« MEDIA'S PHONY GROPER ALLEGATIONS FALLING LIKE DOMINOES Common Democrat tactic used to slander, destroy opponents unravels | Main | Fwd: PLEASE FORWARD to Dr. Art Robinson: major problems with Peter DeFazio (Congressman, Roseburg, Oregon) »
Private Attorney General comments re: WaPo: Private prison industry fights Justice Department directive to end the use of contract facilities
Our Comment posted today:
The Credential Investigation, launched by our office in August 2001, recently requested APPOINTMENT AFFIDAVITS for all BOP personnel going back 10 years -- the discovery window authorized by 18 USC 1961(5).
Not a single credential was disclosed, and every one of those FOIA Requests is now PAST DUE and also IN DEFAULT.
The Act of Congress at 5 USC 5507 bars federal officers from being paid, if they have not executed valid U.S. OPM Standard Form 61 APPOINTMENT AFFIDAVITS.
Making matters worse, the electronic SF-61 published at OPM's Internet website is a known COUNTERFEIT: no OMB control number; no expiration date; no citation to 5 USC 2903 (Authority to administer); and the misleading claim"Prior editions not usable" when the only valid SF-61s pre-date August 2002.
Many of those SF-61s were also "administered" by HR assistants not authorized to do so by 5 USC 2903.
This whole mess is rendered even more serious by the Oath of Office Clause in the organic U.S. Constitution, which pre-dates the Bill of Rights and has never been amended.
The Credential Investigation, launched by our office in August 2001, recently requested APPOINTMENT AFFIDAVITS for all BOP personnel going back 10 years -- the discovery window authorized by 18 USC 1961(5).
Not a single credential was disclosed, and every one of those FOIA Requests is now PAST DUE and also IN DEFAULT.
The Act of Congress at 5 USC 5507 bars federal officers from being paid, if they have not executed valid U.S. OPM Standard Form 61 APPOINTMENT AFFIDAVITS.
Making matters worse, the electronic SF-61 published at OPM's Internet website is a known COUNTERFEIT: no OMB control number; no expiration date; no citation to 5 USC 2903 (Authority to administer); and the misleading claim"Prior editions not usable" when the only valid SF-61s pre-date August 2002.
Many of those SF-61s were also "administered" by HR assistants not authorized to do so by 5 USC 2903.
This whole mess is rendered even more serious by the Oath of Office Clause in the organic U.S. Constitution, which pre-dates the Bill of Rights and has never been amended.
Sincerely yours,
/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Private Attorney General, Civil RICO: 18 U.S.C. 1964;
/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Private Attorney General, Civil RICO: 18 U.S.C. 1964;
Agent of the United States as Qui Tam Relator (4X),
Federal Civil False Claims Act: 31 U.S.C. 3729 et seq.
http://supremelaw.org/support.
All Rights Reserved (cf. UCC 1-308 https://www.law.cornell.edu/
|
3:43 PM (7 hours ago)
 |
|
||
|
||||
p.s. Case in point, the SF-61 for Sally Q. Yates is
another COUNTERFEIT:
Our Comment posted today:
The Credential Investigation, launched by our office in August 2001, recently requested APPOINTMENT AFFIDAVITS for all BOP personnel going back 10 years -- the discovery window authorized by 18 USC 1961(5).
Not a single credential was disclosed, and every one of those FOIA Requests is now PAST DUE and also IN DEFAULT.
The Act of Congress at 5 USC 5507 bars federal officers from being paid, if they have not executed valid U.S. OPM Standard Form 61 APPOINTMENT AFFIDAVITS.
Making matters worse, the electronic SF-61 published at OPM's Internet website is a known COUNTERFEIT: no OMB control number; no expiration date; no citation to 5 USC 2903 (Authority to administer); and the misleading claim"Prior editions not usable" when the only valid SF-61s pre-date August 2002.
Many of those SF-61s were also "administered" by HR assistants not authorized to do so by 5 USC 2903.
This whole mess is rendered even more serious by the Oath of Office Clause in the organic U.S. Constitution, which pre-dates the Bill of Rights and has never been amended.
The Credential Investigation, launched by our office in August 2001, recently requested APPOINTMENT AFFIDAVITS for all BOP personnel going back 10 years -- the discovery window authorized by 18 USC 1961(5).
Not a single credential was disclosed, and every one of those FOIA Requests is now PAST DUE and also IN DEFAULT.
The Act of Congress at 5 USC 5507 bars federal officers from being paid, if they have not executed valid U.S. OPM Standard Form 61 APPOINTMENT AFFIDAVITS.
Making matters worse, the electronic SF-61 published at OPM's Internet website is a known COUNTERFEIT: no OMB control number; no expiration date; no citation to 5 USC 2903 (Authority to administer); and the misleading claim"Prior editions not usable" when the only valid SF-61s pre-date August 2002.
Many of those SF-61s were also "administered" by HR assistants not authorized to do so by 5 USC 2903.
This whole mess is rendered even more serious by the Oath of Office Clause in the organic U.S. Constitution, which pre-dates the Bill of Rights and has never been amended.
Sincerely yours,
/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Private Attorney General, Civil RICO: 18 U.S.C. 1964;
/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Private Attorney General, Civil RICO: 18 U.S.C. 1964;
Agent of the United States as Qui Tam Relator (4X),
Federal Civil False Claims Act: 31 U.S.C. 3729 et seq.
p.s. Case in point, the SF-61 for Sally Q. Yates is
another COUNTERFEIT:
http://supremelaw.org/support.
All Rights Reserved (cf. UCC 1-308 https://www.law.cornell.edu/
October 18, 2016 in Current Affairs | Permalink
