The
Tanner Mystery: The Disappearance
of
Constitutional Form of Government
The Credential Investigation has recently searched for
evidence that helps to assemble an accurate history
of changes made over time to OPM Standard Form 61
APPOINTMENT AFFIDAVITS (abbreviated “SF-61”).
This search was inspired in large part by confirmation
that the Acts of Congress at 5 U.S.C. 3333 and 7311
were never repealed by Congress. There is a related
criminal statute at 18 U.S.C. 1918, and
it too was
never repealed by a proper Act of Congress.
A key phrase in Section 7311 prohibits
personnel of the
U.S. Government from advocating the overthrow of our
“constitutional form of government”.
An obvious question arises by examining the current
version of SF-61 that is readily available at OPM’s
Internet website; “constitutional form of the Government”
has been removed entirely from that current version:
https://www.opm.gov/forms/pdf_fill/sf61.pdf
We searched for historical evidence that might explain
when that key phrase was removed
from OPM’s SF-61.
That search guided us to focus on the SF-61 that was
signed by William H. Rehnquist when he was appointed
as an Associate Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court.
The date on his signature is December 17, 1971:
Pay attention to the number of Paragraphs lettered
A., B., and C. – a total of 3.
The phrase “constitutional form of the Government”
is conspicuously absent from Rehnquist’s SF-61.
Now compare the SF-61 signed by Jack E. Tanner
when he was appointed to the office of District Judge.
There are 4 lettered paragraphs: A., B., C. and D.
The date of Tanner’s signature is June 6, 1978.
We have highlighted Paragraph B. in Tanner’s SF-61:
It is obvious that Paragraph B. on Tanner’s SF-61
clearly contains text that does not appear anywhere
on Rehnquist’s SF-61.
Moreover,
the key phrase “constitutional form of the Government”
is clearly present in Tanner’s Paragraph B.
As such, Tanner has signed his SF-61 some 6 ½ years
after the date on Rehnquist’s SF-61; one
would think
“constitutional form of the Government” would
have been
removed from
Tanner’s SF-61 by the year 1978.
Partial answers can be obtained by focusing closely
on the upper left corner of Tanner’s SF-61.
There, we find the following additional evidence:
STANDARD FORM NO. 61a
REVISED JUNE 1957
Assuming the latter text is authentic and not altered,
the following inference is initially justified:
Tanner must have had specific knowledge about
the removal of “constitutional form of the Government”
from OPM’s blank SF-61 as of June 1978; and,
it is possible that he insisted on signing a prior
SF-61
showing 4 paragraphs, of which Paragraph B. says:
AFFIDAVIT AS TO SUBVERSIVE ACTIVITY AND
AFFILIATION
The latter is certainly a reasonable inference.
This mystery about Tanner’s SF-61 was rendered
much deeper by a related discovery for which we still,
as of today, have no accurate or even partial explanation.
During experimentation with artificial intelligence
software,
one AI program mentioned an SF-61 that was reportedly
signed by Tanner on May 21, 1971, and was annotated
with the phrase “18 USC 1918”. Here’s the screen shot
It’s quite obvious that “Added by Tanner; see 18 USC 1918”
does not appear in
the right margin of Paragraph B on his SF-61 above.
One possible explanation for this mysterious annotation “Added
by Tanner”
is the existence of proprietary historical information,
perhaps classified
in some manner or other, that is simply not available to
casual users of
artificial intelligence software that is currently
available to the public.
Without acquiring a lot more information, we think it best
to refrain
from generating any alternative hypotheses about the
origins of
Tanner’s mysterious annotation.
p.s.
Interested
readers and constitutional scholars may contact
this author
at the following email address (preferred):
<supremelawfirm@gmail.com>
--
Sincerely yours,
/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Private Attorney General, Civil RICO: 18 U.S.C. 1964;
Agent of the United States as Qui Tam
Relator (4X),
Federal Civil False Claims Act: 31 U.S.C. 3729 et
seq.
All Rights Reserved
( cf. UCC
1-308 https://www.law.cornell.edu/
Other SF-61s:
Approved January 1943:
http://supremelaw.org/rsrc/opmdocs/sf61-A.January.1943.2.pdf
Revised March 1956:
http://supremelaw.org/rsrc/opmdocs/sf61-A.March.1956.pdf
Revised June 1957:
http://supremelaw.org/rsrc/opmdocs/SF-61.Information.for.Appointee.June.1957.pdf
Revised June 1957:
https://supremelaw.org/rsrc/oaths/opm/SF-61-A.1967.annotated.png
Revised December 1966:
http://supremelaw.org/rsrc/opmdocs/sf61.December.1966.pdf
Revised June 1986:
http://supremelaw.org/rsrc/opmdocs/sf61.June.1986.pdf
Revised June 1996:
http://supremelaw.org/rsrc/opmdocs/sf61.June.1996.pdf
Revised August 2002: