physically and psychologically abusing these children. The clients were homosexual pedophiles.


One of Lawrence E. King’s pedophilic customers was Vice President George Herbert Walker Bush. Other high profile people involved were Harold Andersen, a good friend of Bush’s, CFR member and the publisher of the Omaha World Herald. Andersen in particular was a very nasty pedophile who would have sex with 12 year old boys (see victim Paul Bonnacci). Paul Bonnacci, an abused teenaged prostitute, was also pimped out 3 times to Democratic Rep. Barney Frank.


Another high level pedophile and friend of President George Herbert Walker Bush was a man placed at a very high level in the Justice Dept. and this pedophile played a key role in nefariously using the forces of the federal government in protecting his fellow pedophiles. It would not surprise me if President George Herbert Walker Bush and this other high level pedophile at Justice were the ones using the FBI to orchestrate the murder of Gary Caradori. Remember the FBI is a part of the Dept of Justice and the homosexual pedophile at Justice was very high level.


If you don’t think George Herbert Walker Bush is a murderer, then read my essay Jeb Bush and the Murder of CIA Drug Smuggler Barry Seal in 1986.


The odds are near 100% that George Herbert Walker Bush, Oliver North and Jeb Bush murdered CIA Drug Smuggler Barry Seal in 1986. My number one suspect for the murder of Gary Caradori would also be George Herbert Walker Bush, a pedophile politician possibly facing the risk of exposure.


Longtime Houston gay activist Ray Hill told me in 2011 that when George Herbert Walker Bush was a congressman in Houston in the late 1960’s he was sexually abusing a young boy. Ray Hill knew about this because his friend John Coil owned the Carousel Motel (formerly near Gulfgate Mall in Houston) and GHW Bush would often take this Hispanic boy there for sexual purposes. John Coil would often talk about the deviant sexual activities of then Congressman George Herbert Walker Bush. I specifically asked Ray Hill how old was the boy? Age 17 or 18? Or Age 15 or 16? Ray Hill told me the boy was young enough to be called a kid! So GHW Bush’s pedophilia of the late 1960’s jibes perfectly with his participation in the 1980’s Franklin pedophile ring.


1980’s GOP star lobbyist Craig Spence was also someone highly involved in pedophilia and sexual blackmail of people who were having sex with boys. Craig Spence was the uber well connected Jack Abramoff of his era - a man with high level access to the Bush White House.


Web link: http://www.roseanneworld.com/blog/2014/06/special-report-fbi-killed-franklin-scandal-investigator-wayne-madsen-report/


Excellent web site on Franklin Scandal - www.franklinscandal.com


Excellent timeline of the Franklin pedophile ring: http://www.franklincase.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=11&Itemid=9


Documentary Conspiracy of Silence - it was banned because it hit a high level nerve center. A must watch video. It opens with pedophilic pimp Lawrence E. King singing the national anthem at the 1984 Republican convention.


Another good link on this topic: http://archive.org/stream/TheFranklinCover-upByFormerGreenBeretJohnDecamp/the_Frankklin_cover-up_-_ebook_djvu.txt


Books to read on the 1980’s Franklin pedophile ring:


1) The Franklin Cover Up by John De Camp (1992)


Here is a PDF of the Franklin Cover Up http://www.whale.to/b/the_franklin_cover-up_-_john_decamp_-_ebook.pdf


The shut-down of Omaha, Nebraska's Franklin Community Federal Credit Union, raided by federal agencies in November 1988, sent shock waves all the way to Washington, D.C. $40 million was missing. The credit union's manager: Republican Party activist Lawrence E. "Larry" King, Jr., behind whose rise to fame and riches stood powerful figures in Nebraska politics and business, and in the nation's capital.

In the face of opposition from local and state law enforcement, from the FBI, and from the powerful Omaha World-Herald
newspaper, a special Franklin committee of the Nebraska Legislature launched its own probe. What looked like a financial swindle, soon exploded into a hideous tale of drugs, Iran-Contra money-laundering, a nationwide child abuse ring, and ritual murder.

Nineteen months later, the legislative committee's chief investigator died - suddenly, and violently, like more than a dozen other people linked to the Franklin case. 

Author John DeCamp knows the Franklin scandal from the inside. In 1990, his "DeCamp memo" first publicly named the alleged high-ranking abusers. Today, he is attorney for two of the abuse victims.

Using documentation never before made public, DeCamp lays bare not only the crimes, but the cover-up - a textbook case of how dangerous the corruption of institutions of government, and the press, can be. In its sweep and in what it portends for the nation, the Franklin cover-up followed the ugly precedent of the Warren Commission.


2) The Franklin Scandal by Nick Bryant (2009)

A chilling exposé of corporate corruption and government cover-ups, this account of a nationwide child-trafficking and pedophilia ring in the United States tells a sordid tale of corruption in high places. The scandal originally surfaced during an investigation into Omaha, Nebraska's failed Franklin Federal Credit Union that went beyond the Midwest, ultimately to Washington, DC. Implicating businessmen, senators, major media corporations, the CIA, and even the venerable Boys Town organization, this extensively researched report includes firsthand interviews with key witnesses and explores a controversy that has received scant media attention.


3) Confessions of a D.C. Madame: The Politics of Sex, Lies and Blackmail by Henry Vinson, due to be published by Trine Day in December, 2014. Henry Vinson was the #1 gay pimp for Washington, DC in the 1980’s.Vinson book, when it is published is going to be blockbuster with some very high profile people finally being held accountable for their behavior. This book is a MUST READ.


From Wayne Madsen Report: June 20-22, 2014 – SPECIAL REPORT:

FBI killed Franklin scandal investigator

WMR can exclusively report that it was the Federal Bureau of Investigation that placed a bomb on the private airplane that killed state of Nebraska chief investigator Gary Caradori and his 6-year old son “AJ” on July 11, 1990. Caradori had been hired by the Nebraska unicameral legislature to investigate allegations that a number of Nebraska youth had been sexually abused and transported over state lines in a scandal centered around the Franklin Credit Union, headed by rising GOP African-American star Lawrence King.


A very knowledgeable source involved with what became known as the “Franklin Scandal” told WMR that Caradori flew to Chicago ostensibly to attend the All Star game on July 10 at Wrigley Field. In reality, the trip to the game was a cover for Caradori to meet with a source who handed him photographs that proved that Nebraskan children, some from the famed Boy’s Town orphanage, were being used for the sexual gratification of important political leaders in Washington, including Vice President and President George H W Bush.


Caradori phoned his wife and another investigator shortly before the All-Star game and told them the same thing: “I got what I came after. I got ‘em by the balls. I’ve got pictures. I will take them to the game and bring them back to Nebraska.”


When Caradori began to follow the money behind the Franklin scandal, he discovered two things: the Franklin Credit Union was being used by the White House and CIA to launder money for the Iran-contra affair and King and his associates were given a free ride to sexually traffic in and molest children, including many procured from Boy’s Town.


One of those implicated in the Franklin scandal was Housing and Urban Development Secretary Sam Pierce. At the 1984 Republican National Convention in Dallas, King held a $1 million reception for Pierce. However, King’s salary at the time was $14,000 a year and the actual cost of the reception was $300,000. The difference, $700,000, went into a slush fund that was laundered by the Franklin Credit Union for various “activities” sponsored by the CIA and White House.


On July 11, Caradori took off in his private plane from Chicago en route to Nebraska. Witnesses on the ground said they saw a flash in the sky followed by an explosion. Initial news reports stated that Caradori’s aircraft exploded in flight and then crashed. However, subsequent news reports were altered and claimed the aircraft exploded upon impact with the ground. Caradori and his son were killed in the crash. The local Sheriff’s office reported that scattered in the wreckage were child pornographic photographs. The FBI arrived and began systematically removing the photographs, debris, and Caradori’s briefcase. Meanwhile, FBI agents in Lincoln, Nebraska entered Caradori’s office and seized his files. Another FBI agent showed up at the office of a Nebraska state official investigating the Franklin case and demanded he turn over his files. The state official told the FBI agent to “get the hell out.”


The Bush White House immediately began covering up the Franklin scandal and put pressure on the remaining Nebraska state investigators. The FBI used the Kansas City mob to intimidate high-level witnesses and investigators of the Franklin scandal. One of the lead investigators also told WMR, “the FBI killed Caradori . . . they put the bomb on his airplane.”


An attempt to hire former CIA director William Colby to lead a state of Nebraska investigation of the Franklin scandal failed in a legislative committee 4 to 3 vote. Instead, the committee appointed attorney Kirk Naylor as its chief investigator. A major figure involved in investigating Franklin told WMR that Naylor was the most incompetent person the committee could have found to lead the investigation. Colby was a Vietnam War colleague of Nebraska state Senator John De Camp, one of major investigators of the Franklin scandal. Colby reportedly was ready to expose the CIA’s own involvement in the use of child prostitutes for the purposes of political and diplomatic blackmail. Colby died in a suspicious canoeing accident on the Chesapeake Bay on April 27, 1996.


Monsignor Robert Hupp, the Vicar-General of the Archdiocese of Omaha, a former Navy chaplain, and, in 1976, the first-ever clergy member of the U.S. delegation to the United Nations, had reported in the early 1970s to his bishop that there was sexual abuse at Boy’s Town that even involved a priest murdering a boy. Hupp was later named the head of Boy’s Town, ostensibly to keep him quiet. Hupp was in charge of Boy’s Town until the late 1980s, when the Franklin scandal first hit the front pages. Eventually, even after stepping down as the head of the orphanage, Hupp was forced to leave Boy’s Town altogether. WMR has learned that in 2003 a longtime supporter of Boy’s Town allowed Hupp to move into his cabin in Mausten, Wisconsin after being forced to leave the facilities at Boy’s Town. A reporter for the Omaha World-Herald, a newspaper owned by Nebraska billionaire Warren Buffett and which always had a skeptical view of the Franklin scandal, volunteered to drive Hupp to Wisconsin. Upon arriving at the cabin, the reporter prepared dinner for Hupp. The retired monsignor who broke the Catholic Church’s silence on its role in the Franklin scandal, died in his sleep that same night.


The iconic Washington Times front page that capped off the Franklin scandal’s sporadic and spotty news coverage.


Anyone who believes the Franklin Scandal and Cover-up is over and done with would be dead wrong. On January 20, 2012, Carol Stitt, the 29-year director of the Nebraska Foster Care Review Board, an individual who aggressively protected foster care children in Nebraska from sexual perverts and other undesirable foster parents, was dismissed by her own board of directors. The 11-member board had been stacked by loyalists of Republican Governor Dave Heineman whose goal it was to oust Stitt. As with the constant intimidation of witnesses involved in Franklin, Stitt also found herself investigated by the federal government’s Office of Special Counsel for allegedly violating the Hatch Act by attending a 2006 political campaign rally for Republican and football coach legend Tom Osborne. Although Stitt, a state employee, would not normally be subject to the rarely-enforced Hatch Act that bans political activity by federal employees, Stitt’s Foster Care Review Board received funds from the federal Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

The HHS’s initial complaint against Stitt, which arose from her attendance at the 2006 Osborne rally, began when current GOP U.S. Senate candidate Ben Sasse was serving as assistant secretary for planning and evaluation at HHS. From 1996 to 1998, Sasse was one of four tutors/proctors for the U.S. House of Representatives page program. During this time frame, a number of House pages complained of sexual harassment from GOP House members. Representatives Jim Kolbe (R-AZ) and Mark Foley (R-FL) were later named as principal harassers of underage male pages. WMR has also learned from a member of the Sasse family that physical and psychological abuse have been rampant in the Sasse family. Senate candidate Sasse, who helped the John Ashcroft Justice Department draw up torture policy along with the CIAm is a home-schooler whose religious beliefs are based on neo-Calvinist fundamentalist Christian Dominionism.


Sasse faces two opponents after coming from the political wilderness to defeat better known and financed GOP candidates in the primary. David Domina, a trial lawyer, is Sasse’s lackluster Democratic opponent, while Dan Buhrdorf is mounting a spirited independent challenge under the Tax Wall Street Party banner.




Attachments area
Conspiracy Of Silence (Banned Discovery Channel Documentary)

June 22, 2014 in Current Affairs | Permalink


I don't care if a judge is Obama appointed or not, what is going on is unacceptable. This one just happens to be both Obama appointed and the wife of a recent former Wyoming governor.

Annotations from below PDF electronically entered here by Teknosis, see below PDF from Docket entry thereafter for original scan. This corruption can't be left standing! Please help me get this to the right people. There has to be someone out there who can help Paul.

[Re: JURY TRIAL that never happened]

[Re: circled CHEYENNE / United States District Court] no jurisdiction in personam: see 28 USCS 1691; 28 USCA 1691

[Re: circled For The District of Wyoming] no venue!

[Re: circled United States District Court / District of Wyoming logo] not an official seal; not an embossing stamp

[Re: circled Stephan Harris / Clerk of Court] no credentials produced for 6+ YEARS (SF-61, 28 USC 951)

[Re: circled UNITED STATES OF AMERICA] This entity has no legal standing as such; See 28 USC 1345, 1346, 1746 (within & without)

[Re: circled JOSEPH RUBEN HILL & MITCHELL PAUL MODELESKI aka PAUL MITCHELL,] ALL CAPS names are a "nom de guerre" implying state of war/mixed war/treason.

[Re: circled BEFORE Nancy D. Freudenthal, Chief, United States District Judge] now recused for bias, multiple conflicts of interest, and violations of 18 U.S.C. 2, 3, 242

[Re: circled DATE AND TIME April 14, 2014 @ 8:30 a.m] never happened!

[Re: TYPE OF PROCEEDING and circled JURY TRIAL] never happened: violates Speedy Trial guarantee!

[Re: circled STEPHAN HARRIS Clerk of Court] no credentials produced (SF-61, 28 USC 951)

[Re: circled Zachary Fisher Deputy Clerk] no credentials produced (SF-61, 28 USC 951)

[Re: circled AUSA - Bob Murray] missing credentials: 28 USC 544

[Re: circled Defense Counsel - Mike Reese] Mr. Reese defamed Defendant!

[Re: circled Stanby Counsel - Mark Hardee, two annotations]

[1] "Stanby" [sic] should be "Stand-by" See U.S. v. Coupez, 603 F.2d 1347 (9th Cir. 1979); and, Russell v. U.S., 308 F.2d 78 (9th Cir. 1962)

[2] correct until 3/26/2014: see NOTICE OF TERMINATION; and, moreover Defendant was never at any time legally "represented by Mark C. Hardee" [sic]; see Johnson v. Zerbst, U.S. Supreme Court


file in # 2:14-CR-00027-NDF-2

All Rights Reserved



Recent previous posts:


US Gov / IRS is using diesel therapy against IRS targeted political prisoner
Blowing Whistles at Hurricanes

Paul Andrew Mitchell has been bundled away by the US Government

Constitution, citizens, and the united states / Interview with Paul Andrew Mitchell who has been diesel therapied (for up to 5 months) by the US Gov in an IRS targeting scandal against conservatives/patriots:

June 22, 2014 in Current Affairs | Permalink

JFK Assassination Report: 13 Shots / Interviews with Leroy Blevins on Mystery US Show #'s 51, 52, 53

This interview with Leroy Blevins Sr. author of The JFK Assassination Report: 13 Shots reveals up all the secrets held in the photographic record proving a conspiracy. Leroy's research provides us with the precise times, locations and trajectories for each of 13 shots fired by four different gunmen, including Lee Harvey Oswald. And, Leroy has matched Oswald's fingerprints to prints found on the bullet casings.

Leroy Blevins colorization of the black and white images fully reveals the grassy knoll gunmen inside shelter number three who are visible from more than one angle and can be seen in multiple films and images. It once and for all dispels the notion of the lone gunman theory that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone and it evidences a conspiracy in the JFK assassination by showing you the grassy knoll gunmen and shots being fired from shelter number three and more shots coming from a sniper on the rooftop of the 7 story Records building.

June 21, 2014 in Current Affairs | Permalink

Re: The Great Reformer Cop-Out

I agree that putting pressure on our selected representatives is essential to bring about reform, but the folks behind the curtain are a really big part of the problem.  For example, with all of the reform groups out there and the two big parties fighting for us and what not, one would think that people are putting pressure on our selected representatives to do the right thing, but somehow nothing seems to interfere with the progressive march towards tyranny and injustice.

Perhaps the biggest problem is that people are sucked into traps designed to control and diffuse opposition to abuses of power?  

After all, all of the "reform" groups don't actually do anything to give the people in power any concern.  For example, Campaign for Liberty, Americons for Prosperity, FreedumWorks, PFAW, Move On, etc., never even suggest that anyone run for office, and they hope that people don't realize that they are putting their time, money and effort behind "reform" efforts which are not doing anything to actually push for reform.

Also, if you have been involved with the two big parties on the local level, you will see party leadership actively discourage people from challenging bad reps cuz he is one of ours if the incumbent is a member of their party while the other big party often supports someone designed to lose, if anyone.  In other words, the leadership of the two big parties keep their people from actually putting pressure on the people in office.

The "reform" groups and the party leaders use these basic opposition control techniques to trap the few who realize that there is a problem and keep them from actually bringing about any reform.

Meanwhile, the folks from the "news" wing of the Ministry tell the masses stories about the great tug of war show that the two big parties are putting on to make people believe that there are folks competing against each other to bring us the best government possible.  However, the "news" often ham-handedly announces who the big race is between while conveniently forgetting to mention the other folks who are running without the approval of the SIC (Scum in Charge).  Note the Crist/Scott Florida Governor's race coverage which usually ignores all other candidates, and recall that the "news" announced that Sink and Jolly were the leading candidates for the Congressional race to replace Bill Young before the candidates even announced that they were running.  Now, is that good investigative journalism or ham-handed manipulation of the selection process? 

Meanwhile, the folks from the Ministry distract and confuse the few who are searching for answers by floating all kinds of ludicrous excuses about why things are going from bad to worse.  See Larry Becraft's website at http://hiwaay.net/~becraft/deadissues.htm for analysis of a lot of the patriot myths, but note that most reform groups complain about who is voting and the influence of big money being the biggest problems without ever mentioning that the votes are "counted" in secret.  

More importantly, think about this.  If the votes are "counted" in secret and the people have no power to enforce the law but instead have to beg prosecutors, regulators and judges to enforce the law, do you really live in a democratic republic or simply in an illusion of one maintained by an aristocracy with a very gullible public who seem incapable of questioning anything?  
Who says that government control of eduction isn't making effective citizens, at least from our rulers' point of view?

Anyway, as long as people keep believing that the do nothing reform groups are going to do something, that the two big parties are doing their best to put their best people in office, and that the news tells them anything important, there will be no meaningful slowing of the long train of abuses.

Oh, if anyone wants another dose of reality, check out the Florida Division of "Elections" candidate tracking list at http://election.dos.state.fl.us/candidate/Index.asp  Then, select view list for the 2014 General Election and note how many incumbents have already won because no one opposed them!  Moreover, note how many incumbents have only been opposed by write in or third party candidates who have no chance of winning the selection!  

It's easy to see that 4 of Floriduh's 27 members of Congress have already won due to being unopposed, and although the busy bureaucrats in Tallahassee haven't yet gotten to noting who won the Florida Senate and House offices already due to the contrived lack of opposition, if you scroll down to the Florida State Senate selection, you will see that out of 20 seats which were up for selection, 8 incumbents have been re-selected due to no one running against them while another 3 have no one from a major party challenging them.  That's 11 incumbent Florida State Senators out of 20 who have been re-selected already, and the Florida House has similar results.

So, to recap, for about half of the offices up for selection this year in the banana republic of Floriduh, the reform groups didn't do anything to encourage anyone to put any pressure on incumbents by challenging them for office and the two major parties also didn't bother to encourage anyone to challenge the incumbent for the other party!!!  Moreover, the "news" didn't notice this obvious lack of efforts either!  After all, that news might undermine that carefully crafted illusion, huh? 

Anyway, the biggest problems are that by design, no one puts any real pressure on the corrupt status quo and that almost no one realizes that fact. 

Mark A. Adams JD/MBA

P.S. Feel free to post this on your blog or whatever. 


Jeffrey Liberty relays:

Extremely well summarized Mark. This should be the headline article on every news paper and magazine in the country along with being featured on all the television and radio stations in the nation.


Sadly it won’t but we should post it where we can.


Jeffrey Liberty


From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: [ronpaul-48] FW: The Great Patriot Cop-Out was RE: Two Trends the Mainstream Press Will Not Talk About
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2014 13:47:49 -0400



From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]
Sent: Friday, June 20, 2014 1:37 PM
To: 'Chap'
Subject: The Great Patriot Cop-Out was RE: Two Trends the Mainstream Press Will Not Talk About




CHAP WROTE: Because I doubt we ever really broke away from Jolie Ole, I question the bit about D.C. calling the shots.


It is a popular, perverse "hobby" of many so-called patriots to focus on suspected "off-stage" controllers.

By that I mean suspicion that official US government actors are just figureheads that take orders from some unseen powers behind the scenes. 


Of course history is replete with examples of government actors getting caught corruptly acting for their own or others' political or economic benefit....or on behalf of some hidden ideology, instead of acting to uphold the Constitution in the interest of their constituents as is their sworn duty. (or, like Benedict Arnold, treasonously giving aid and comfort to enemies of the Constitution/nation)


While it is wise to be always alert to the possibility/probability of corrupt influences (The price of liberty is eternal vigilance.),  it seems to me that many in the "Patriot Community" have fallen into the habit of raising such suspicions in order to absolve themselves from any responsibility to bring heat on the official that they suspect is being corruptly influenced.


The implied rationale being:  "Oh well, the "Invisible Government" is actually running things so there is no point in doing anything because we can't see who's really pulling the strings in the background and therefore have no hope of finding out who they are or having any control over them."


The facts are, regardless of who or what the off-stage influences might be, that the official in front of your face (the one who holds the office) is the one with his hands on the levers of government power.


Suspicion that your representative is being controlled by unseen, off-stage influences inimical to the interests of his constituents does not alleviate one's responsibility to bring heat on that official.


In fact, it dramatically increases it.


Focusing on one of the popular patriot myths like "We are still a British Colony controlled from London." is an even more ridiculous cop-out.


The answer to "Man Behind The Curtain suspicions" is to bring sufficient heat upon one's representative to force him or her to either

1) act within Constitutional limits in the interest of America/his constituents,

2) admit that he's a traitor, taking orders from His Wife, England, Donald Trump, The Teamsters, George Soros, The CIA, Edgar Cayce, the Divil Hisself, The Boogieman, etc. etc. etc

3) resign,


4) be impeached,




5) lose the next election.



Focusing on the "Invisible Government" is, in my opinion, The Great Patriot Cop-Out.



If memory serves, Chapper, there is info somewhere on Becraft's site debunking the "We are still a British Colony" myth...


See:   http://home.hiwaay.net/~becraft/deadissues.htm


and:   http://home.hiwaay.net/~becraft/GrossErrors.html





Unless you have sufficient hard evidence to prove your suspicion,

unless you have irrefutable verifiable proof,

quit buying into the (likely government planted) patriot mythology!


Pay no attention to your suspected  "man behind the curtain".


Just "shoot" the guy holding the gun! (ie the one with his hands on the levers of government power.)


If you keep shooting the guy holding the gun.....  (i.e. Hold the actual office holder's feet to the fire)


any "man behind the curtain"  will soon be exposed....


or your "Man Behind the Curtain"  will quickly run out of recruits that he can control.  



"Most people prefer to believe their leaders are just and fair even in the face of evidence to the contrary, because once a citizen acknowledges that the government under which they live is lying and corrupt, the citizen has to choose what he or she will do about it. To take action in the face of a corrupt government entails risks of harm to life and loved ones. To choose to do nothing is to surrender one's self-image of standing for principles.  Most people do not have the courage to face that choice. Hence, most propaganda is not designed to fool the critical thinker but only to give moral cowards an excuse not to think at all."  


                                                                                                                                                ~~~Michael Rivero








From: Chap [mailto:[email protected]
Sent: Friday, June 20, 2014 9:48 AM
To: <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Two Trends the Mainstream Press Will Not Talk About


Because I doubt we ever really broke away from Jolie Ole, I question the bit about D.C. calling the shots.

Sent from my iPhone

On Jun 18, 2014, at 11:40 PM, <[email protected]> wrote:


Two Trends the Mainstream Press 
Will Not Talk About


June 21, 2014 in Current Affairs | Permalink

RELATOR’S FIFTH VERIFIED CRIMINAL COMPLAINT, ON INFORMATION: 18 USC 234, 3231, 242, 241, UDHR, ICCPR; 42 U.S.C. 1986-1986 / Docket No. #2:14-CR-00027-NDF-2

Use Docket No. #2:14-CR-00027-NDF-2



242, 241, UDHR, ICCPR; 42 U.S.C. 1986-1986.


TO: Office of Presiding Judge (duly credentialed)

       District Court of the United States (“DCUS”)

       2120 Capitol Ave. 2nd Floor

       Cheyenne 82001

       Wyoming, USA

DATE: June 12, 2014 A. D. (Anno Domini)

Greetings Your Honor,

Comes now the United States ex rel. [28 USC 1345]

Paul Andrew Mitchell, Citizen of Washington

State and Private Attorney General

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1964(a), to invoke

the original jurisdiction of this DCUS

under the latter statute and under

18 U.S.C. 3231 strictly construed; and,

to provide formal NOTICE to all whom

it may concern that Relator supra

now verifies below that the facts, already

documented in pleadings previously filed

and served in the Docket No. supra,

now constitute probable cause fully

justifying a formal report to this honorable

Court pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 4, and this


formally charging:


-1 of 4-


Christopher A. Crofts, James P. Donohue,

Corey Endo, Zachary Fisher, Dave Guest,

Mark C. Hardee, Stephan Harris, Tammy

Hilliker, James Marcy, L. Robert Murray,

Nancy Tenney, Brian Tsuchida, Cynthia

A. Low, and Does 1 thru 100 with:


(1) aiding, abetting, and being accessories

after the fact to multiple violations of

the Undersigned’s Fundamental Rights

expressly guaranteed: by the First, Fourth,

Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, Eighth and Tenth

Amendments and Article VI, Clause 3 in

the Constitution for the United States of

America as lawfully amended (“U.S.

Constitution”); and, by the Universal

Declaration of Human Rights (“UDHR”)

and the International Covenant on Civil

and Political Rights (“ICCPR”) both

rendered supreme Laws by the Supremacy

Clause in the U.S. Constitution; all in

one or more violations of 18 U.S.C. 2, 3, 4,

242 and 42 U.S.C. 1985-1986; and,

(continue next page)


-2 of 4-


(2) conspiring with others, both named

and unnamed herein, to aid, abet, and

to be accessories after the fact to, multiple

violations of the Undersigned’s Fundamental

Rights expressly guaranteed: by the

First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh,

Eighth and Tenth Amendments and

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

and, by the UDHR supra and ICCPR supra,

both rendered supreme Laws by the

Supremacy Clause in the U.S. Constitution;

all in one or more violations of 18 U.S.C.

2, 3, 4, 241 and 42 U.S.C. 1985-1986.


Upon careful examination of the Senate’s

Reservations, Understandings and Declarations

attached to its ratification of the ICCPR,

the United States hereby stipulates that the

RUD’s “not self-executing” Declaration

is unconstitutional for obviously violating

the Petition clause in the U.S. Constitution –

read “the Right conservative of all other

rights” as previously held by the Supreme

Court of the United States. “Here, see also

Miranda v. Arizona re: Rights secured

by the Constitution: there can be no

legislation – like the RUD supra – which

would abrogate any such Rights.


-3 of 4-



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

hereby verify under penalty of perjury,

under the laws of the United States of

America, without (outside) the United States,

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 Supreme Clause

(Constitution, laws and treaties of the

United States [federal government] are

all the supreme Law of the Land).


Dated: June 12, 2014 A. D.


Signed: Paul Andrew Mitchell (chosen name*)

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

Relator In Propria Persona: 28 U.S.C. 1654;

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

Citizen of Washington State, Pannill v. Roanoke

(expressly NOT a federal citizen), and

* Doe v. Dunning, Washington State Supreme Court

All Rights Reserved (cf. UCC 1-308)


p.s. cf. DOJ Standard Form 95 re: “collateral”,

and AUTOMATIC STAY invoked by United States




-4 of 4-



Previous (note: updated links are promptly appended to bottom of 'Paul Andrew Mitchell has been bundled away by the US Gov' post):


US Gov / IRS is using diesel therapy against IRS targeted political prisoner
Blowing Whistles at Hurricanes

Paul Andrew Mitchell has been bundled away by the US Government


June 21, 2014 in Current Affairs | Permalink


                                         NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION


(“SEALED”) [sic] #2:14-CR-00027-NDF-2 (USDC/DWY)

TO: Office of Chief Judge (duly credentialed)

       U.S. District Court

       2120 Capitol Avenue, 2nd Floor

       Cheyenne 82001

       Wyoming, USA

DATE: June 4, 2014 A. D.

Greetings Your Honor,

Now comes the United States ex rel. [28 USC 1345]

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

Citizen of Washington State and Private

Attorney General [18 USC 1964], to move this honorable

Court for an ORDER compelling disclosure

of all discovery documentation and all

grand jury transcripts to the Undersigned

personally under 28 U.S.C. 1654, for all

of the following meritorious reasons:

(1) the Office of U.S. Attorney [OUSA/DWY] has already

been ordered, once before, to produce timely

discovery documents and grand jury

transcripts for examination by Relator; [see Docket records]

(2) so-called “stand-by counsel” Mark

C. Hardee [Hardlee?] totally abandoned Relator

between the two (2) hearings on 3/21/2014

and 6/3/2014, in violation of the Sixth Amend. [6th Amend.];

(3) a formal Complaint is now pending


-1 of 4-


against Mr. Hardee at the Wyoming State Bar, Board of Professional

Responsibility, for abandonment and

other related attorney malpractices; [cf. NOTICE OF TERMINATION filed]

(4) a Table of Delegations of Authority

in the IRS Internal Revenue Manual [“IRM”]

still shows awards of $25,000 CASH and

up to “$35,000 to the President, through

Treasury”; on the Internet, see www.irs.gov/irm/.

(5) the latter Performance Management

and Recognition System (“PMRS”)

was repealed by Act of Congress in 1993 [i.e. “Kickback Racket”],

21 years ago as of 2014 A.D.; still “on the books”;

(6) it now appears quite probable that the

IRS continues to award Federal prosecutors

$25,000 CASH for every “indictment” issued

by Federal grand juries against “tax

protestors on any similar designation,” and

against State Citizens wrongly identified

as “sovereign citizens” and/or “extremists” [sic]; [cf. “RRA98”, 112 Stat.]

[see attached article: “Inside the DHS,” Pgs. 2 of 6, 5 of 6!!]

(7) Relator is an eyewitness to a written admission, on IRS letterhead, that no

PMRS records exist because all such

awards were paid in CASH; see FOIA Request;

(8) such CASH awards also raise the real

possibility that recipients have failed

to report same on their IRS Forms 1040

“U.S. Individual Income Tax Return(s)”; [felony tax evasion]


-2 of 4-


(9) failing to report such CASH awards

on their Forms 1040 also implicates

all recipients in felony tax evasion

and felony perjury [felony perjury: 28 USC 1746(2); see IRC, subtitle F;

(10) IRS Forms 1040 must be executed

under penalty of perjury in conformity

to 28 U.S.C. 1746(2) i.e. within (inside)

the “United States” and without (outside)

the United States of America (50 States

of the Union); latter are NOT “Plaintiffs” in this case; [28 USC 1345] [cf. Preamble]

(11) given the sheer volume of “indictments”

required to enlarge the Federal prison [U.S. BOP]

population to its current inflated size,

it is also reasonable to suspect, and prove, that

no grand juries were ever convened

for many such “indictments,” that is,

the latter were merely “signed” by a

“FOREPERSON”[“Debra Halthus”?] and a “U.S. ATTORNEY”


color of compliance with FRCvP Rule 7;

(12) if no lawful grand jury was ever

convened in the instant cases, that fact

by itself would serve to explain the

“government’s” contempt of the previous

discovery orders at (1) above i.e. there

are no transcripts because there were

no grand jury hearings, in point of FACT!

(13) it necessarily follows that no

exculpatory (favorable) evidence was,

or even could be, presented to a lawful

grand jury in the instant cases, obviously

if no such hearings were ever conducted; [see Brady v. Maryland, re: Brady Hearing]

(14) Relator has already demonstrated

that the Federal Jury Selection and Service

Act [28 USC 1865] expressly discriminates against State

Citizens aka Citizens of ONE OF the 50 States,

by requiring all Federal jurors to be

federal citizens; cf. “Federal citizenship”

in Black’s Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition;

[Pannil v. Roanoke; People v. De La Guerra; “The Federal Zone”!!

(15) a panel of federal citizens was not, and

could not be, a lawful Federal grand

jury [28 USC 1865] in the instant cases, further proving

that no valid “subpoenas” and no valid

“indictments” could ever issue from any

such panel(s), in point of Law and fact.



This Court should ORDER the Office of the

U.S. Attorney in Cheyenne to show cause

why it should not be sanctioned for

contempt of all prior discovery ORDERS.

Respectfully submitted,

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

Relator In Propria Persona, 28 U.S.C. 1654;

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

All Rights Reserved (cf. UCC 1-308, 28 U.S.C. 1861)


-4 of 4-


[Teknosis: Ed. note: Attached article with accompanied notations by PM]


[Incorporated by reference in MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY AND TRANSCRIPTS, June 4, 2014 A.D.]


[File in: #2:14-CR-00027-NDF-2, “SEALED”]


Inside the DHS: Former Top Analyst Says Agency Bowed to Political Pressure


Interview conducted by Heidi Beirich

Daryl Johnson has been battling extremist groups [underlined, ? PM] for two decades. He got his start in the field in 1991, when he worked on counterterrorism for the U.S. Army. In 1999, Johnson left the Army for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, where he was a subject-matter expert on violent antigovernment groups.[underlined, ?] In 2004, officials at the newly created Department of Homeland Security (DHS) approached Johnson to take a key post as the senior domestic terrorism [underlined, ?] analyst. He accepted and, for six years, Johnson led a team of experts on domestic extremist groups.

[See Pages 2 of 6, 5 of 6!]

While at DHS, Johnson and his team wrote the April 7, 2009 report, "Right-wing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment." The report, which was intended for law enforcement only, was quickly leaked and caused a firestorm among some on the political right who accused DHS of painting all kinds of conservatives as potential Timothy McVeighs. In fact, it had merely pointed out that some domestic extremists focused on single issues like immigration and abortion and also noted that extremists were interested in recruiting military veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan. Its analysis of the causes of the surge of right-wing radicalism — the election of the nation's first black president and the economy, among other things — still seems completely accurate and is in line with similar findings by the Southern Poverty Law Center. [underlined, = zionist bias, prejudice, hypocrisy – PM]

Daryl Johnson
Daryl Johnson [obese too? PM]

But DHS ultimately reacted to criticism from conservative columnists and groups like the American Legion by withdrawing the report. [underlined, PM] (Ironically, given the criticism of his report, Johnson describes himself as a registered Republican who "personifies conservativism.") In the months following the leak, Johnson says in the interview below, DHS gutted its domestic terrorism analysis unit.

Events in the immediate aftermath of DHS' suppression of its report seemed clearly to exonerate its conclusions. In late May 2009, abortion provider George Tiller was shot and killed by an anti-abortion fanatic — just the kind of person the DHS report had warned of in one section. In June 2009, neo-Nazi James von Brunn killed a security guard at the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, D.C., while trying to storm into the building. Many similar attacks and planned attacks by the radical right have followed, right up to the present day.

Since leaving DHS last year, Johnson has formed a company, DT Analytics, to consult and offer training

1 of 6

on issues related to violent domestic extremism and homeland security. He also is writing a book that he hopes will set the record straight on what really happened at DHS as well as help state and local law enforcement officials better confront the continuing threat of domestic terrorism.

When did you become interested in domestic terrorism?
Way back in 1983, when I was only 14 years old. At the time, the white supremacist terrorist group the Covenant, the Sword and the Arm of the Lord, or CSA, was generating a lot of media attention. I was fascinated by CSA and a little bit scared by it too. It made me curious to understand why people would quit jobs, leave their families and move to remote Arkansas to start arming themselves for Armageddon. I even sent a letter in 1986 to then-Sen. John Warner [R-VA], as part of my Eagle Scout requirements, that talked about the increasing terrorist activity abroad and I wondered, "How much longer will it take until terrorism arrives in the United States?" In the letter, I wrote, "If terrorism does come to the United States, which I think it will shortly, it will either be started or contributed by the militia." Nine years later, Timothy McVeigh, who was affiliated with the militia movement, blew up the Alfred P. Murrah Federal building in Oklahoma City, killing 168 people. Ultimately, I turned that interest into a career.

How did your official work in this area begin?
When I was with the U.S. Army as a civilian intelligence analyst in the years after the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing, we had a lot of militia cases involving threats to the military in U.S. These groups were stealing military materials, recruiting U.S. soldiers, conducting surveillance of armories, and plotting to attack bases. They thought the "New World Order" was staging its troops on our bases and that the Federal government was creating citizen detention camps using the U.S. military. They also claimed alleged black helicopter sightings. I remember learning that the Republic of Texas had conducted surveillance of military installations in Texas, that another militia group in Michigan had stockpiled illegal weapons and plotted to attack military bases in Battle Creek, and then there was the Ft. Hood plot, too. [Editor's note: In 1997, two men, who were associated with the militia movement, were arrested. They had planned to attack Ft. Hood, near Killeen, Texas, and slaughter foreign troops which they wrongly believed were housed there, along with innocent civilians.]

What was your mission at DHS?
DHS's mission was identified in the 2002 Homeland Security Act. Part of the department's responsibilities includes identifying and assessing possible terrorist threats to the homeland and notifying law enforcement officers of those threats. We looked at extremist groups who had histories of violent activities, but who might not necessarily be doing anything right now. We also studied radicalization: the process of adopting an extremist belief system and showing a willingness to use or facilitate violence to change the world. We wanted to know how a law-abiding person becomes radicalized to the point of being willing to hurt people. No one else was doing this work from a uniquely domestic, non-Islamic perspective.

How did your unit work?
I was the senior intelligence analyst for the domestic terrorism unit. I oversaw five analysts who worked directly for me, and we had support from other analysts outside our unit. Each person had a different account—the white supremacist movement, militias and sovereign citizens [circled – PM*], single-issue extremists, and so on. We also had anarchists and leftwing terrorists as topics. There was an analyst who supported us through alternative analysis—that's where you think about the future and try to figure out what domestic terrorism will look like down the road. Another analyst conducted most of our Internet research. Three of my staff members were considered subject-matter experts. Combined, we had 50 years of experience in analyzing domestic extremism.

What was it like day-to-day at DHS?
We were responsible for providing answers to state and local law enforcement agencies. They would submit questions, and we would help out, usually by telling them what is happening throughout the country, identifying emerging trends and explaining the history, organization structure, capability and activities of extremist groups. The fusion centers would send in information, and we'd analyze it and respond. We had a monthly newsletter, and we wrote several assessments and reference aids that provided background information on extremist groups who had violent histories. Most valuable, I think, were the dozens of presentations we gave to state and local law enforcement agencies each year. We often received positive feedback and letters of appreciation from our stakeholders.

2 of 6

How did your work with DHS differ from the FBI's?
The FBI is the lead agency on terrorism, so no one else in the federal government has the resources they have. They have a core cadre of agents and analysts in D.C. devoted to this issue. DHS complemented the FBI counterterrorism mission. The FBI is a law enforcement agency, so they have rules and legal parameters in which they must operate. DHS was not constrained by these same rules because we were part of the intelligence community. We had a different set of rules to abide by. At the time, we had more latitude to look at extremist groups who talked about violence or who had histories of conducting violent acts, although not currently engaged in violence. And we were an alternate and sometimes dissenting voice to the FBI. This is an important aspect of intelligence work, because it prevents "group think" and biased analytical judgments by a single agency.

Can you describe what led to the creation of the right-wing extremism report?
Back in 2005, we were worried about the ELF [Earth Liberation Front, a leftwing extremist group] and ALF [Animal Liberation Front] because of their sabotage and arson activities. But in 2007, we started seeing a shift as right-wing extremism was becoming revitalized. We still had analysts covering animal rights extremism and eco-terrorism, but we began spending more time focused on white supremacists and militias.

The report evolved in a complicated way. It began after a phone call from the U.S. Capitol police in January 2007. They wanted help with then-Sen. Barack Obama's announcement of his candidacy for president. We monitored the Internet for about a month or so looking for threats to Obama. We didn't see anything threat-related, but I started thinking, "What if the U.S. elects a black president? What impact will this have on extremism in this country?" It seemed pretty clear to me that it would lead to a radicalization and recruitment boom by white supremacists, militias and other right-wing extremists, because this is what they fear the most—a black president, the ultimate symbol of a minority population's integration into U.S. society.

When Obama looked as though he was going to win the nomination [in August 2008], we started an outline. Between April and October 2008, we were immersed in collecting data. My team was still writing a draft of the report when Janet Napolitano [underlined] became the new DHS secretary in January 2009. [*]

Three months into Obama's administration, Napolitano asked us four questions: Are we seeing a rise in domestic right-wing extremism? If so, is it related to the election of a black president? What are the chances of it escalating to violence? And what are we going to do about it?

At first, I thought I would do a Q&A for Napolitano, but given that we had a report in draft form, I was directed to write an assessment that would not only answer Napolitano's questions, but also help state and local police prepare for an anticipated change in the domestic threat environment.

How did you feel about her appointment?
We were actually somewhat optimistic and excited because [Janet] Napolitano was the former Arizona attorney [underlined, U.S. Attorney* NO!] [general [NO!]. She had been involved in the prosecution of Michael Fortier, who was part of the Oklahoma City bombing investigation of Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols. And she was also involved in the Viper Militia case back in 1996. [Editor's note: Members of the militia were accused of surveilling Federal facilities in Phoenix as part of an alleged bombing plot. In the end, several were convicted of weapons charges.] So, here we had a secretary with experience in working domestic terrorism cases. We thought we had a potential advocate and ally.

Did your report generate controversy inside DHS?
This is how it happened. I got a tasking from the secretary, which demanded a quick turnaround. We went through all the necessary coordination; many people reviewed the draft and made comments. Several people signed off on the report: two supervisors, the Office of General Counsel, multiple editors, etc. The Office of Privacy signed off, and the Office of Policy had no suggestions.

The secretary doesn't oversee agency reports. She couldn't do it, given the number of agencies generating multiple reports a day. As a result, heads of DHS' agencies have authority to review work, coordinate with other agencies, approve and disseminate reports.

[* See all VERIFIED CRIMINAL COMPLAINTS in: Arizona v. Mitchell, and Misconduct Complaint v. the late John M. Roll, USDC/Tucson]

3 of 6

One office raised issues — the Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties [CRCL]. At the time, we weren't required to give them the report, but my boss thought we should run it past them. They had edits, but the main issue related to the definition of right-wing extremism. That office wanted a narrow definition limited to violent groups and individuals. Our subject-matter experts and management felt the definition needed to be broader.

Under CRCL's definition, if you were in the Klan, burned crosses, had a terrorist in your house and donated money to groups advocating violence, you still would not qualify as a right-wing extremist. Our attorneys basically told them, "We appreciate your input, but we are approving the more broad definition." This ended up being a sore point with CRCL once the document was released.

Did Napolitano know about the report?
Analysts generally have little interaction with the secretary. I know she was briefed on the report a few days before it went out. The day after it went out, I met with Napolitano to talk about the four questions she had asked. My division director thought we could answer the first three questions, but couldn't answer the last. So, we gave the last question to the FBI, and they came to the briefing.

The report had yet to be leaked. I gave Napolitano a summary of the report and gave her a map of where new militia extremist groups had recently organized. She held the report and nodded her head with agreement as I was talking. It was a cordial meeting. She listened and thanked us all, and she seemed pleased.

Daryl Johnson
“When the right-wing report was leaked and people politicized it, my management got scared and thought DHS would be scaled back. DHS stopped all of our work and instituted restrictive policies. Eventually, they ended up gutting my unit.[underlined, obese too? answer: YES!]

Any idea who leaked it? 
The report went to the fusion centers [joint federal, state and local terrorism task forces] and various law enforcement agencies. They, in turn, blasted it out to many more people. It's virtually impossible to know who leaked it, though I have some hunches. Obviously, the person who leaked the report didn't agree with it and had a political agenda.

How did you react when the report came under attack?
It was an extremely frustrating time, to see conservatives and media folks taking the report out of context and misinterpreting it. [Conservative columnist] Michelle Malkin called it Obama's "hit job" to target conservatives and others said it called everyone "on the right" a terrorist.

They would have been shocked to know that I personify conservatism. I'm an Eagle Scout. I'm a registered Republican. I'm Mormon. In fact, I was helping the Boy Scouts with a fundraiser when I heard the report being attacked on the news.

How were Malkin and other commentators wrong?
This report was not politically motivated. It was based on a phone call from the Capitol Police that got me thinking about what having a black president would mean to extremism in the U.S. We wanted to warn LEOs [law enforcement officials] about a growing threat.

Sad to say, we were right on this one. History has shown that. I'd also like people to know that we were not directing LEOs to do anything. We were prohibited from doing so. All we could do was say there is a

4 of 6

trend emerging, and if you have these folks in your jurisdiction, perhaps you should think about how you are using your resources. Malkin and others totally misconstrued this.

Others criticized the report's points as being obvious, meaning that the bad economy and Obama were fueling this resurgence. Nonetheless, we were the first ones in law enforcement to connect these dots and to write about them.

What happened after the leak? 
I got to the office, and there were lots of phone calls. Citizens were angry. People wanted to speak to DHS authorities. I was very distraught. I felt I could talk to my peers, but beyond that, I couldn't speak for myself. The public affairs office was doing all the PR and media response. We weren't consulted on anything. If I could have responded, I would have said this is why we wrote this. But the response DHS provided just fueled the public's speculation.

What about Napolitano?
Napolitano initially supported the report. She issued an official press release [on April 14, 2009] that said DHS has the authority to look at all types of threats. And we need to be vigilant. It was very supportive and direct.

Unfortunately, not too many people listened, and they kept applying political pressure. She held a couple of press conferences, trying to put out that same message. And people just kept continuing the pressure, especially after Congress got involved. [Editor's note: For example, U.S. Rep. Pete Hoekstra (R-Mich.), then the ranking member of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, wrote to Napolitano to complain about what he called "a shoddy, unsubstantiated, and potentially politicized work."]

I don't know whether her staff advised her to, but she eventually backtracked. The DHS press spokesman came up with this story [underlined, LIE? PM] that it was all unauthorized and orchestrated by a rogue group of analysts. DHS caved in.

How did you feel?
I felt as if I had been betrayed. I had been the recipient of numerous awards at DHS. Our team was considered to be a very productive team that knew its customers. Our co-workers, field representatives and law enforcement counterparts respected us. Many thought we were doing great work.

What ultimately happened?
Napolitano eventually told Congress that DHS was going to remove the report from its websites. Some of the people in the media assumed they were recalling the report. That never happened. There is actually a formal process involved when you want to rescind a report. The only reason you do so is if there was something erroneous in the document. Napolitano also told Congress that DHS was going to pull this report back and refashion it into a much more usable format. It never happened.

Is it off the DHS website today?
Yes. It was removed from various law enforcement computer systems, [underlined, PM] and classified systems too. But they never sent out an official recall notice saying, "Hey, you need to destroy this document, it's erroneous." 

What happened to your DHS unit?
When the right-wing report was leaked and people politicized it, my management got scared and thought DHS would be scaled back. It created an environment where my analysts and I couldn't get our work done. DHS stopped all of our work and instituted restrictive policies. Eventually, they ended up gutting my unit. [underlined, PM] All of this happened within six to nine months after the furor over the report. Analysts then began leaving DHS. One analyst went to ICE [U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement], another to the FBI, a third went to the U.S. Marshals, and so on. There is just one person there today who is still a "domestic terrorism" analyst.

Since our report was leaked, DHS has not released a single report of its own on this topic. Not anything dealing with non-Islamic domestic extremism[circled * - PM]—whether it's anti-abortion extremists, white supremacists, "sovereign citizens,"* [circled *: see U.S. Supreme Court: “American People are sovereigns without subjects”] eco-terrorists, the whole gamut.

5 of 6

What do you think this means for our country's safety? 
We are more vulnerable. I mean, we lost five good analysts, four of them, including myself, very well-seasoned, considered experts in their topics. We obviously have this serious threat coming from Al Qaeda, or some other international terrorist group, which can result in a mass casualty-producing attack. [*] But I feel that the government has a lot of good intelligence analysts focused on Al Qaeda and similar threats.

What worries me is the fact that our country is under attack from within, from our own radical citizenry. [underlined, ?? FACT? – PM] There have been a lot of small-scale attacks lately, whether it's three mail bombs sent to U.S. government facilities in Maryland and D.C., or a backpack bomb placed near a [Martin Luther King Jr. Day] parade in Spokane, Wash., or two police officers gunned down at a traffic stop in West Memphis, Ark., [by antigovernment extremists in May 2010].

These incidents are starting to add up. Yet our legislators, politicians and national leaders don't appear too concerned about this. So, my greatest fear is that domestic extremists in this country will somehow become emboldened to the point of carrying out a mass-casualty attack,* [underlined, *] because they perceive that no one is being vigilant about the threat from within. That is what keeps me up at night.

[* Please contact U.S. Coast Guard (“USCG”) Investigations at San Diego Harbor: Paul Andrew Mitchell assisted USCG there for ~7 years with 911/Pentagon research; identified foreign nationals smuggling high explosives into close proximity to the U.S. Navy Base at Coronado Island; and, reported rogue 20KT nuclear weapon reportedly hidden in aircraft carrier USS Midway, now a popular aircraft museum moored in San Diego Harbor adjacent to Navy Pier (civilian side). County HazMat was also notified in person by Undersigned, Paul Andrew Mitchell]

6 of 6





NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO STRIKE : 28 U.S.C. 1654; and, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights / (“SEALED”) Case No. #2:14-CR-00027-NDF-2 [sic] (“ICCPR”)




US Gov / IRS is using diesel therapy against IRS targeted political prisoner
Blowing Whistles at Hurricanes

Paul Andrew Mitchell has been bundled away by the US Government

June 21, 2014 in Current Affairs | Permalink



#2:14-CR-00027-NDF-2 (USDC/DWY) [sic]

                                          (“SEALED” [sic])

TO: Ms. Nancy D. Freudenthal

c/o U.S. District Court (“USDC”)

       2120 Capitol Ave, 2nd Floor

       Cheyenne 82001

       Wyoming, USA

DATE: June 6, 2014 A. D.

RE: malicious prosecution, fraudulent concealment etc. [18 USC 1519]

Formal DEMAND is hereby made of you to

immediately recuse yourself from the instant

case, retroactive to the hearing on 3/21/2014,

and to cease and desist from any further

attempts to preside upon such case at any time

in the future, for reasons including but

not limited to the following:

(1) the USDC for the District of Wyoming [“DWY”] lacks

jurisdiction in personam, due chiefly to

multiple violations of 28 U.S.C. 1691 [28 USC 1691, fraudulent concealment] by Clerk’s

Office personnel; absent the requisite credentials,

Stephan Harris cannot perform any duties

conferred upon that Office: see “Clerks or Jerks?

The Pivotal Duties of Federal Court Clerks,”

by the Undersigned [author], which is incorporated

by reference, as if set forth fully here;

(2) you have violated 28 U.S.C. 1654 by knowingly,

and fraudulently, maintaining false and


-1 of 6-


misleading docket entries showing the

Undersigned as “legally represented by

Mark C Hardee” [sic], when the 2-hour

hearing on 3/21/2014 should have made

it entirely obvious to you that the Under-

signed has always proceeded In Propria Persona

- by opting to appear “personally” under

28 U.S.C. 1654 and NOT “by counsel” [sic]; cf. arraignment

(3) you have stubbornly repeated plain errors

by fostering the fallacious notion that a

litigant who opts to appear personally

has effectively “waived” counsel, and is

therefore not entitled to adequate technical

assistance of counsel; that fallacy is

flatly contradicted by standing case

law under 28 U.S.C.S. 1654 (cf. also cases

re: “Pro Se” litigants), and under the Sixth

Amendment, in which the correct meaning

of “assistance of Counsel” has been well

established for more than a century (cf.

“stare decisis” as explained in U.S. v. Mason) [S. Ct.];

(4) you have also manifested evidence that

you have failed to read statutes such as

28 U.S.C. 1654 before hearings; your gross negligence

in this manner was painfully obvious

on 3/21/2014, when you paused for some

time to access and read 18 U.S.C. 1504, giving

all present reason to conclude that you had not


-2 of 6-


reviewed that statute prior to that hearing:

the last paragraph[18 USC 1504] is one element essential

to this litigant’s defense against all of

the false charges [malicious prosecution] enumerated in the charging

document aka “indictment”; cf. 18 USCS 1504 (LexisNexis);

(5) you have allowed the Court to proceed

out of order by neglecting to adjudicate

the two (2) MOTIONS TO DISMISS filed by

this litigant to date, and by failing to ensure

that any pleading(s) in opposition to said

MOTIONS were duly served on this litigant;

even if Mr. “Hardlee” [Mark C. Hardee] did receive electronic

copies of all such opposition pleadings,

he failed to forward copies of same to this

litigant: those failures constitute positive

proof of ineffective assistance of Counsel,

which has resulted in OUSTING the Court

of jurisdiction; see Johnson v. Zerbst here;

(6) the Court was provided with an itemized

AFFIDAVIT of 28 MOVES this litigant has endured,

in violation of the Eighth Amendment; but,

on 6/3/2014 you acted as if those 28 MOVES

were “news” to you; your ignorance of

those 28 MOVES calls for the conclusion

that you are NOT reading this litigant’s

pleadings, necessarily causing multiple

violations of the Petition Clause and also

FRCvP Rule 2 re: fairness, and justice (fair and just);


-3 of 6-


(7) your ignorance and negligence regarding

credentials has rendered you civilly liable

to this litigant under 42 U.S.C. 1985-86, if not

also criminally liable under U.S.C. 2, 3, 912,

1513, 1519, and 1962, for starters; mandatory

OATHs OF OFFICE did necessarily impose a clear

legal duty upon you to confirm that all

Clerk’s Office personnel at the USDC/DWY

were at all times in full compliance with

all laws, previously cited in this litigant’s

several pleadings, as a matter of fact;

that duty of yours began when you were

first admitted to the Wyoming State Bar,

and has also continued without interruption

right up to the present: there is no statute

of limitations for fraud; see Art VI, Cl. 3 (OATHs);

(8) the Chief Judge of a Federal Court has

supervisory responsibility for all subordinates,

such as Clerk’s Office personnel, particularly

when key authorities must be delegated

to those subordinates by the same Federal

Court on which the Chief Judge presides, or

claims to preside: here cf. “respondeat

superior” aka vicarious liability in pari

materia with 18 U.S.C. 1964 (Civil RICO);

(9) absent all requisite credentials, Mr. Harris

cannot be delegated any authorities by the Court,


-4 of 6-


nor can Mr. Harris delegate any authority(s)

to any subordinate Deputies; likewise,

Mr. Harris cannot select or summon jurors:

the Federal Jury Selection and Service Act

defines who may select and summon

Federal juries, be they grand or petit

(trial) juries, be they civil or criminal

juries; as such, vicarious liability

touches both Ms. Freudenthal and

Mr. Harris insofar as 28 U.S.C. 951 and

5 U.S.C. 2906 (the “court”) are flagrantly and routinely

being violated in the instant case, and other cases;

(10) the issue of your liabilities to me is

directly addressed in Stump v. Sparkman

and in the International Covenant on Civil

and Political Rights (“ICCPR”): in the former,

the U.S. Supreme Court has already held

that a Federal Judge is liable to all Proper

Parties when the court clearly lacks

Jurisdiction; in the latter United States

Treaty, judicial offices are made liable

for violating the fundamental Rights

of Parties [cf. Supremacy Clause], notwithstanding that such

violations were committed by Court personnel

acting in their “official” capacities; also,

the “not self-executing” clause in Congress’

Reservations, Understandings and Declarations

(“RUD”) clearly violates the Petition Clause,

First Amendment: read: no private right of action.


-5 of 6-


(11) the official record in the instant case

now documents numerous violations

of this litigant’s Fundamental Rights,

as guaranteed by the ICCPR supra and

by the First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth,

Seventh, Eighth and Tenth Amendments,

and Article VI, Clause 2 (Supremacy Clause)

and Clause 3 (Oath of Office) in the U.S. Constitution.


The Undersigned now incorporates his

prior DEMAND FOR RECUSAL as already

filed and served in the instant case,

as if the same were set forth fully here.


Respectfully submitted June 6, 2014 A. D.

Paul Andrew Mitchell (chosen name*)

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

Relator In Propria Persona, 28 U.S.C. 1654;

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)


* See Doe v. Dunning, Washington State Supreme

Court (re: fundamental law, common law

right, to change one’s name)


-6 of 6-




US Gov / IRS is using diesel therapy against IRS targeted political prisoner
Blowing Whistles at Hurricanes

Paul Andrew Mitchell has been bundled away by the US Government


June 20, 2014 in Current Affairs | Permalink


- COPY -


REQUEST : 5 U.S.C. 552

TO: Disclosure Officer

       FDC SeaTac

       P. O. Box 13901

       Seattle 98198-1091

       Washington State, USA

DATE: 5/12/2014

This is a proper request under the Freedom

of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552, for true

and correct copies of the following three (3)


(1) valid U.S. Office of Personnel Management


Duly executed by:

(a) Cynthia A. Low, Ph. D.

Forensic Psychologist, WA Lic. # PY2352

(b) Katherine Skillestad Winans, Ph. D.

Chief Psychologist, WA Lic. # PY60170774

(C) Eloisa De Bruler, Acting Warden


I hereby verify under penalty of perjury,

under the laws of the United States of America,

that I am the Proper Person making this request.

Signed: Paul Andrew Mitchell             MAIL TO:

Printed: Paul Andrew Mitchell              MODELESKI, M.P. (given name)

 (chosen name)                             c/o SBCDC # 45396

see Doe v. Dunning,                             P. O. Box 130

Wash. Supreme Court                          Gering 69341-0130

                                                        Nebraska, USA










US Gov / IRS is using diesel therapy against IRS targeted political prisoner
Blowing Whistles at Hurricanes

Paul Andrew Mitchell has been bundled away by the US Government

June 20, 2014 in Current Affairs | Permalink