United
States' DECLARATION OF INSOLVENCY
Explained in
Simple Language with Questions and Answers
by
Paul
Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Private
Attorney General, 18 U.S.C. 1964(a)
(March 23,
2009 A.D.)
All Rights
Reserved without Prejudice
We
have now hyperlinked the DECLARATION OF INSOLVENCY
with Exhibits:
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/
(please study all Exhibits for a detailed explanation)
The "United States" in Federal law means the Federal Government:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/
The Federal Reserve Banks (“FED”) are private municipal corporations,
created by Congress back in 1913:
http://www.supremelaw.org/
When Congress needs to spend more money than it takes in with taxes,
it sells bonds to the FED. The FED buys
those bonds with money
which the FED creates out of thin air.
Congress must repay the bond principal and interest, and
it liens on the American People to do so, with
NOTICES OF FEDERAL TAX LIEN, NOTICES OF LEVY,
NOTICES OF DEFICIENCY, etc. See subtitle
F of the
Internal Revenue Code for all enForcement
statutes.
We summarized the entire scam in Chapter 8 of "The Federal Zone":
http://www.supremelaw.org/
(begin reading at “What gives?”)
The United States is now bankrupt, because it cannot repay all
the money loaned to it by the FED and by other countries.
Moreover, creating money out of thin air is fraud, and
this scam originated way back in 1913:
http://www.supremelaw.org/
So, on behalf of our clients, who are presently seeking bankruptcy
protection in the Eastern District of Washington, I do have authority
to represent the United States as a Private Attorney General:
http://www.supremelaw.org/
The United States will interplead into
that bankruptcy case
on March 31, 2009 A.D., formally to declare insolvency AS TO
each and every obligation -- e.g. U.S. Bond -- which the
Congress "sold" to the FED.
Moreover, because FRNs are legally defined as "obligations of the United
States",
that DECLARATION OF INSOLVENCY will also have the legal result of
voiding all FRNs presently in circulation anywhere on planet Earth:
All FRNs will need to be recalled systematically, and then destroyed,
after being exchanged -- one-for-one -- with U.S. Notes that are printed
by the Bureau of Engraving and Printing -- withOUT
any interest owed or
payable to the FED on those U.S. Notes.
The links in the hyperlinked DECLARATION above will take you to
photographs comparing Federal Reserve Notes and United States Notes.
The latter have been called "red dot" currency, because the Treasury seal
is printed in red ink.
The recall of FRNs and exchange for U.S. Notes are temporary measures,
en route to returning to Constitutional money:
http://www.supremelaw.org/
We do not anticipate that U.S. Notes will need to be recalled too:
once there is enough gold and silver to back U.S. Notes,
Congress can simply enact a Law declaring them redeemable.
One of the main reasons for declaring insolvency formally
is the automatic stay authorized by the Federal bankruptcy laws:
no creditor may collect any further principal or interest payments
once a debtor has sought bankruptcy protection from a
U.S. Bankruptcy Court.
Thus, the FED and the IRS will be legally barred (prohibited)
from collecting any more principal or interest payments
on any of the "obligations" of the United States which it
"owes"
to the Federal Reserve Banks.
Moreover, since FRNs are also legally defined as such "obligations",
the FED and IRS will also be legally estopped from
demanding the
return of any more FRNs e.g. to pay Federal income taxes.
Federal income taxes are being used to pay interest to the FED;
they do NOT pay for any Federal government services.
See the Report of the Grace
Commission, for proof:
http://www.supremelaw.org/sls/
Last but not least, it is already well established that there
is no liability STATUTE for Federal income taxes imposed
by subtitle A of the Internal Revenue Code:
http://www.supremelaw.org/
And, the U.S. Supreme Court has already ruled that a tax liability
may NOT be created by Regulations published in the Federal Register
(again, see links in the DECLARATION above, and below):
http://www.supremelaw.org/sls/
http://www.supremelaw.org/sls/
The obvious conclusion, then, is that income taxes imposed by
subtitle A of the Internal Revenue Code are fraudulent to the core,
because there is no Statute at Large (Act of Congress) creating
any specific liability for any of those "taxes":
http://www.supremelaw.org/
In summary, both the FED and the IRS will be legally "out of
business"
throughout the United States of America and throughout all Federal enclaves,
territories and possessions as of midnight ending March 31, 2009 A.D.
p.s. Questions and answers are appended
below, and
there is much additional (and free) reading
at the links below my name here ...
http://www.supremelaw.org/
Sincerely yours,
/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Private Attorney General, 18 U.S.C. 1964(a)
http://www.supremelaw.org/
Criminal Investigator and Federal Witness: 18 U.S.C. 1510, 1512-13
http://www.supremelaw.org/
http://www.supremelaw.org/
http://www.supremelaw.org/
http://www.supremelaw.org/
http://www.supremelaw.org/
All Rights Reserved without Prejudice
Our condensed list of IRS outreach resources:
http://www.supremelaw.org/sls/
http://www.supremelaw.org/
http://www.supremelaw.org/end.
http://www.supremelaw.org/
http://www.supremelaw.org/
http://www.supremelaw.org/
http://www.supremelaw.org/
http://www.supremelaw.org/end.
http://www.supremelaw.org/
DISCLAIMER: Forwarding email from
someone else
does not mean that I endorse any of its contents.
Questions and Answers
about the United States’
DECLARATION OF
INSOLVENCY:
by
Paul
Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Private
Attorney General, 18 U.S.C. 1964(a)
(April 5,
2009 A.D.)
All Rights
Reserved without Prejudice
> How are U.S. Notes any more secure and
> how can they be a preferred currency
> without proof of metal/specie-based assets/collateral?
There is no interest due to the FED on
any U.S. Notes.
Even if U.S. Notes are not
redeemable in gold or silver initially,
the recall of FRNs
and their replacement with U.S. Notes will effectively destroy
FRNs as legal tender.
Thus, the issuance of U.S. Notes
that are not redeemable is a temporary measure --
to expedite the recall of all FRNs in circulation.
Later, as Treasury builds up its
stocks of gold and silver, Congress can
enact a law making U.S. Notes redeemable and thereby eliminating
any need to recall U.S. Notes too.
> Where now does this Declaration position the common man on the
street?
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/fox2/insolvency.htm
An automatic stay went into effect at midnight
ending March 31, 2009.
See 11 U.S.C. 362:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/11/362.html
In simple language, whenever an entity seeks the protection of a bankruptcy
court,
that statute prohibits any and all further attempts by the creditor(s) to
collect
any of the debts owed by the
debtor(s).
The Grace Commission has already admitted that Federal income taxes
do not pay for any Federal government services; those "taxes" pay for
interest on the U.S. government debts to the Federal Reserve Banks.
Thus, the implications are explained in the DECLARATION OF INSOLVENCY
as follows:
This
automatic stay is intended to bar any and all Federal
Reserve Banks henceforth from any and all further efforts to collect from
the United
States, or from the People at Large, either the principal or interest
amounts previously owed by the United
States to the Federal Reserve Banks.
This
intent necessarily also bars the Internal
Revenue Service from performing, or claiming any authority to perform, any
further collections of income taxes allegedly imposed by subtitle A
of the Internal
Revenue Code. See IRS
Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998.
[end
excerpt]
In addition to the automatic stay, it is now an established FACT
that Congress never enacted any liability STATUTE(s) for taxes imposed
by IRC subtitle A. This is yet another
reason why the IRS and the FED
no longer have any legal authority to enforce collections of those
"taxes":
It
is now a well established fact that Congress never enacted any Statute(s) at
Large creating a specific liability for taxes imposed by subtitle A
of the Internal
Revenue Code. By comparison,
Congress has enacted Statutes at Large creating specific
liabilities for taxes imposed by subtitles B and C of
the Internal
Revenue Code. On this key point, see
26
CFR 1.1-1(b) and Commissioner
v. Acker, 361 U.S. 87, 4 L.Ed.2d 127, 80 S.Ct.
144 (1959), quoting in pertinent part:
But the
section contains nothing to that effect, and, therefore, to uphold this
addition to the tax would be to hold that it may be imposed by regulation,
which, of course, the law does not permit. United
States v. Calamaro, 354 U.S. 351, 359; Koshland v. Helvering, 298
U.S. 441, 446-447; Manhattan
Co. v. Commissioner, 297 U.S. 129, 134.
[bold emphasis added]
We mentioned the RRA98 in particular, because
it now renders the Internal Revenue Manual ("IRM") enforceable.
IRS personnel can now be disciplined or terminated
for any of the violations enumerated at section 1203(b) of that Act:
http://www.supremelaw.org/stat/112/RRA98.pdf
This RRA98 was never codified in Title 26, however;
you need to pay attention where it states -- in the margin --
"26 USC 7804 note." That "note" is buried here:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode26/usc_sec_26_00007804----000-notes.html
Begin reading at "Termination of Employment for Misconduct".
Notice in particular where it itemizes acts defined as "misconduct":
(3) with respect to a taxpayer, taxpayer representative,
or other employee of the Internal Revenue Service,
the violation of —
(A) any right under the Constitution of the United
States
...
(6) violations of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, Department
of Treasury regulations, or policies of the Internal Revenue
Service (including the Internal Revenue Manual)
for the
purpose of retaliating against, or harassing, a taxpayer, taxpayer
representative, or other employee of the Internal Revenue
Service;
[end excerpt]
Prior to the RRA98, the IRM had no legal force or effect whatsoever:
it was merely a "guideline" that contained no mandatory
provisions
prior to enactment of the RRA98:
http://www.supremelaw.org/letters/kozinski.htm
Well, Separation of Powers is a Right under the Constitution;
and, Commissioner v. Acker held -- correctly -- that the IRS
may NOT create a tax liability by means of Regulations
published in the Federal Register:
http://www.supremelaw.org/sls/2amjur2d.htm
Also, the Internal Revenue Manual makes it very clear --
in two separate places -- that no "collections" may commence
without a procedurally proper ASSESSMENT:
http://www.supremelaw.org/lien.or.levy.htm
Well, IRS is legally BARRED from performing any procedurally
proper ASSESSMENT because they cannot verify same without
committing perjury. See IRC 6065:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/26/6065.html
That perjury stems from the FACT that there is no liability STATUTE; and,
an ASSESSMENT cannot be verified "under the penalties of perjury"
without the signer committing an act of perjury.
To summarize, all collections of principal and interest payments [to the
FED]
must cease immediately, chiefly because of the automatic stay,
but also because there is no liability STATUTE for subtitle A; and,
the IRS is thereby prohibited from creating a tax liability by means of
Regulations published in the Federal Register.
I hope this helps.
> Your reply is much appreciated, and
> is there some way to compel a bank
to exchange FRN’s for U.S. Notes
> upon appropriate presentation of a
copy of your Declaration to any such bank?
No.
We are suggesting that bank customers start "asking"
in such large numbers that their requests get noticed
and forwarded to the Bureau of Engraving and Printing:
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/fox2/frn.recall.letter.to.banks.htm
There is also a statute [now] limiting the total number of U.S. Notes
presently authorized to circulate: 31
U.S.C. 5115:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/31/5115.html
(b) The amount of United States currency notes outstanding and
in circulation —
(1) may not be more than $300,000,000; and
(2) may not be held or used for a
reserve.
And, that's why our template letter above mentions the need
for appropriate legislative changes e.g. amending 5115.
> Regarding the writing to banks
for U.S. Notes
> would it be possible for you to
write a sample letter?
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/
> I ran
these case numbers with the U.S. Bankrupcy court
database,
> they didn't match with the cases
outlined below.
Sometimes,
you must append the initials of the "robe" assigned
e.g. "PCW" = Patricia C. Williams; "PCW7" =
Chapter 7; etc.
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/
etc.
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/
etc.
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/
See also Exhibit "H" here:
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/
It has happened quite frequently during the past 19+ years,
that controversial cases, and controversial pleadings,
somehow "disappear" from the official court records;
of course, this is a felony Federal offense, but that
hasn't stopped the guilty parties from destroying
official court records. To illustrate
from sworn statements
recorded by the late Gary Wean, LAPD Detective:
http://www.supremelaw.org/
(search for "Pregerson" and find Harry and
Dean -- father and son)
So, I wouldn't put too much faith in some database,
without also cross-checking first -- as you have done
by contacting me.
Moreover, our extensive, ongoing investigation of
missing credentials, assisted by U.S. DOJ in D.C.,
has now assembled proof that confirmed impostors
are the ones most likely to be assigned to "tax" cases
-- as happened with Dean D. Pregerson:
http://www.supremelaw.org/
http://www.supremelaw.org/
For example, all 25 "robes" now seated on the U.S. Tax Court
turned up without any of 4 requisite credentials:
http://www.supremelaw.org/
If you like, I can request our clients to contact you,
for confirmation, but only at their discretion.
p.s. In my
office is a large "banker box" with literally hundreds
of documents that have already been filed in that bankruptcy case.
Thus, the links above will connect you to only 2 of many such
legal documents.
> I
read a page and I wonder if this page for declaration of
> bankrupcy of the U.S. banks are real?
Yes. The United States has formally
declared insolvency
as to its alleged indebtedness to the Federal Reserve Banks;
but, the DECLARATION OF INSOLVENCY does not declare
bankruptcy of any "U.S. banks".
> Can
the government reject the declaration of insolvency you filed?
> Is
there any legal reason they must be REQUIRED to make the insolvency public?
It is public: it was duly served on the U.S. Bankruptcy
Court
for the Eastern District of Washington; and, as such,
it must be filed in that bankruptcy case and
it must be made a permanent record of which
the Clerk of Court is the designated legal custodian.
Those records are "public".
The U.S. Postal Service has also confirmed delivery,
by means of the Delivery Confirmation Track & Confirm
number that was affixed to those documents.
If there is any attempt to obstruct the filing and
entry of same into the Clerk's records, that attempt
would violate 18 U.S.C. 1001 -- a felony Federal offense.
You could help yourself, and help us, by studying
the law rather than asking so many questions
with the expectation that I have all the time
in the world to answer such questions
without compensation. I don't.
I also think you may be assuming, wrongly, that
impostors who lack credentials somehow qualify
as "the government", when the case law is
quite contrary:
http://www.supremelaw.org/
(all their acts are void)
>
I would like to know if this is legit.
Yes: I'll follow with the USPS Delivery
Confirmation
confirming delivery to the Clerk of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court
for the Eastern District of Washington.
See also:
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/fox2/insolvency.htm (fully hyperlinked version)
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/fox2/insolvency.doc (laser-printer original)
Greetings Ladies and Gentlemen:
As of 5:31 a.m. today, March 31, 2009 A.D.,
the United States officially declared insolvency
as to its obligations allegedly payable to the
Federal Reserve Banks.
See Delivery Confirmation information below,
as provided by the USPS Track & Confirm
Internet system of notification via email.
The fully hyperlinked version of that
DECLARATION OF INSOLVENCY
is here on the Internet:
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/
The original hard copy is formatted using
Microsoft WORD 2003:
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/
Please relieve us of the burden of shipping hard copies
by printing either document, and all incorporated Exhibits,
directly from the Internet.
Certified and embossed versions of the .doc version above
can be purchased from my office for a nominal certification fee
of $20.00 each. Please send either CASH
or
a BLANK U.S. Postal Money Order to:
Forwarding Agent
7115 N. Division St. #B-354
Spokane 99208
WASHINGTON STATE, USA
Further details and a plain English explanation can be found
in this document:
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/
Thank you for your professional consideration.
p.s. If you are
presently engaged in litigation in either State or Federal Court(s),
please make a point of filing a DEMAND FOR MANDATORY JUDICIAL NOTICE
of the above DECLARATION OF INSOLVENCY.
Cf. Rule 201(d) in the
Federal Rules of Evidence ("FREV") for mandatory judicial notice of
adjudicative facts.
From: U.S._Postal_Service_
<U.S._Postal_Service@usps.com>
Date: Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 8:23 AM
Subject: USPS Shipment Info for 0308 0730 0000 7401 7297
To: supremelawfirm@gmail.com
This is a post-only message. Please do not respond.
Paul Mitchell has requested that you receive the current Track & Confirm
information, as shown below.
Current Track & Confirm e-mail information provided by the U.S. Postal
Service.
Label Number: 0308 0730 0000 7401 7297
Service Type: Delivery Confirmation(TM)
Shipment Activity Location
Date & Time
------------------------------
Delivered
SPOKANE WA 99201
03/31/09 5:31am
Arrival at Unit SPOKANE WA 99201
03/31/09
5:30am
Processed SPOKANE WA
99224
03/30/09 8:01pm
------------------------------
USPS has not verified the validity of any email addresses submitted via its
online Track & Confirm tool.
For more information, or if you have additional questions on Track &
Confirm
services and features, please visit the Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
section of our Track & Confirm site at
http://www.usps.com/shipping/
latest on the
bankruptcy follows ...
All "branch" Federal Reserve Banks will also receive Page 1 from
each of the following 2 documents, via U.S. Mail posted today:
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/
> Many of us at the 912 Project are anxious to
know the
> status of the United States Declaration
of Insolvency
> that was set to be heard yesterday
in the bankruptcy
> court in Washington State. Please advise me of the
> outcome so
I may pass it on to them.
No.
It was not "set to be heard yesterday"
in the bankruptcy
court in Washington State.
It
was, however, delivered by the U.S. Postal Service
at 5:31 a.m. yesterday and, as such, it was legally served
at that time.
In point of law, the automatic stay described
in that DECLARATION OF INSOLVENCY
went into effect at midnight ending yesterday.
Therefore, the United States is now officially
insolvent as to its alleged debts to the
Federal Reserve Banks, and the automatic stay
authorized by U.S. bankruptcy laws is now in effect.
A simple English explanation is here:
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/fox2/insolvency.explained.htm
If you will read the DECLARATION OF INSOLVENCY and
all Exhibits, you will learn that the personnel employed
by the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District
of Washington have either failed or refused to produce
credentials:
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/fox2/insolvency.htm
Thus, it may take quite some time to clean up that
related mess too. There is no point in
scheduling
any hearings where so many impostors congregate:
http://www.supremelaw.org/rsrc/commissions.htm
("all their acts are void")
FYI: our office has been working with
the U.S.
Department of Justice to investigate missing credentials:
Start here:
http://www.supremelaw.org/copyrite/uoregon.edu/memo.ag01.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/rsrc/commissions/index.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/rsrc/commissions/evidence.folders.2004-03-16.htm
Thank you for contacting the Supreme Law Firm.
> I am
eagerly awaiting news.
> When
should we know the status of the filing and insolvency of FR and IRS?
> Will
anything be announced to the general public?
The
DECLARATION OF INSOLVENCY will take legal effect
at midnight tonight (3/31/2009):
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/
As such, it will activate the automatic stay authorized
by pertinent statutes in the Federal bankruptcy laws.
It has already been received by the U.S. Bankruptcy Court
(Delivery Confirmation to follow this message).
Don't expect CNN, Fox News or MSN to report it, however.
Federal Express .. er .. Federated Hardware Stores .. er ..
the "Federal" Reserve might try to terminate
the reporters for doing so.
> Some posters are claiming it to be a hoax.
> However, I informed them that they could check the delivery of
the doc themselves, and
> how to do it. I
checked it out and it WAS delivered just as you said.
> However,
on the same site, some are attempting to defame you. Here is one of them: …
> Hope you can either respond to them
or give me something to pass on for you.
Defamation is a crime.
Yes, I have used several pen names.
Thank you.
p.s. This is not a hoax: the
Federal personnel at the U.S. Bankruptcy Court
for the Eastern District of Washington, in Spokane, all failed or refused
to produce credentials. See Exhibits
"F" thru "J" inclusive here:
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/fox2/insolvency.htm
The staff dba
"clerks" also failed or refused to produce credentials,
making it impossible for any Bankruptcy Court "orders" to comply
with 28 U.S.C. 1961:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/28/1691.html
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/fox2/benka/
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/fox2/benka/nad.affidavit.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/fox2/benka/nad.oath.of.attorney.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/fox2/benka/letter.2009-03-05/refusal.for.cause.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/fox2/watkins/
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/fox2/watkins/nad.affidavit.htm
Because they all lack credentials now, as a Private
Attorney General
I exercise more de jure authority than all of them put together!
http://www.supremelaw.org/stat/62/
http://www.supremelaw.org/stat/62/28usc1691.case.law.2.htm
[begin excerpt]
In Peaslee v. Haberstro,
15 Blatchf. 472, Fed.Cas. No. 10,884,
the summons was set aside because not under the seal of court or signature
of clerk. ...
To my mind, the word “process,” as used in Rev. St. § 911, means an order of court,
although it may be issued by the clerk.
[Leas & McVitty
v. Merriman, 132 F. 510, 511-513]
[(C.C.
W.D. Virginia 1904), emphases added]
[end excerpt]
http://www.supremelaw.org/stat/62/28usc1691.case.law.htm
> Thanks, Paul. I read all of
you messages posted on Freedom Fight, and
> have urged
others to as well. Thank you for being a
valued member!
Copy that!!
Anyone could reliably PREDICT that certain agents
provocateur
would come out of the woodwork, once this DECLARATION
OF INSOLVENCY hit the fan.
It is NOT a "hoax" by any means:
all the missing credentials
at the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Spokane, Wash., mean that the
United States could walk right in and effectively OCCUPY
that entire forum -- ALL BY ITSELF.
See all incorporated
Exhibits for a partial list of missing credentials:
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/fox2/insolvency.htm
The absence of credentials was also confirmed by this
SUBPOENA IN A CIVIL CASE, which the A.O. failed to answer:
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/aouscourts/
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/aouscourts/delivery.instructions.htm
[begin excerpt]
Certified copies of the U.S. Office of Personnel Management Form 61
APPOINTMENT AFFIDAVITS and OATHS OF OFFICE FOR
UNITED STATES JUDGES
(see samples attached) for all Justices, Judges,
full- and part-time Magistrates,
Clerks and Deputy Clerks presently
employed by the Supreme Court of the United States,
United States Courts of Appeal, District Courts of the United States, United
States District Courts,
United States Bankruptcy Courts, United
States Court of Federal Claims, United States Tax Courts,
and United States Court of International Trade.
[end excerpt]
And, that's exactly what we did -- OCCUPY THAT FORUM
AND THEREBY ACTIVATE THE AUTOMATIC STAY.
Add to those facts the added PROOF that Obama was
born in Mombasa, Kenya;
and, the entire Executive Branch
now has very little delegation of authority: Obama can NOT
exercise the Appointments Clause in the U.S. Constitution!!
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/obama/third.circuit/nad02.htm
(see Official Report by the National Assembly of the Republic of
Kenya!)
See Exhibit "K" in the DECLARATION OF INSOLVENCY:
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/obama/vieira/Obama.Stand.Up.Now.or.Stand.Down.htm
THINK ABOUT THAT ONE "little detail" FOR A MINUTE OR TWO!!!
> WAY TO GO
PAUL!!!!!!
> HOPE THEY CHOKE WHEN THEY REALIZE WHAT
YOU HAVE DONE.
> COULDN'T
HAPPEN TO A BETTER BUNCH OF PEOPLE.
> Now we can
all reap the benefits, thanks to you.
Yes!
This one is truly worth VERY WIDESPREAD DISTRIBUTION
e.g. the copies for the regional
Federal Reserve Banks
were mailed last Friday, so hopefully they will all receive
their copies by today.
The success of this effort will depend in no small way
upon the participation of the American People too.
The People can begin by inundating their local banks
with requests -- written and verbal -- to exchange
Federal Reserve Notes for United States Notes.
Even though those banks will probably not have
enough U.S. Notes -- at the start of this project --
the public demand will hopefully grow to such
an extent that the Bureau of Engraving and Printing
will have no alternative but to start cranking out
U.S. Notes -- as an interim measure.
There is a link to photos comparing FRNs and U.S. Notes
in the DECLARATION OF INSOLVENCY:
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/fox2/insolvency.htm
http://www.ustreas.gov/usss/money_characteristics.shtml
p.s.
There is much additional (and free) reading
at the links below my name here ...
http://www.supremelaw.org/reading.list.htm
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
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
Our condensed list of IRS outreach resources:
http://www.supremelaw.org/sls/nutshell.htm <-- START HERE
http://www.supremelaw.org/letters/irs.estopped.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/end.times.irs.forward.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/letters/irs.perjury.jurats.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/psta.analysis.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/lien.or.levy.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/notice.of.deficiency.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/end.times.irs.cclists.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/support.guidelines.htm
DISCLAIMER: Forwarding email from
someone else
does not mean that I endorse any of its contents.