Donald E. Wishart, Sui Juris
Citizen of California State,
Federal Witness and Victim
c/o 5150 Graves Avenue, Suite 12-C
San Jose [ZIP code exempt]
CALIFORNIA, USA
In Propria Persona and
by Special Appearance Only
All Rights Reserved
without Prejudice
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA [sic],)
Case Number CR-00-20227-JF
)
Plaintiff [sic], ) SECOND SUPPLEMENT TO
) MOTION
TO STRIKE SIX
v. ) GOVERNMENT PLEADINGS:
)
DONALD E. WISHART [sic], ) Article I,
Section 9, Clause 8;
) Article I,
Section 10, Clause 1;
Defendant [sic]. ) Article III, Section
2, Clause 2;
_______________________________) 28 U.S.C. 530B,
1652.
COMES NOW Donald E. Wishart, Sui Juris, Citizen of California State and Defendant in the above entitled matter (“Defendant”), to submit this, His SECOND SUPPLEMENT TO MOTION TO STRIKE SIX GOVERNMENT PLEADINGS, which MOTION was previously filed and properly served.
On October 13, 2000 A.D., Messrs. Robert S. Mueller III, Thomas S. DiLeonardo and Gregory S. Gordon filed and served three (3) more pleadings in the instant case, to wit:
(1) GOVERNMENT’S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS COUNT THREE OF INDICTMENT;
(2) GOVERNMENT’S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT’S NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO DISMISS COUNTS FOUR THROUGH SEVEN OF INDICTMENT; and,
(3) GOVERNMENT’S RESPONSE TO MISCELLANEOUS PLEADINGS FILED BY DEFENDANT.
Sadly, these three government attorneys have repeated the same fundamental errors which are evident in all of their prior pleadings.
First, they title their caption pages with the nomenclature “Attorneys for the United States of America” [sic].
Second, they claim to represent the named Plaintiffs UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, when this claim is false and constitutes evidence further still of misrepresentation.
As a term which is expressly used in the Constitution for the United States of America, as lawfully amended (“U.S. Constitution”), the term “United States of America” cannot be altered or amended by the United States (federal government) nor by any of its officers, employees, or agents. See Eisner v. Macomber, 252 U.S. 189 (holding predicated on ratification of the so-called 16th amendment, which would have introduced the term “income” into the U.S. Constitution for the very first time).
There is no “second USA” as might be incorrectly inferred from statutes such as 36 U.S.C. 1101(70)-(72). Indeed, subsection (71) was expressly NOT enacted by section 1101 of Title 36, U.S.C.
Congress can only create a corporation in its capacity as the Legislature for the federal zone. See Daly v. The National Life Insurance Company for the United States of America, Indiana Supreme Court (1878). There is no such thing as a national federal corporation; to create a national federal corporation would invade the province of the 50 States, expressly reserved to them by the Tenth Amendment in the U.S. Constitution.
All federal corporations created by Acts of Congress are necessarily foreign corporations with respect to the municipal jurisdictions of the several States of the Union.
For the edification of this honorable Court, Defendant attaches a pertinent essay entitled “A Cogent Summary of Federal Jurisdictions,” by Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S., as published at Internet URL:
http://www.supremelaw.com/authors/mitchell/cogent.htm
There is no such thing as the United States of America, Incorporated [sic].
There is no such thing as the United States of America, Inc.
There is no such thing as the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, if the latter term refers to anything other than the 50 States which are united by, and under, the U.S. Constitution.
The United States (federal government) did not create the several States of the Union, because the existence of the several States predates the United States. See the Declaration of Independence and the Articles of Confederation, at Article II, which expressly refers to the “United States, in Congress Assembled”:
ARTICLE II.
Each State retains its sovereignty, freedom and independence, and every power, jurisdiction and right, which is not by this confederation expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress Assembled.
INCORPORATION OF
RELATED PLEADING
Defendant hereby formally incorporates all pertinent facts and laws as itemized, and verified, in Defendant’s FIRST SUPPLEMENT TO MOTION TO DISMISS COUNTS FOUR THRU SEVEN, BY AFFIDAVIT, as if set forth fully herein.
MISREPRESENTATION
IS ACTIONABLE
UNDER THE McDADE ACT: 28 U.S.C. 530B
Under section 6086.7 of the California Business and Professions Code, a court shall notify the State Bar whenever a modification or reversal of a judgment in a judicial proceeding is based in whole or in part on the misconduct, incompetent representation, or willful misrepresentation of an attorney. See 28 U.S.C. 530B(a) (Ethical standards for attorneys for the Government); 28 U.S.C. 1652.
It is willful misrepresentation for Messrs. Mueller, DiLeonardo and Gordon to claim falsely that they have any power(s) of attorney to represent the Plaintiffs UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (plural).
To allow such a claim to remain unchallenged and unpunished, is to tolerate a fundamental violation of the Separation of Powers Doctrine -- a separation which is elevated to the status of supreme Law by the Tenth Amendment in the U.S. Constitution.
It is also willful misrepresentation for Messrs. Mueller, DiLeonardo and Gordon to claim falsely that they have any power(s) of attorney to represent the plaintiff United States of America, Incorporated, as that term is found at 36 U.S.C. 1101(70)-(72), because paragraph (71) in said statute was expressly not enacted.
It is also willful misrepresentation for Messrs. Mueller, DiLeonardo and Gordon to claim that they have any power(s) of attorney to represent the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA if, by that term, they are proceeding on behalf of a federal corporation which has no organic Act of Congress and, hence, no legal standing whatsoever.
Furthermore, it is also willful misrepresentation for Messrs. Mueller, DiLeonardo and Gordon to claim that they have any power(s) of attorney to represent the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA if, by that term, they are deliberately omitting the required “Incorporated” or “Inc.” suffix, in order to deceive the general populace, as a matter of deliberate and premeditated federal policy, practice, and procedure.
In point of fact, this unconstitutional practice of misrepresenting the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA [sic] in numerous federal civil and criminal proceedings has become so widespread, it is time for this Court to take a very close look at this practice, with a view toward issuing appropriate injunction(s) and sanction(s).
Accordingly, Defendant hereby provides formal Notice to all interested Party(s) of His specific intent to apply to a court of competent jurisdiction for an ORDER to Messrs. Mueller, DiLeonardo, and Gordon to show cause why they should not all be charged with violating 28 U.S.C. 530B each and every time they filed a pleading in the instant case on behalf of the Plaintiffs UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
REMEDY REQUESTED
Due to their obvious bad faith, to their lack of Oaths of Office, and also to their demonstrable lack of any lawful powers of attorney to represent the named Plaintiffs UNITED STATES OF AMERICA in the instant case, Defendant respectfully requests an ORDER from this honorable Court, striking the three (3) additional pleadings itemized above, and further sanctioning all three (3) persons for alleging falsely to represent the Plaintiffs UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and for acting in bad faith -- by deliberately imposing an unnecessary and prejudicial burden upon Defendant with pleadings which said persons were not authorized to file, or serve, in the first instance.
I, Donald E. Wishart, Sui Juris, hereby verify, under penalty of perjury, under the laws of the United States of America, without the “United States” (federal government), that the above statement of facts and laws is true and correct, according to the best of My current information, knowledge, and belief, so help Me God, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1746(1). See Supremacy Clause in pari materia with all provisions of Title 28, U.S.C. (Constitution, Laws and Treaties of the United States are supreme Law of the Land).
Dated: October 19, 2000 A.D.
Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Donald E. Wishart
Donald E. Wishart, Sui Juris
Citizen of California State,
Federal Witness and Victim (18 U.S.C. 1512, 1513)
All Rights Reserved without Prejudice
I, Donald E. Wishart, Sui Juris, hereby certify, under penalty of perjury, under the laws of the United States of America, without the “United States” (federal government), that I am at least 18 years of age, a Citizen of ONE OF the United States of America, and that I personally served the following document(s):
SECOND SUPPLEMENT
TO
MOTION TO STRIKE
SIX
GOVERNMENT
PLEADINGS:
Article I, Section 9, Clause 8;
Article I, Section 10, Clause 1;
Article III, Section 2, Clause 2;
Guarantee Clause; 28 U.S.C. 530B, 1652
by placing one true and correct copy of said document(s) in first class United States Mail, with postage prepaid and properly addressed to the following:
Office of the U.S. Attorney Office of the U.S. Attorney
280 South First St., Ste. 371 312 North Spring Street
San Jose [ZIP code exempt] Los Angeles [ZIP code exempt]
CALIFORNIA, USA CALIFORNIA, USA
Department of Justice, Tax Div. Department of Justice, Tax Div.
West. Criminal Enforcement Sec. West. Criminal Enforcement Sec.
600 “E” St., N.W., Room 5712 600 “E” St., N.W., Room 5712
Washington [ZIP code exempt] Washington [ZIP code exempt]
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, USA DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, USA
Federal Public Defender’s Office Internal Revenue Service
160 W. Santa Clara St., Ste. 575 55 South Market Street
San Jose [ZIP code exempt] San Jose [ZIP code exempt]
CALIFORNIA, USA CALIFORNIA, USA
Paul Camacho Don Hallenbeck
Internal Revenue Service Internal Revenue Service
55 South Market Street 55 South Market Street
San Jose [ZIP code exempt] San Jose [ZIP code exempt]
CALIFORNIA, USA CALIFORNIA, USA
Mel Steiner Colbert Tang
Internal Revenue Service Internal Revenue Service
55 South Market Street 55 South Market Street
San Jose [ZIP code exempt] San Jose [ZIP code exempt]
CALIFORNIA, USA CALIFORNIA, USA
Brian
Watson Ken
Whitmore
Internal Revenue Service Internal Revenue Service
55 South Market Street 55 South Market Street
San Jose [ZIP code exempt] San Jose [ZIP code exempt]
CALIFORNIA, USA CALIFORNIA, USA
Dan Sutherland Solicitor General
Internal Revenue Service U.S. Dept. of Justice
55 South Market Street 10th & Constitution, N.W.
San Jose [ZIP code exempt] Washington [ZIP code exempt]
CALIFORNIA, USA DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, USA
Bay View
Federal Bank Chief
Counsel
Attention: Legal Department Internal Revenue Service
2121 South El Camino Real 1111 Constitution Ave., N.W.
San Mateo [ZIP code exempt] Washington [ZIP code exempt]
CALIFORNIA,
USA DISTRICT OF
COLUMBIA, USA
Jeremy Fogel Patricia V. Trumbull
c/o Clerk of Court c/o Clerk of Court
280 South First Street, Rm. 2112 280 South First Street, Rm. 2112
San Jose [ZIP code exempt] San Jose [ZIP code exempt]
CALIFORNIA, USA CALIFORNIA, USA
Executed on October 19, 2000 A.D.
/s/ Donald E. Wishart
Donald E. Wishart, Sui Juris
Citizen of California State,
Federal Witness and Victim (18 U.S.C. 1512, 1513)
All Rights Reserved without Prejudice
Attachment “A”:
by
Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
as published at Internet URL: