Time: Thu Aug 07 20:42:33 1997
by usr10.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id OAA28324;
Wed, 6 Aug 1997 14:15:30 -0700 (MST)
Date: Wed, 06 Aug 1997 14:14:29 -0700
To: sew@valint.net
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
Subject: SLS: Where are Janet Reno's credentials? (fwd)
References: <3.0.3.16.19970805191502.3f9fcf32@pop.primenet.com>
<33D90868.4015D3E0@prodigy.net>
<33D90868.4015D3E0@prodigy.net>
<3.0.3.16.19970805191502.3f9fcf32@pop.primenet.com>
It's a constitutional requirement, and
a failure to take the oath is grounds
for ouster by Quo Warranto proceedings.
/s/ Paul Mitchell
http://www.supremelaw.com
At 01:06 PM 8/6/97 -0700, you wrote:
>I didn't know FOIA could be used to get certified documents. It
>doesn't say that in the act, that I can see.
>
>Steve Washam
>
>Tue, 05 Aug 1997 19:15:02 -0700
>Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar] wrote:
>>Paul Mitchell's comments infra:
>>
>>
>>At 10:21 PM 8/2/97 -0700, you wrote:
>>>Fri, 25 Jul 1997 15:11:21 -0500
>>> Brooks Martin <haze11@PRODIGY.NET> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Some of you may find this interesting. Those of you who have spoken to
>>>>Mr. Mitchell know he is _very_ passionate about his beliefs. I took
>>>>the
>>>>time to verify some of this story myself. Especially the part about
>>>>redirecting the FOIA request for Janet Reno's credentials etc. from the
>>>>Dept. of Justice to the PUBLIC LIBRARY(?) This is true folks, if you
>>>>submit a FOIA request to the Dept. of Justice for a copy of Janet Reno's
>>>>sworn oath of office and her other credentials you will be refered to
>>>>the
>>>>Public Library. Don't ask why. I don't have that info yet.
>>>
>>>Here's my guess.
>>>
>>>The FOIA officer is _interpreting_ the Mitchell's request to be
>>>a request for the _text_ of the oath, rather than a copy of the
>>>Reno's executed oath. That information will be found in the US
>>>Code, available in the public library.
>>
>>
>>Not true. We have received many copies of
>>executed Appointment Affidavits from the
>>Department of Justice. We have found all
>>of them to be unacceptable, because our
>>FOIA requests specifically required
>>_certified_ copies of said Affidavits.
>>
>>DOJ now refuses to certify these crucial
>>documents. Therefore, the photocopies
>>which they do send out, are not admissible
>>and, for this reason, are essentially worthless.
>>
>>The end result is being litigated right now,
>>as I write this, before the 8th Circuit,
>>because a failure to produce evidence of a
>>proper oath of office is grounds for ouster
>>by Quo Warranto. The 8th Circuit now
>>knows this, because we have told them so.
>>
>>/s/ Paul Mitchell
>>http://www.supremelaw.com
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>Because _part_ of the information is available elsewhere under
>>>this _interpetation_, they are using it as a slimy excuse to can
>>>the entire request.
>>>
>>>Just a guess, which is not as interesting as some thoeries.
>>
>>Nice guess, but we are way beyond "guessing"
>>at this stage of the game.
>>
>>One of the main reasons why I believe they
>>are now stalling in the face of these
>>FOIA requests for credentials, is that
>>we took the next step in the Grand Jury
>>case in Arizona last year. Once an
>>Appointment Affidavit is entered into
>>evidence, using Rule 201(d) of the
>>Federal Rules of Evidence, for example,
>>the Constitution and its exact provisions
>>become a matter of evidence, and of equity.
>>
>>I have made no secret of my intentions to
>>sue out the exact provisions of the
>>Constitution which is mentioned in the
>>language of 5 U.S.C. 3331, which language
>>is repeated on these Appointment Affidavits.
>>Here is the question we plan to put to a
>>competent and qualified jury, for example:
>>
>>"Do the facts support a legal conclusion
>> that the 16th amendment was not lawfully
>> ratified?"
>>
>>A jury can be convened to issue declaratory
>>relief on this subject, but the jury should
>>be one convened under state law, because
>>28 U.S.C. 2201 has a bar against declaratory
>>judgments, when the subject matter is federal
>>income taxes. The state courts have original
>>jurisdiction, pursuant to the explicit Reservations
>>which Congress attached to the two human Rights
>>treaties now on the books. Treaties are supreme
>>Law, pursuant to the Supremacy Clause.
>>
>>/s/ Paul Mitchell
>>http://www.supremelaw.com
>>
>>
>> But
>>>it's important to sytematically eliminate the possibilities in
>>>this FOIA game, as I understand it.
>>>
>>>A more specific and limited request might turn the trick. At
>>>least they could not refer you to the library.
>>>
>>>Bureaucrats have difficulty answering more than one question at
>>>a time, in my experience.
>>>
>>>Steve Washam
>>>
>>>###
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>Just a thought, what if items 1-5 of the Freedom of Information Act
>>>>Request, contained below, don't exist. Why is the Dept. of Justice
>>>>stating that the request designated organizations OUTSIDE of the
>>>>Depatment of Justice? Why does the reply from the Dept. of Justice
>>>>also state that the FOIA/PA request apply only to the records and
>>>>agencies within the Executive Branch of the Federal Government?
>>>>Are we to conclude that Janet Reno is part of an agency outside
>>>>of the Executive Branch of the Federal Government?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Brooks Martin
>>>>
>>>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>>Paul Andrew Mitchell wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Brooks,
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, I faxed to her, and to the White House,
>>>>> a NOTICE OF SPECIFIC INTENT TO EXECUTE
>>>>> CITIZEN'S ARREST, AND DEMAND FOR IMMEDIATE
>>>>> RESIGNATION, several weeks ago.
>>>>>
>>>>> /s/ Paul Mitchell
>>>>> http://www.supremelaw.com
>>>>>
>>>>> At 01:32 PM 7/25/97 -0500, you wrote:
>>>>> >Paul,
>>>>> >
>>>>> >I was wondering if you had followed up on this already. BTW, the
>>>>> >MIME encoding works fine on my end.
>>>>> >
>>>>> >Regards,
>>>>> >Brooks Martin
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>
>>>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>Submitted to the LRT list by a member of that list. These were
>>>>originally
>>>>sent by Paul Mitchell to another list I believe. I'm not sure.
>>>>
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> I have executed FOIA requests for the official credentials
>>>>> >> of the alleged Attorney General of the United States, Janet
>>>>> >> Reno. My original request was dated May 2, 1997; appeal
>>>>> >> dated May 17, 1997 and Courtesy Notice dated May 27, 1997.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> The following letter was posted to me on May 29, 1997.
>>>>> >> This constitutes the respect our Just-Us Department has
>>>>> >> for *their own* federal laws. Pay careful notice to where
>>>>> >> they directed me to "resubmit" the FOIA request.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> ---
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> U.S. Department of Justice
>>>>> >> Washington, D.C.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> May 28, 1997
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> [my name]
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Dear [me]:
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Your Freedom of Information Act/Privacy Act (FOIA/PA)
>>>>> >> request was received by this office which serves as the
>>>>> >> receipt and referral unit for FOIA/PA requests addressed
>>>>> >> to the Department of Justice.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> The Freedom of information and Privacy Act apply only to
>>>>> >> the records of agencies within the Executive Branch of
>>>>> >> the Federal Government.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Your request designated organizations outside of the
>>>>> >> Department of Justice and will have to be resubmitted by
>>>>> >> you directly to them.*
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Sincerely,
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> /s/ Betty S. Clark for
>>>>> >> Benjamin F. Burrell, Director
>>>>> >> Facilities and Administrative
>>>>> >> Services Staff
>>>>> >> Justice Management Division
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> *Public Library
>>>>> >> Tucson, Arizona 85719
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> ---end of letter---
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> [This text is formatted in Courier 11, non-proportional spacing.]
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> -----------------------------cut here----------------------------
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> c/o 2509 N. Campbell
>>>>> >> Tucson [zip code exempt]
>>>>> >> ARIZONA REPUBLIC
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> May 2, 1997
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT REQUEST
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Disclosure Officer
>>>>> >> Office of the Attorney General
>>>>> >> Department of Justice
>>>>> >> 10th and Constitution, N.W.
>>>>> >> Washington [zip code exempt]
>>>>> >> DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Subject: Credentials of Janet Reno [sic]
>>>>> >> "Attorney General" [sic]
>>>>> >> Department of Justice
>>>>> >> Washington, D.C.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Dear Disclosure Officer:
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> This is a request under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C.
>>>>> >> 552 et seq., and regulations thereunder. This is My firm promise
>>>>> >> to pay fees and costs for locating, duplicating, and mailing to
>>>>> >> Me certified copies of the records requested below.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> If some of this request is exempt from release, please furnish Me
>>>>> >> with those portions reasonably segregable. I am requiring
>>>>> >> certified copies of the documents requested, in lieu of personal
>>>>> >> inspection of same.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Admissible documents requested:
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> 1. Certified copy of the solemn oath of office of one
>>>>> >> named Janet Reno, as required by 5 U.S.C. 3331 and by
>>>>> >> Article VI, Clause 3, of the Constitution for the
>>>>> >> United States of America, as lawfully amended.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> 2. Certified copy of her fidelity bond or surety bond.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> 3. Certified copy of her Appointment Affidavit, signed and
>>>>> >> witnessed, for the position she currently claims to
>>>>> >> occupy. (This is an OMB-approved form.)
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> 4. Certified copy of the formal delegation of authority,
>>>>> >> beginning with the President, linking all officials in
>>>>> >> the chain of command between him and the position she
>>>>> >> currently claims to occupy.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> 5. Certified copy of her license to practice law in the
>>>>> >> District of Columbia, if any.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> The requested records are not exempt from disclosure because
>>>>> >> they:
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> [Please see next page.]
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> -----------------------------cut here----------------------------
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> (A) could not reasonably be expected to interfere with law
>>>>> >> enforcement proceedings;
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> (B) would not deprive a person of a right to a fair trial
>>>>> >> or an impartial adjudication;
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> (C) could not reasonably be expected to constitute an
>>>>> >> unwarranted invasion of personal property;
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> (D) could not reasonably be expected to disclose the
>>>>> >> identity of a confidential source;
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> (E) would not disclose techniques and procedures for law
>>>>> >> enforcement investigations or prosecutions, and would
>>>>> >> not disclose guidelines for law enforcement
>>>>> >> investigations or prosecutions;
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> (F) could not reasonably be expected to endanger the life
>>>>> >> or physical safety of any individual.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> [see Exemption 7 in FOIA]
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> If you are not the correct person to whom this Freedom of
>>>>> >> Information Act Request should be directed, kindly forward it to
>>>>> >> the correct person.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Time is of the essence. If you have any questions about your
>>>>> >> rights and obligations under 5 U.S.C. 552, may we recommend that
>>>>> >> you contact the office of the Attorney General in Washington,
>>>>> >> D.C., for immediate assistance.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Please see U.S. Postal Service Publication #221 for addressing
>>>>> >> instructions.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Thank you very much for your consideration, and for your timely
>>>>> >> obedience to the controlling laws in this matter, specifically
>>>>> >> the Freedom of Information Act and the Constitution for the
>>>>> >> United States of America, as lawfully amended.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Respectfully submitted,
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> /s/ [me]
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Citizen of Arizona state
>>>>> >> all rights reserved without prejudice
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> copy: Janet Reno
>>>>> >> Department of Justice
>>>>> >> 10th and Constitution, N.W.
>>>>> >> Washington
>>>>> >> DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> # # #
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> -----------------------------cut here----------------------------
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> c/o 2509 N. Campbell
>>>>> >> Tucson, Arizona state
>>>>> >> zip code exempt
>>>>> >> May 17, 1997
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT APPEAL
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Disclosure Officer
>>>>> >> Office of the Attorney General
>>>>> >> Department of Justice
>>>>> >> 10th and Constitution, N.W.
>>>>> >> Washington [zip code exempt]
>>>>> >> DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Dear Disclosure Officer:
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> This is an appeal under the Freedom of Information Act.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> On May 2, 1997, I requested documents under the Freedom of
>>>>> >> Information Act (see attached). To date, the requested documents
>>>>> >> have not been produced.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> I hereby appeal your failure to produce the requested documents.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> The documents that were withheld must be disclosed under the FOIA
>>>>> >> because the original Thirteenth Amendment prevents government
>>>>> >> officials from exercising privileges of a nobility class, such as
>>>>> >> being exempt from the principles of open government and freedom
>>>>> >> of information. Evidence of the original Thirteenth Amendment
>>>>> >> has been filed with the Foreperson of the Grand Jury and with the
>>>>> >> Clerk of the United States District Court in Tucson, Arizona
>>>>> >> state (a Republic). See also Colorado Records Custodian.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Disclosure of the documents which I requested is in the public
>>>>> >> interest because the information, and the procedure for obtaining
>>>>> >> the information, are likely to contribute significantly to public
>>>>> >> understanding of the operations and activities of government and
>>>>> >> are not primarily in My commercial interest.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Moreover, the information requested will help to improve public
>>>>> >> confidence in the integrity of the United States (federal
>>>>> >> government), or to confirm that there are persons attempting to
>>>>> >> exercise executive and judicial branch powers in America without
>>>>> >> any authority or jurisdiction whatsoever. See U.S. v. Lopez.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Thank you for your careful consideration of this appeal.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Respectfully submitted,
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> /s/ [me]
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Citizen of Arizona state
>>>>> >> all rights reserved without prejudice
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> # # #
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> -----------------------------cut here----------------------------
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> c/o 2509 N. Campbell
>>>>> >> Tucson [zip code exempt]
>>>>> >> ARIZONA REPUBLIC
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> May 27, 1997
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> COURTESY NOTICE
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Janet Reno
>>>>> >> U.S. Department of Justice
>>>>> >> 10th and Constitution, N.W.
>>>>> >> Washington [zip code exempt]
>>>>> >> DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Subject: FOIA request and appeal
>>>>> >> for your credentials
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Dear Ms. Reno:
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> This is a courtesy notice to you, and to all of those government
>>>>> >> officers, employees, and agents who rely upon formal delegation
>>>>> >> of authority from the office of the U.S. Attorney General to
>>>>> >> perfect their actions under authority of the United States
>>>>> >> (federal government), that the final deadline for production of
>>>>> >> your official credentials will fall on Monday, June 2, 1997,
>>>>> >> at 5:00 p.m. Notice to principals is notice to agents.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Our original request for your credentials was submitted to you
>>>>> >> via first class United States Mail on May 2, 1997 pursuant
>>>>> >> to the Freedom of Information Act ("FOIA"), 5 U.S.C. 552 et seq.
>>>>> >> Our administrative appeal for said credentials, given your
>>>>> >> failure to produce same in response to Our proper request dated
>>>>> >> May 2, 1997, was submitted to you via first class United
>>>>> >> States Mail on May 17, 1997.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> The final deadline for production of your official credentials
>>>>> >> falls officially on June 2, 1997 at end of the working day
>>>>> >> (5:00 p.m., Eastern Standard Time). Beyond that deadline, Our
>>>>> >> administrative remedies will have been exhausted, and the
>>>>> >> doctrine of estoppel by acquiescence will be activated formally,
>>>>> >> finally, and forever.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> If I need to explain to you the far-reaching implications that
>>>>> >> will issue from your failure to produce, among other things, the
>>>>> >> Oath of Office required of you by Article VI, Clause 3, in the
>>>>> >> Constitution for the United States of America, as lawfully
>>>>> >> amended, then Our nation is in much worse shape than I ever
>>>>> >> thought possible heretofore.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Respectfully submitted,
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> /s/ [me]
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Citizen of Arizona state
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> # # #
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> -----------------------------cut here----------------------------
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> ================================================================
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> All Rights Reserved Without Prejudice FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS GROUP
>>>>> >> For Privacy: social security number rescission and consultation;
>>>>> >> pure contractual trusts; gold-backed banking; offshore banking;
>>>>> >> International Business Company formation; resident agent service
>>>>> >> mailto:grscott@primenet.com
>>>>> >> ================================================================
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> "Hey, YOU, don't even *think* about pickin' my pocket!"
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> "Privacy is a fundamental Right. Assert it."
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> =============================================
>>>>> >> ==========================
>>>>> >> To subscribe: send a message to the LRT_list@sportsmen.net
>>>>> >> with the word SUBSCRIBE in the subject/topic field. Use
>>>>> UNSUBSCRIBE
>>>>> >> to
>>>>> >> remove yourself from the list. Questions/comments/problems?
>>>>> >> email: Not Moderated@sportsmen.net or listmgmt@sportsmen.net
>>>>> >> For info about this system and its lists email: info@sportsmen.net
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> ==================================================================
>>>>> >> =====
>>>>> >> via: Sportsman's Paradise~~Online 602-922-1639 - www.sportsmen.net
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>>
>>>>> =
>>>>> ======================================================================
>>>>>
>>>>> Paul Andrew Mitchell : Counselor at Law, federal
>>>>> witness
>>>>> B.A., Political Science, UCLA; M.S., Public Administration, U.C.
>>>>> Irvine
>>>>>
>>>>> tel: (520) 320-1514: machine; fax: (520) 320-1256:
>>>>> 24-hour/day-night
>>>>> email: [address in tool bar] : using Eudora Pro 3.0.3 on 586
>>>>> CPU
>>>>> website: http://www.supremelaw.com : visit the Supreme Law Library
>>>>> now
>>>>> ship to: c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776 : this is free speech, at its
>>>>> best
>>>>> Tucson, Arizona state : state zone, not the federal
>>>>> zone
>>>>> Postal Zone 85719/tdc : USPS delays first class w/o
>>>>> this
>>>>>
>>>>> As agents of the Most High, we came here to establish justice. We
>>>>> shall
>>>>> not leave, until our mission is accomplished and justice reigns
>>>>> eternal.
>>>>> ========
>>>>> ===============================================================
>>>>> [This text formatted on-screen in Courier 11, non-proportional
>>>>> spacing.]
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>========================================================================
>>Paul Andrew Mitchell : Counselor at Law, federal witness
>>B.A., Political Science, UCLA; M.S., Public Administration, U.C. Irvine
>>
>>tel: (520) 320-1514: machine; fax: (520) 320-1256: 24-hour/day-night
>>email: [address in tool bar] : using Eudora Pro 3.0.3 on 586 CPU
>>website: http://www.supremelaw.com : visit the Supreme Law Library now
>>ship to: c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776 : this is free speech, at its best
>> Tucson, Arizona state : state zone, not the federal zone
>> Postal Zone 85719/tdc : USPS delays first class w/o this
>>
>>As agents of the Most High, we came here to establish justice. We shall
>>not leave, until our mission is accomplished and justice reigns eternal.
>>========================================================================
>>[This text formatted on-screen in Courier 11, non-proportional spacing.]
>
>
>
>
========================================================================
Paul Andrew Mitchell : Counselor at Law, federal witness
B.A., Political Science, UCLA; M.S., Public Administration, U.C. Irvine
tel: (520) 320-1514: machine; fax: (520) 320-1256: 24-hour/day-night
email: [address in tool bar] : using Eudora Pro 3.0.3 on 586 CPU
website: http://www.supremelaw.com : visit the Supreme Law Library now
ship to: c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776 : this is free speech, at its best
Tucson, Arizona state : state zone, not the federal zone
Postal Zone 85719/tdc : USPS delays first class w/o this
As agents of the Most High, we came here to establish justice. We shall
not leave, until our mission is accomplished and justice reigns eternal.
========================================================================
[This text formatted on-screen in Courier 11, non-proportional spacing.]
Return to Table of Contents for
Supreme Law School: E-mail