Time: Tue Nov 12 19:06:38 1996
To: Liberty Law
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
Subject: Richard Ginn, applicant
Cc: Richard Ginn <ginn@cornell.edu>
Bcc: 

Dear Liberty Law,

I wish to sponsor Richard Ginn to
the Liberty Law email list.

Richard and I met when he responded
to one of my broadcasts, and we
quickly discovered lots of common
interests.

He then helped me extensively with 
the White House Constitution, which
we obtained from the President's
Assistant Counsel, in response to a
FOIA request.

Richard and I were able to divide up
the labor with great ease, and he
did follow through promptly, and
with great ease.  He is very familiar
with Pretty Good Privacy (PGP), and
he encrypted the White House Constitution
to guarantee integrity before making
it available generally to the Internet.

Since then, he has asked me to help
develop a private email list to 
discuss some important legal research
which he is currently doing.  Without
going into details, I can say that
it is something which Liberty Law
would do very well to consider.  I will
leave it to Richard to fill in the
rest of the details.  I can forward to
you a summary, if he will provide it
to me here.

Richard, are you listening?

My only condition here is that we admit
Richard, and begin to grapple with the
major questions he will bring to the list,
by raising our standards of discourse a 
little bit higher than they have been
heretofore.

"Contention before Substance" is a
recent criticism of our style, and we
will do well to take that criticism to
heart.  I believe it is well deserved.

So, I wish to request that we admit 
Richard, and discuss his issues, but
only on condition that we do so with
the highest level of discourse possible.
This means no ad hominems, at the very
least, okay?

Tom Clark, take it away.

/s/ Paul Mitchell 

Copy:  Richard Ginn


At 06:32 PM 11/12/96 -0500, you wrote:
>Paul,
>
>Thankyou for offering to sponsor me to the libertylaw mailing list, I 
>would like to join to see what it is about, and to ask if the other list 
>members would be interested in carrying the conversation I am having with 
>a few other people regarding the matter of constitutional jurisdiction 
>and its application to ending the war on drugs, traffic courts, and other 
>abuses.
>
>There are 2 other main people who are interested in having me start a 
>list for this purpose, but we could also hold the conversation on llaw if 
>that works for everyone.
>
>We plan to cover theory and practice, and also the origins of the problem 
>back to the Titles of Nobility Amendment (rediscovered by one of the 2 
>who want to start a list with me).
>
>What do you think?  If we start a separate list I would like to invite 
>you to join us, if we join llaw we may have either a bigger audience 
>(participating) or more people just listening...
>
>Richard.
>
>
      

Return to Table of Contents for

Supreme Law School:   E-mail