"Compassion and Infiltration: Calling the Kettle Black"
by
Michael
Hafter, Freelance Writer
December
23, 2015 A.D.
Fourth in a Continuing Series on American Just US
The
Compassionate Use Alliance encountered the Credential Investigation about ten
years ago, the same year a Federal Court SUBPOENA was served upon The State
Bar of California. In retrospect,
the State Bar's reply to that SUBPOENA
was quite revealing, in more ways than one.
Calling it "burdensome
and oppressive", an Assistant General Counsel for the State Bar tried
in vain to claim that said SUBPOENA was not proper because the copyright case
from which it issued had been "dismissed"
at all three levels of the Federal Judiciary.
This, of course, was another sorry instance of calling
the kettle black. Federal Court
personnel at all 3 levels had come up through the same State Bar, and they too
had failed to comply with important sections of the State Bar Act.
Notably, after receiving a lawful NOTICE AND DEMAND to
exhibit valid licenses to practice law in the State of California, Associate
Justices Anthony M. Kennedy, Sandra Day O'Connor and Stephen Gerald Breyer all fell silent.
Their silence turned out to be a very serious matter,
because the question of missing licenses was a major point in all pleadings
that had reached the U.S. Supreme Court in that case.
The District Court had issued seven more subpoenas to
defense attorneys, and all seven had failed to produce any evidence of compliance with the State Bar Act.
For readers who are not entirely familiar with legalese,
a blatant conflict of interest is the correct legal language to describe the
legal consequences of that silence. And,
Federal law requires Judges to disqualify themselves whenever such conflicts are disclosed. Even the mere appearance of bias or prejudice is sufficient to "recuse" any Federal Judge.
There were other missing credentials for high Court
personnel. Luckily, the U.S. Department
of Justice was persuaded to agree that the Office of the Attorney General in
Washington, D.C., is the designated legal custodian of the requisite
PRESIDENTIAL COMMISSIONS for all Federal Judges.
In response to a timely request under the Freedom of
Information Act, DOJ admitted they had no PRESIDENTIAL COMMISSIONS for Ruther
Bader Ginsberg, Clarence Thomas or Stephen Gerald Breyer
(again). Absent valid COMMISSIONS, no
other credentials can be valid.
Three plus two equals five.
This was a rather fatal admission, because Federal law
requires at least six duly credentialed Justices to constitute a legal quorum
at the U.S. Supreme Court. Nine minus
five equals four, depriving that entire high Court of a quorum in all cases,
not merely the copyright case where these discoveries came to light.
The same pattern had already emerged at the Ninth Circuit
Court of Appeals and at the Federal District Court in Sacramento. In particular, all full-time U.S. Magistrate
Judges must have been members of a State Bar in good standing for at least five
full years.
The Magistrate assigned to that copyright case was a
State Bar "member" but he too failed to produce any evidence of a
valid license and certificate of oath.
And, about a fourth of Ninth Circuit Judges had also come up through The
State Bar of California and all of those were likewise disqualified by the
same conflicts of interest.
On the merits, the State Bar officer's off-point answer
to the SUBPOENA tried to characterize it as a request for certified copies of
ten years of attorney registration cards. This was like asking your grocer if he has
any apples in stock, and he replies they have no bananas today.
CUA's extensive research has now amassed a mountain of
evidence proving that Bar Cards are not valid certificates of admission, and
they are not valid certificates of oath either.
The State Legislature's original Act of 1851 clearly
equates the terms "certificate of admission" and
"license": the two terms are
equivalent.
The back sides of Bar Cards display some telephone
numbers and a line for signatures certifying that Bar members have paid their dues.
There is no mention on either side of any oath, no
mention of the Constitution of the United States, and no mention of the
Constitution of the State of California.
These two large bodies of Law are matters of substance,
not a mere formality.
In particular, the State Bar Act in California implements
Article VI, Clause 3 in the Federal Constitution, that Clause predates the Bill
of Rights by three years, and that Clause has never been amended.
After obvious obstruction at all levels of the Federal
Judiciary, that copyright case was then re-filed in the California Superior
Court by invoking the civil remedies provided by Congress in Federal
racketeering laws.
This effort was proper, chiefly because Congress had
already added criminal copyright infringement to the list of RICO
"predicate acts" which constitute a pattern of racketeering
activities, and the U.S. Supreme Court had already ruled that State courts also
enjoy jurisdiction of Civil RICO cases.
It was then no surprise when that Superior Court case was
shunted back to the very same impostors who had already obstructed the Federal
copyright case.
Nevertheless, by that time a very thick stack of formal
documentation had already been assembled, complete with a comprehensive criminal
complaint charging all State Bar members with multiple State and Federal
felonies, including of course a conspiracy to engage in a pattern of
racketeering activities.
The implications of that criminal complaint are very
far-reaching.
For example, all U.S. Attorneys must obey all State Bar
disciplinary guidelines in each State where they are stationed.
This means that all U.S. Attorneys appointed to offices
in California must comply with all the same requirements imposed on all other
attorneys in this State -- "to the same extent and in the same
manner".
They have not done so, however.
As such, poking huge holes in routine Federal
prosecutions is now a simple task.
Lacking powers of attorney, they cannot legally represent the Federal
Government in any American courts.
In one recent misdemeanor case, CUA helped the defendant
appreciate the importance of credentials required of the Federal prosecutor and
the Federal magistrate.
At a preliminary hearing, no one appeared for the
government i.e. the U.S.
DOJ failed to prosecute. And,
the magistrate was disqualified on three counts: no valid license to practice law, no valid
certificate of oath, and no APPOINTMENT AFFIDAVITS, all of which are mandated
by applicable State and Federal laws.
Further fraud upon that Federal court occurred when an
officer of the U.S. Forest Service turned up without any APPOINTMENT
AFFIDAVITS. That one credential is
required of all new Federal employees, without exception.
The U.S. Office of Personnel Management's "Entry on Duty Process for New
Employees" makes that credential a mandatory requirement, and another
Act of Congress prevents Federal officers from being paid if they have not signed
that credential in a timely fashion.
When all of this evidence is placed on the table for
adequate deliberation, one has to wonder if California has been the target of
widespread subversive activities.
This is not an idle question. It is certainly one that should be considered
by a statewide grand jury convened specifically to consider all the evidence.
The Credential Investigation has also amassed proof that
all Judges seated on the California Courts of Appeal and on the California
Supreme Court are also registered State Bar "members".
And, all have failed to produce proof of compliance with
the State Bar Act, after being served with proper DEMANDs for same.
Every one!
Being the largest State in the Union, it would seem
logical that advocates of some New World Order would attempt to implement their
ominous plans in one advanced industrial society, by way of demonstrating proof
of concept.
Call us a "test case".
In short, if these subversives can impose their aims upon
30+ million Californians, by any means available, doing the same to less
advanced civilizations should then be a piece o' cake.
Ask yourself this one key question: if world government is the essential goal of
all this infiltration, will anyone on planet Earth have an opportunity to vote
for or against this radical reorganization?
The People of California are guaranteed a Republican Form
of Government, which mandates that all American government personnel at all
levels must honor fundamental democratic principles.
Any conspiracy to violate that Guarantee is a felony
Federal offense.
Stay with us as we explore local efforts to expose these
ugly skeletons that now proliferate in government offices throughout the State
of California.
# # #