Youngevity BTT 2.0 + Healthy Start Paks 2.0
HEIGHT=

Youngevity BTT 2.0 + Healthy Start Paks 2.0

Coffees from Youngevity
HEIGHT=

Coffees from Youngevity

Youngevity Be The Change

Youngevity Healthy Chocolate

GOFoods Youngevity

Join or Create a Ron Paul Meetup,.
HEIGHT=

Join or Create a Ron Paul Meetup,.

Ron Paul Forums
HEIGHT=

Ron Paul Forums

APFN Message Board
HEIGHT=

APFN Message Board

Leo Emil Wanta / Wantagate Links

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

« Bank of Montreal now aware All Federal Reserve Banks are now IN CONTEMPT of the AUTOMATIC STAY expressly authorized by 11 U.S.C. 362 | Main | Computer spyware violates human rights guidelines watchdog »

Re: CONFIDENTIAL / FYI: Delay + Formal Answer to your question re: USA passport

from: Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S. <supremelawfirm@gmail.com>
reply-to: supremelaw@googlegroups.com
to: "Thomas J. Brown" <thomas@thomasbrown.org>
cc: Ken O'Keefe <tjp.kenokeefe@gmail.com>,
SupremeLaw <supremelaw@googlegroups.com>
date: Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 11:08 PM
subject: Re: CONFIDENTIAL / FYI: Delay + Formal Answer to your question re: USA passport
 
https://www.facebook.com/thomas.j.brown.18?fref=ts

see:

A CONSTITUTIONAL TIMEBOMB:

Is New Zealand’s Government and court system unlawful?

 
[begin quote]

Henke says the bizarre situation has arisen where

Australia has sworn to uphold the international declarations on human rights, but

where Australian courts have ruled the declarations do not apply domestically.

New Zealand too, is guilty of the same action by virtue of Government policy.

According to Philip Joseph, the New Zealand Government, like Australia,

has not allowed our domestic law to automatically recognise international law

even if NZ is a signatory to it.

[end quote]

 

Those 2 paragraphs parallel almost perfectly the situation

America is now facing with the "not self-executing" Declaration

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

http://www.supremelaw.org/ref/treaty/reservations.htm

 

Declarations:

"(1) That the United States declares that the provisions of
articles 1 through 27 of the Covenant are not self-executing.

Of course, that Declaration has now been formally challenged

for violating the Petition Clause in the First Amendment

and the Bicameralism Clause, both in the U.S. Constitution:

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

http://supremelaw.org/cc/hill/civil/iccpr/draft/first.draft.htm

 

For those who are presently not familiar with those 2 Clauses,

the Petition Clause clearly states "Congress shall make no law ...."

and the Bicameralism Clause mandates approval by 2 Houses of Congress

for "domestic" legislation to be legally binding.

 

http://supremelaw.org/ref/whuscons/whuscons.htm#1st-amend

Congress  shall  make  no  law  respecting  an  establishment  of
religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;  or abridging
the freedom  of speech,  or of  the press;   or  the right of the
people peaceably  to assemble, and to petition the Government for
a redress of grievances.

http://supremelaw.org/ref/whuscons/whuscons.htm#1:1

 

Section 1.  All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested
in a  Congress of  the United  States, which  shall consist  of a
Senate and House of Representatives.

Under the Treaty Clause, the U.S. House of Representatives

does NOT vote on proposed treaties:

http://supremelaw.org/ref/whuscons/whuscons.htm#2:2:2

 

The conclusion is therefore inescapable that the

U.S. House of Representatives never voted on

that "not self-executing" Declaration and, accordingly,

that Declaration can NOT have any domestic legal effect!

 

The ICCPR  stands as supreme Law of the Land

throughout the United States of America --

State Zone and federal zone both!

 

Semper fidelis!

 

/s/ Paul

 


On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 7:34 PM, Thomas J. Brown <thomas@thomasbrown.org> wrote:

I have many times told the kaumatua of your noble deeds and honorable stand, I pray for and look forward to the day you can meet them. God bless you brother :)

On 27/02/2015 3:47 PM, "Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S." <supremelawfirm@gmail.com> wrote:
The United States ex rel. Paul Andrew Mitchell, Private Attorney General,
requests the courtesy of your kind regards extended to all our native friends
throughout the entire land of New Zealand.

Get some rest, Tommy.  You earned it!

/s/ Paul


On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 6:19 PM, Thomas J. Brown <thomas@thomasbrown.org> wrote:

Thank you most kindly good sir! I'm falling asleep, will be able to perform cognitional processing once rested. So appreciated, Tom

On 27/02/2015 3:04 PM, "Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S." <supremelawfirm@gmail.com> wrote:

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S. <supremelawfirm@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 5:30 PM
Subject: Re: Delay + Formal Answer to your question re: USA passport
To: "Thomas J. Brown" <thomas@thomasbrown.org>


>  Btw they asked me to surrender USA passport, I'm going to check with embassy, any knowledge re that?


Thank you, Mr. Brown, for contacting our office for Counsel
concerning the matter raised in your question above.

We will endeavor to answer it in our capacity as an
Agent of the United States under the False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. 3729 et seq.,
and as a Private Attorney General under the Civil RICO law at 18 U.S.C. 1964.
First of all, our office has never been informed of any action(s)
you may have taken to expatriate from your natural born status
as a Citizen of one of the United States of America:

On this point, the U.S. Supreme Court has already ruled that
waivers of Fundamental Rights must be knowingly intelligent acts,
done with sufficient awareness of the relevant circumstances and
likely consequences.
 
If our information about you is not up-to-date in this regard, please advise ASAP.
 
Your present domicile in New Zealand did not, in and of itself,
constitute an intentional act to expatriate from your lawful status
as a State Citizen under American laws never repealed.
This is so primarily because you also enjoy a Fundamental Right
to travel, and you did exercise that Right when you traveled
to New Zealand in the company of your late spouse.

Please also accept our sincere condolences for the tragic and
painful loss you endured at her passing.  As you may recall,
the three of us enjoyed a long and wonderful lunch several
years ago in Northern California, USA, and one of the topics
we discussed on that occasion was the Law of Citizenship in America.

She is and was one of the most warm and loving spouses
I have ever met.  I shall always remember my joy at hearing
her "foreign" accent -- one of my favorites, to be sure,
as I hope my accent was just as "foreign" to her.

 
Furthermore, both New Zealand -and- the United States have formally
ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights ("ICCPR").

Despite an attempt by the U.S. Senate to render that Treaty
"not self-executing", you should already know that our office
has formally challenged that Declaration for violating at least
two (2) fundamental guarantees in the U.S. Constitution:

Accordingly, your Fundamental Immunity against double jeopardy
evidently has been violated by New Zealand government personnel
insofar as they have openly refused to recognize the verdict of acquittal
which you already received from a jury of your peers.

See Article 14, Section 7 in the ICCPR supra:

http://supremelaw.org/ref/treaty/covenant.htm
7.   No one  shall be liable to be tried or punished again for an
offence for  which he  has  already  been  finally  convicted  or
acquitted in  accordance with the law and penal procedure of each
country.
Allow me to recommend that the United States (federal government)
apply for leave to intervene ex rel. in your second criminal proceeding,
for purposes of asserting your several Fundamental Rights under the
Constitution for the United States of America, as lawfully amended,
and under the ICCPR as ratified by the Government of New Zealand.

 
CONCLUSION:  In light of all the above, there appears to be no legal reason,
or obligation, requiring you to surrender your USA passport at this time.

Please feel free to share this Formal Answer with Ambassadors in the
appropriate Embassies of New Zealand and the United States.


Thank you for contacting the Supreme Law Firm in this matter.


--
Sincerely yours,
/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Private Attorney General, 18 U.S.C. 1964
http://www.supremelaw.org/decs/agency/private.attorney.general.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/reading.list.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/index.htm (Home Page)
http://www.supremelaw.org/support.policy.htm (Support Policy)
http://www.supremelaw.org/guidelines.htm (Client Guidelines)
http://www.supremelaw.org/support.guidelines.htm (Policy + Guidelines)

All Rights Reserved without Prejudice


On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 4:52 PM, Thomas J. Brown <thomas@thomasbrown.org> wrote:

Hey Paul, my co-defendents in error took lawyers so jury disempaneled & adjourned till Nov 2 give them time. Was looking forward to winning next week, more time to focus. Will keep you posted, heading home tonight. Be well bro! Tom

Btw they asked me to surrender USA passport, I'm going to check with embassy, any knowledge re that?




--
Sincerely yours,
/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Private Attorney General, 18 U.S.C. 1964
http://www.supremelaw.org/decs/agency/private.attorney.general.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/reading.list.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/index.htm (Home Page)
http://www.supremelaw.org/support.policy.htm (Support Policy)
http://www.supremelaw.org/guidelines.htm (Client Guidelines)
http://www.supremelaw.org/support.guidelines.htm (Policy + Guidelines)

All Rights Reserved without Prejudice

 

February 27, 2015 in Current Affairs | Permalink