DOJ AND DHS fraud and corruption against Sheriff Joe...

Private Attorney General discloses DOJ and DHS corruption to Sheriff Joe Arpaio


Paul Andrew Mitchell Greetings Sheriff Arpaio, Deputy Sheriffs and All Staff:

Please allow us to itemize for your official consideration
a small sampling of reasons why the U.S. Department of Justice
and Department of Homeland Security are corrupt and
motivated to retaliate corruptly against your office:

(1) our ongoing investigation of missing credentials required of
all Federal government officers has confirmed that counterfeit
OPM Standard Form 61 APPOINTMENT AFFIDAVITS are
circulating widely among recently hired Federal “employees”;
see 5 U.S.C. sections 2903, 2906 and 3331:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/5/3331.html
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/5/2906.html
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/5/2903.html

http://www.supremelaw.org/rsrc/commissions/evidence.folders.2004-03...

(2) that “bootleg” form is a counterfeit because it lacks the OMB control number
that is absolutely required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (“PRA”);
it also lacks the paragraph at the bottom which cites 5 U.S.C. 2903 supra
defining the persons who are authorized to administer Standard Form 61 (“SF-61″);
in such cases, the Public Protection Clause of that PRA is rather explicit:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/44/3512.html (b)

(b) The protection provided by this section may be raised in the form of a

complete defense, bar, or otherwise at any time

during the agency administrative process or judicial action applicable thereto.
(3) in line with our ongoing investigation described above,
you are hereby formally notified that the SF-61 APPOINTMENT AFFIDAVITS
for Eric H. Holder, Jr. are also fatally defective, for the same reasons:

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/sebelius/holder/letter.2010-06-09/affi...
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/sebelius/holder/letter.2010-06-09/affi...

Here are our original Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) Requests for Holder’s SF-61:

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/sebelius/holder/foia.request.holder.op...
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/sebelius/holder/foia.request.holder.htm

In addition to the counterfeit credential above, the related correspondence we received
is archived here:

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/sebelius/holder/letter.2010-04-28/page...
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/sebelius/holder/letter.2010-04-28/page...

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/sebelius/holder/letter.2010-06-09/page...

Accordingly, the existence of valid credentials for Eric H. Holder, Jr.
assumes facts not in evidence and, therefore, he is not and cannot be
a duly authorized Attorney General of the United States, nor can he
as such delegate any authority to any subordinates within DOJ.

(Frankly, I have more authority than he does at present.

See 18 U.S.C. 1964; Rotella v. Wood.)

(4) Janet Napolitano has already been charged with multiple Federal offenses
in connection with a Federal Grand Jury “subpoena” which the late
U.S. District Judge John M. Roll authorized my office to litigate
in defense of the Arizona trust which had been served with same:

http://www.supremelaw.org/copyrite/predicate.acts.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/roll/
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/roll/nadappea.htm#napolitano1512
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/roll/nadappea.htm#napolitano1510

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/azvmitch/crossco4.htm

[begin excerpt]

Ms. Janet Napolitano with:

(1) aiding and abetting the obstruction of correspondence

transmitted via first class, certified, and registered

United States mail, under color of law, in violation of 18

U.S.C. 2 and 1702 (twenty-five (25) counts);

(2) aiding and abetting the act of tampering with a federal

grand jury, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 2 and 1512 (twenty-

five (25) counts);

(3) aiding and abetting obstruction of criminal investigations,

in violation of 18 U.S.C. 2 and 1510 (twenty-five (25)

counts);

(4) deprivation of fundamental Rights under color of law,

specifically the Right to Petition a lawfully convened

federal grand jury for a formal investigation, in violation

of 18 U.S.C. 242 (twenty-five (25) counts);

(5) conspiracy to commit all of the above, in violation of 18

U.S.C. 241 and 371 (twenty-five (25) counts);

(6) impersonating an officer of the United States, in violation

of 5 U.S.C. 3331 and 18 U.S.C. 912 (one (1) count each).

[end excerpt]

We also have reasons strongly to suspect that Ms. Napolitano was also complicit
for failing to do anything but obstruct and stonewall our part-time investigation into the
whereabouts of 2,500 missing children — and young adults — who had reportedly
“disappeared” into Arizona’s Child Protective Services:

http://www.supremelaw.org/press/rels/kidnaps.htm
(cf. 42 U.S.C. 1986: action for neglect to prevent and/or failure to remedy)

(5) lastly, and arguably of equal or greater severity, for many years DOJ
has been commencing ALL civil and criminal lawsuits in the U.S. District Courts
on behalf of one or the other of 2 defunct Delaware corporations named
“UNITED STATES OF AMERICA” [sic]; when we brought this fact to the
attention of the Delaware Secretary of State, both corporate charters
were promptly REVOKED!

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/usa.inc/
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/usa.inc/registered.agent.2007-02-12.gif

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/usa.corp/
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/usa.corp/registered.agent.2007-02-12.gif

We recommend that you make official contact with the Arizona Secretary of State
to confirm that neither defunct corporation has ever registered to do business
inside the State of Arizona, as we have already confirmed with the
Secretaries of State for California and several other large States of the Union:

http://www.supremelaw.org/sos/ (e.g. New York State = the heart of “The Conspiracy”)

We elaborate the all important differences between the “United States”
and the “United States of America” here:

http://www.supremelaw.org/letters/us-v-usa.htm
(read “NOT a corporation”: U.S. v. Cooper Corp.)

If we can be of any further assistance to your offices in this matter,
please direct one of your capable Staff to initiate contact with me here, via email,
and we can take it from there.

We are standing by, Sheriff Arpaio.
Paul Andrew Mitchell

Bcc: Arizona Attorney General, Crime, Fraud and Victim Resource Center

Views: 1123

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

epiphany: we have absolutely no authorized government in the white house and no representation by any who are authorized. I do believe we are actually being ruled by a dictatorship of a select and elite group. 

Mitchina I agree with you so who leads when we no authorized government?  Who corrects this.  Can this mess be corrected?

We do.  Which is what we did in the initial break into being our own free country.  I am afraid this would be the only way of getting it back. 

Yes my friend and it is "We the People." We can and must stand up. We out number them in the millions and We must do it NOW.

 

thanks crash...

It is past time to end this stupidity.

I fully agree we all have to do something to stop this destruction of our country.....................

yeah the gentiles are coming

the jig is up

charade is over

 

UN Paramilitary dressed in disguises  and positioned insurgents all ready to pounce

 

u don't need to speak english to pulla trigger

We knew there was corruption in D.C., now Eric Holder and Janet Napolitano are getting their hands more than slapped!  Remove them from their offices and let them serve jail time like any other American citizen would do!  Now, Charging and removing the big cheese or bho trying him for treason, and acts against the United States and against the US Constitution for which this country was founded on.. jail all the corrupt politicians and liars and start with an all new fresh Congress and Senators, Reps, who ever isnt carrying out their duties for the people and the states they represent.  They forget who put them into office.. "We The People", did.. this is the kind of Change we need now.

Well said Karen!! I agree 100%.  God Bless America!!

I would say almost all of us agree with you Karen, but outside a general revolution, that can only happen if we can get the right people in position (office) and all at the same time. Take a look around at all the Demon (liberal) states and realize THAT would be a monumental task at best. Too many on the dole with Obozo adding to the count every chance he gets.

Let us not forget about which agency is assigned to protect the integrity of the offices that these criminals hold; it is the U.S. Marshall"s service. We must get them engaged in the legal processes since this corrupt Congress abided by a corrupt media will not perform their Constitutional duties.

RSS

LIGHTER SIDE

 

Political Cartoons by AF Branco

Political Cartoons by AF Branco

ALERT ALERT

Horrible: Democrats Set The Constitution On Fire With Fraudulent Impeachment

House Democrats unveiled two articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump on Tuesday morning after an investigation that violated fundamental provisions of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

The investigation of the president began with the complaint of a so-called “whistleblower” who turned out to be a rogue Central Intelligence Agency employee, protected by a lawyer who had called for a “coup” against Trump in early 2017.

Democrats first demanded that the “whistleblower” be allowed to testify. But after House Intelligence Committee chair Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) was found to have lied about his committee’s contact with the “whistleblower,” and after details of the “whistleblower’s” bias began to leak, Democrats reversed course. In violation of the President Trump’s Sixth Amendment right to confront his accuser, Democrats refused to allow the “whistleblower” to testify. They argue the president’s procedural rights, even if they existed, would not apply until he was tried in the Senate — but they also invented a fraudulent “right to anonymity” that, they hope, might conceal the whistleblower even then.

Schiff began the “impeachment inquiry” in secret, behind the closed doors of the Sensitive Compartmentalized Information Facility (SCIF) in the basement of the U.S. Capitol, even though none of the testimony was deemed classified. Few members of Congress were allowed access. Schiff allowed selective bits of testimony to leak to friendly media, while withholding transcripts of testimony.

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), having allowed the secret process to unfold, legitimized it with a party-line vote authorizing the inquiry. The House resolution denied President Trump the procedural rights enjoyed by Presidents Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton, and denied the minority party the traditional right to object to witnesses called by the majority.

Rather than the House Judiciary Committee, which traditionally handles impeachment, Pelosi also deputized the House Intelligence Committee to conduct fact-finding; the Judiciary Committee was turned into a rubber stamp. Schiff held a few public hearings, but often failed to release transcripts containing exculpatory evidence until after they had passed.

In the course of the Intelligence Committee’s investigation, Schiff quietly spied on the telephone records of his Republican counterpart, Ranking Member Devin Nunes (R-CA). He also snooped on the phone records of a journalist, John Solomon; and on the phone records of former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani, acting as President Trump’s personal lawyer.

Schiff’s eavesdropping violated both the First Amendment right to press freedom and the Sixth Amendment right to counsel. Yet he proceeded undeterred by constitutional rights, publishing the phone logs in his committee’s report without warning, confirmation, or explanation, alleging that Nunes and the others were part of a conspiracy to assist the president’s allegedly impeachable conduct. When Republicans on the Judiciary Committee asked the Intelligence Committee’s majority counsel, Daniel Goldman, to explain the phone logs, he refused to answer,

Ironically, Schiff had done exactly what Democrats accuse Trump of doing: abused his power to dig up dirt on political opponents, then obstructed a congressional investigation into his party’s and his committee’s misconduct.

Democrats’ articles of impeachment include one for the dubious charge of “abuse of power,” which is not mentioned in the Constitution; and one for “obstruction of Congress,” which in this case is an abuse of power in itself.

Alexander Hamilton, writing about impeachment in Federalist 65, warned that “there will always be the greatest danger that the decision will be regulated more by the comparative strength of parties, than by the real demonstrations of innocence or guilt.” Democrats have fulfilled Hamilton’s worst fears.

The Trump impeachment will soon replace the 1868 impeachment of President Andrew Johnson — which the House Judiciary Committee staff actually cited as a positive precedent — as the worst in American history.

In service of their “coup,” Democrats have trampled the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The Republic has never been in greater danger.

You don't get to interrupt me

© 2019   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service