1. What were the
underlying causes related to filing against the California State BAR, its
members and officers? Why California, and
how does this impact other of the several States in actions that would bring
about the same results?
When I commenced my copyright and
trademark infringement lawsuit against 129 named defendants, the Office of
Clerk of Court issued several SUBPOENAs to the attorneys who did initially
appear:
All of those initial attorneys
refused to produce valid licenses to practice law in the State of California:
http://supremelaw.org/cc/statebar/related.subpoenas.htm
One of them tried to argue his way
out of the requirements imposed on him by Sections 6067 and 6068
of the California Business and Professions Code (“CBPC”): I carefully refuted his claims as follows:
http://supremelaw.org/cc/aol/contest.ehlers.htm
2. What, if any
responses have been received by the CA BAR, et
al., or Secretary of the Treasury?
There is presently no lawful
Secretary of the Treasury, because both Geithner and
Lew have turned up with COUNTERFEIT credentials:
http://supremelaw.org/cc/sebelius/geithner/
http://supremelaw.org/cc/sebelius/geithner/letter.2010-04-21/affidavit.refused.jpg
http://supremelaw.org/cc/sebelius/geithner/letter.2010-04-21/affidavit.gif
http://supremelaw.org/cc/sebelius/lew/letter.2013-08-15/
http://supremelaw.org/cc/sebelius/lew/letter.2013-08-15/affidavit.refused.gif
http://supremelaw.org/cc/sebelius/lew/letter.2013-08-15/affidavit.gif
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/hedges/
Later, we served The State Bar of California with a comprehensive
SUBPOENA, and their correspondence was promptly REFUSED for failing to produce
ANY valid certificates of oath that must be indorsed upon the back of
all licenses to practice law.
The folder containing the documents related
to that SUBPOENA is here:
http://supremelaw.org/cc/statebar/
3. Is there any
lawful court which could hear the matter of the unlicensed attorneys practicing
"as if" in California; is this not a massive conspiracy of
collusion? What is the evidence that
would compel a lawful proceeding -- OR, are the facts, as entered, a default
admission of guilt by virtue of failure to respond?
Because the entire "legal
system" in California appears to be compromised by these numerous
impostors, many of whom have infiltrated both State and Federal Courts, it's
nearly impossible to commence an impartial proceeding anywhere in the
State of California.
Yes, it is a massive conspiracy --
chiefly to infringe rights guaranteed by the Constitution, such as the Oath of Office Clause as
implemented by several State and Federal statutes e.g. 4 U.S.C. 101, 5 U.S.C. 3331, etc.
The evidence is the failure by all
200,000+ "members" to produce ANY evidence of a complete, valid
license to practice law;
after doing this investigation for NINE YEARS, we received
ONE-HALF of one such license, and it was the front side only, not the back side
where the certificate of oath must be "indorsed": "in dorso"
in Latin means "on the back" as when indorsing a standard bank check:
http://supremelaw.org/cc/rainmaker/azar/State.Bar.License.1.JPG
Notice the huge overlap between
missing licenses and the Federal "robes"
in California who are directly affected -- because they were
also registered
as "members" of The
State Bar of California:
http://supremelaw.org/cc/aol2/criminal.complaint.4.htm
Later, we confronted all California Appellate
Court and California Supreme Court "robes" and they ALL failed to
produce valid licenses, even though they too were also registered as
"members":
http://supremelaw.org/rsrc/calcourts/
4. What are the
procedures already in place to recall "damaged FRNs", please
elaborate on where this action would originate, and the proposed mechanism (i.e. recall of outstanding notes,
replacement of present fiat notes).
(re: http://supremelaw.org/cc/bep/memo.recall.program.htm)?
U.S. Bureau of Engraving and
Printing in Washington, D.C., assisted by Federal law enforcement officers e.g. Secret Service, U.S. Marshals, etc.
My Proposal to the Director of the Bureau of Engraving and Printing gets into some
of the functional details which we believe would make this recall simple and
straightforward:
http://supremelaw.org/cc/bep/memo.recall.program.htm
And, here is a template letter which
Americans can write and send to their State Governors:
http://supremelaw.org/cc/bep/state.governor.intro.htm
A worldwide recall of all FRNs has more
than symbolic value because Americans are presently required to pay interest on
all FRNs in circulation; however, those
interest payments are now legally BARRED by the AUTOMATIC STAY authorized by 11 U.S.C. 362 and the
DECLARATION OF INSOLVENCY filed by the United States ex rel. in a U.S. Bankruptcy Court here:
http://supremelaw.org/cc/fox2/insolvency.htm
All Federal Reserve Banks are
presently IN CONTEMPT of that AUTOMATIC STAY:
http://supremelaw.org/cc/fox2/interpleader.htm
5. Where can one find
a record of the filing of the United States Declaration of Insolvency? What entity is represented as
"bankrupt": the de jure
Constitutional united States of America, or the
corporation known as UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, domiciled in Washington, D.C.?
See above for a link to the
DECLARATION OF INSOLVENCY etc.
The bankrupt entity is the
"United States" i.e. the Federal Government domiciled in
Washington, D.C., with standing to sue and be sued conferred by 28 U.S.C. 1345 and 1346.
The "UNITED STATES OF
AMERICA" did incorporate twice as such in Delaware, but both corporations
were subsequently revoked by the Delaware Secretary of State; also, neither corporation ever registered
to do business in any of the other States where we checked:
http://www.supremelaw.org/sos/ (e.g.
New York = locus of The Conspiracy)
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/usa.inc/
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/usa.corp/
There is a lot of mythology
circulating on the Internet claiming -- falsely -- that the Federal government
is a corporation; we
refuted that myth numerous times already e.g.:
http://www.supremelaw.org/letters/us-v-usa.htm
... and
quite formally here at the U.S. Court of Appeals:
http://supremelaw.org/cc/williamson2/appeal/reply.to.brief.for.appellee.htm
6. What
is the standing of present fiat bankers and their Federal Reserve Shell Corp's,
acting "as if" legal guarantors of the present currency? Does the formation of State banks effectively
end the Federal Reserve System, and return legitimate power to the BOE? What is the role of the U.S. Treasury, which
is, my understanding, is also a PRIVATE CORPORATION?
They are in contempt of the
AUTOMATIC STAY invoked formally at the U.S.
Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern
District of Washington (State), and they are also implicated in a
conspiracy to engage in a pattern of racketeering activities, due in large part
to all of the fraud which their collection agency -- the IRS -- has been
committing via fraudulent enforcement of a "liability" for IRC subtitle A
which does NOT exist, as a matter of FACT:
http://www.supremelaw.org/press/rels/subpoena.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/letters/irs.estopped.htm
Even if it were a de jure service,
bureau, office or other subdivision of the U.S.
Department of the Treasury -- the one domiciled in Washington, D.C. -- the
IRS would STILL have no authority to create a tax liability solely by means of
Regulations published in the Federal Register: see Commissioner
v. Acker:
http://supremelaw.org/sls/2amjur2d.htm
http://supremelaw.org/sls/2amjur2d.gif
IRS is now what was left over of
"The Untouchables" after alcohol Prohibition was repealed
by the Twenty-First
Amendment: see U.S.
v. Constantine.
Prohibition was secretly financed by
the petroleum cartel, in order to perfect a monopoly in automotive fuels.
7. What is the
proposed backing of any such currency issued through the State Banks by the
BOE? Would there be a movement to
asset-based currency, i.e. precious metals/commodity
backed money, vs. the present toxic system of recycled debt notes churned
through the financial markets at home and abroad?
The recall program we have proposed should be viewed as an "interim"
measure, until such time as all circulating U.S. Notes can be redeemed in gold
or silver specie.
We anticipate a simple Act of
Congress which renders them redeemable as soon as the Treasury of the United
States can execute such redemptions with a realistic guarantee of
performance.
FRNs have been redeemable for a long
time, but the Federal Reserve Banks have flatly refused to honor the laws which
render FRNs redeemable.
Dr. Edwin
J. Vieira, Jr. explained the importance of redemption in this lecture, which I
transcribed and edited with his permission:
http://supremelaw.org/authors/vieira/vieira.htm
8. What is the
enforcement mechanism for the collection of the $8.6 TRILLION funds from the
named parties? Would we expect to see
movements to protect assets, utilize off-shore shelters, or any types of
"legal dodge" to prevent seizure of assets, and how would this be
addressed?
This is where things get very
sticky, because of the intense politics associated
with the funds embezzled from the Pentagon.
You should
know that my office has already requested the Joint Chiefs of Staff to pursue
the passenger manifest of the full El Al Boeing 747 that departed JFK at
4:11 PM on 9/11/2001, destination David Ben Gurion
International Airport in Tel Aviv: that
jet appeared to be the "getaway vehicle" for a plane full of 9/11
co-conspirators: its departure was assisted
by U.S. Military ground crews in violation of the grounding order issued
earlier that day by U.S. Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta.
In the main, a large chunk of funds
disappeared when $2.3 TRILLION USD were embezzled from
the Pentagon prior to 9/11/2001:
The forensic accountants who were
reconstructing that crime were housed in offices adjacent to the Naval Command
Center, most of those accountants perished on 9/11, and much of their evidence
was intentionally destroyed by the hit on the Pentagon.
Nevertheless, not all such evidence
was destroyed, and my office "followed the money" long enough to
identify one key suspect and his Principal:
http://supremelaw.org/cc/zakheim/invoice.4.htm
When both he and his Principal fell
silent, that INVOICE went into DEFAULT.
The funds payable by all 200,000
California State Bar members can come from their professional liability
insurance contracts;
or, if some of them failed to maintain such liability insurance,
the $9 Million will need to be paid from their private estates.
If they can't pay that amount from
their private estates, then they can go to Federal prison: that's how the United States views the $9
Million liability owed to the U.S. Treasury by each
of those 200,000 "members" who never had valid licenses to practice
law.
The $60,000 Management Fee payable
to me by each such "member" is negotiable: for example, I can anticipate selling my
right to one such amount to someone who has already been damaged by one of
those UNlicensed
attorneys.
Just today, for example, an article
published in the Washington Post disclosed a predatory attorney who is
using foreclosure proceedings on struggling Americans, after paying their
overdue property taxes in the District of Columbia:
Since he never had a license to
practice law in California, the parties he has damaged now have a lot of
leverage to apply against him, e.g.
for mail fraud, wire fraud, and bank fraud.
It may be wise for me to
"assign" each $60,000 account receivable to one or more of such
damaged parties, for a modest handling fee e.g.
$500. Even that amount is negotiable,
depending on the damaged parties' ability to pay that amount.
I
understand that some of this predator's victims were forced from their homes!
9. Please explain
your role as the Manager of the triple damage multiplier funds, and how you would
interface with the BEP, U.S. Treasury, and State Banks. Also, what time table would we expect in the
adoption of your proposals through the remaining 49 states, upon adoption by
the initial State Bank? Does this
require new legislation to implement across multiple States?
No one was doing anything about the
$2.3 TRILLION USD which Donald Rumsfeld admitted was missing, at a Pentagon
Press Conference on 9/10/2001 (the day before 9/11).
As part of the pro bono work I did for U.S.
Coast Guard Investigations in San Diego, we investigated many facets of
that mass murder:
one of those facets was the motive
for hitting the Naval Command Center in the manner
with which it was attacked: the hit on
the WTC triggered an emergency meeting of Naval Commanders at the Naval Command
Center, and they were sitting ducks for the incoming AGM's depleted uranium
warhead, and heavily modified A-3 Skywarrior filled
with TNT and jet fuel, that both crashed into those offices in the Pentagon's
"E" Ring.
So, I stepped in as Private Attorney
General legally representing the United States "ex rel." -- as I have done previously many times.
There are ways in which Israel's
debt to the United States could be "monetized" e.g. by way of forgiving major portions of that debt, in exchange for
selling convertible bonds in open markets at major stock exchanges, like the
New York Stock Exchange, Hong Kong Stock Exchange, New Zealand Stock Exchange,
etc.
When I wrote to the S.E.C. with this
idea, they ignored my letters, and so did the Washington State Attorney
General's office:
I have written up a rudimentary
demonstration of how that "monetizing" could be implemented, but to
date the numbers I've used -- as example cash flows -- are not readily
understood by the average American.
If you wanted
to do some homework on this concept, Google
"convertible bonds" and/or "convertible debentures".
Although your question about
timetables is excellent, I have no particular timetables in mind, at this time.
And, yes, we do anticipate needing
additional legislation, particularly in States where no State Banks are
currently operating.
For example, I have no personal need
for all of the funds that would be credited to my own private account in
each State Bank. And, for that reason, I
intend to work with State Government officials and State Bank officials to
identify the most beneficial ways to utilize all that money for the public
good.
10. How would the
"average American" benefit from your proposal, and what actions would
be required to educate the "public", to advance acceptance of this
new system?
Lots of ways,
and actually too many to enumerate here, or to mention here.
Average Americans need to understand
that:
(a)
they have no legal obligation to pay
Federal income taxes;
(b)
interest payments have been payable
on all FRNs in circulation;
(c)
the AUTOMATIC STAY now prohibits the
FED banks from collecting any more of those interest payments;
(d)
compensating Federal employees with
United States Notes will provide a functional vehicle by which FRNs can be
"driven out" of circulation, in conjunction with a well advertised
government program of recalling all FRNs during a reasonable transition period;
(e)
a lot of education will be required,
and you are already demonstrating excellent leadership by airing an open
discussion about all of these issues;
(f)
if Americans will focus on replacing
all FRNs with U.S. Notes, along with that focus they can and should understand
that halting a substantial amount of interest payments on the Federal debt will
help the entire economy in major ways;
(g)
there are a multitude of second- and
third-order effects such as voiding all currently recorded NOTICES OF FEDERAL
TAX LIEN because none of those was ever preceded by procedurally proper
ASSESSMENTS -- due chiefly to the absence of any liability STATUTE; IRS
cannot satisfy IRC
section 6065 without committing FELONY perjury!
(h)
ultimately, this Proposal
contemplates total abolition of the Federal Reserve System and the Internal
Revenue Service, at the same time: I
doubt that the average American will oppose abolition of the IRS, but the need
to abolish the Federal Reserve System at the same time will need further
explanation:
There are plenty of good resources
which already explain the need to abolish the FED: cf. Bill Still's work on YouTube, as one excellent
example; there
are many other good examples e.g.:
http://hiddensecretsofmoney.com/
I hope this helps.
Sincerely yours,
/s/ Paul Andrew
Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Private Attorney General, 18 U.S.C. 1964(a)
http://www.supremelaw.org/decs/agency/private.attorney.general.htm
Criminal Investigator and Federal
Witness: 18 U.S.C.
1510, 1512-13
On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 12:11 AM,
Ken O'Keefe wrote:
Excellent, would love to come to
this.
Let me ask you something Paul:
Bill Still (of Money Masters fame),
has written a piece saying that executive order 11110 did not actually threaten
the Federal Reserve at all, that it was rather inconsequential.
I do not want to believe this
really, but I just wonder if Bill Still has got this wrong and if you have an
opinion of what he says?
Either way Kennedy was a changed man
after the Cuban Missile Crisis and had pissed off Israel (Rothschild's bankers)
in more than one way.
TJP
Many thanks, Ken.
There is a
lot of debate about JFK's EO 11110, and I'd need to review the specific
language of each authority which Bill Still is citing, before I could answer
your excellent question properly:
For an opposite
argument, please see this:
http://www.rense.com/general76/jfkvs.htm
In some ways, that Executive Order is similar to a red
herring, which causes many people to overlook the forest for the trees.
I think
you and your many contacts will do a lot better to study this next excellent
presentation, because it does a very good job of simplifying the obvious and
deliberate complexity which surrounds the FED:
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=005_1386131628
also here:
http://hiddensecretsofmoney.com/
I believe
I have identified at least one path to a monetary system that does NOT charge
interest on our currency. And, yes, that
path necessarily stops any and all future interest payments to a private
banking cartel bent on damaging America.
The steps
I've proposed are relatively simple and straightforward, by design, because they
can be easily understood by most Americans and implemented without enormous disruptions to the entire fiscal and monetary system.
Whether or not JFK increased or limited the supply
of United States Notes with one of his Executive Orders, is of little
consequence now, except for its historical significance.
THE U.S.
NOTES IN QUESTION WERE ISSUED, AND I REMEMBER HAVING ONE IN MY HAND MANY YEARS
AGO! That makes me a Witness.
It is the
prior existence of United States Notes which is the KEY HISTORICAL POINT here,
and there is no reason of which I am aware why the Bureau
of Engraving and Printing cannot resume issuance of such currency -- in the
manner and using the procedures I have proposed.
If they
can print U.S. Bonds, they can print U.S. Notes.
Brother
Nathanael also has a brief but accurate video which emphasizes this same point.
Mine is a
policy-level proposal: recall all FRNs and exchange all FRNs for
United States Notes, establish 50 State Banks, and "prime the pumps"
with $12 Billion United States Notes divided equally among those 50 State Banks
($240 Million each) as an advance on our Management Fee shown on the INVOICE to
The State Bar of California and its
200,000+ "members":
http://supremelaw.org/cc/statebar/invoice.1.htm
This
"advance" means that the U.S. Treasury can then charge statutory interest
on that amount, instead of leaving that $12 Billion as payable to me, with
interest payable to me.
I am told
that California law now permits pre-judgment interest of 10%, but we are
showing only 7% simple interest on that INVOICE (see above).
How that
$240 Million in each State Bank is spent will be decided with the input and
cooperation of State Government officials and State Bank officials in each of
the 50 States.
The Bureau of Engraving and Printing already has
established procedures for destroying "damaged" currency. We execute those same procedures with all
FRNs that are surrendered to BEP, chiefly because those FRNs will NOT be
conveyed to any FED banks once the recall program is operational.
I hope this
helps.
And, many
thanks for your concern and support.
--
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